PART of the reason modern government has become so dysfunctional is because every decision is now argued to be illegitimate by those adversely affected.
Allegations of a lack of consultation or apprehended bias have become the new normal.
When I heard that the former High Court judge Michael McHugh SC had been appointed to inquire into greyhound racing practices, it never occurred to me that someone could seriously challenge the rigour and independence of his investigation.
McHugh was given powers similar to a royal commission to ensure that no stone was unturned. With highly experienced counsel assisting Stephen Rushton SC, the truth was sure to be exposed, whatever it was.
McHugh was one of the outstanding barristers and judges of his generation. He is gifted with the rare combination of a razor-sharp intellect, a photographic memory and the common touch, having grown up in humble circumstances in working-class Newcastle.
Juries used to eat from his hands when he was a barrister because he understands and can relate to ordinary people.
Like most former judges he is fiercely independent and no political friend of the Coalition government. His political links are more to the Labor Party — his former wife was a minister in the Hawke government. Nobody could suggest he was appointed to achieve any set outcome.
McHugh possesses other unique credentials likely to be sympathetic rather than hostile to greyhound racers. His weekend relaxation for most of his life has been to follow and have a punt on the races. That is why Greyhound Racing NSW had previously engaged him to review their situation.
McHugh’s forensic investigation revealed horrible evidence of animal cruelty. Not by a few bad apples as some have suggested, but between 10-20 per cent of dog trainers involved in live baiting. The number of dogs killed was staggering. About half of all greyhounds bred to race, up to 68,000 dogs, have been killed in the past 12 years because they could not race quickly enough. And that cruelty extended to awful methods of killing — some of them as if they had come out of a horror movie.
For example, dogs being bled to death so that their blood could be drained and used after they were killed.
The state government could not turn a blind eye to this evidence. The existing regulation had failed on a grotesque scale. When up to 20 per cent of any group is shown to be involved in abhorrent practices, its position is untenable. Don’t tell me that a good proportion of the other 80 per cent of trainers were not turning a blind eye to the live baiting and killing of dogs. The greyhound racing fraternity has no one but themselves to blame for their current plight.
One NRL player was roundly condemned recently because of inappropriate acts with a dog. Would any sport in our country survive having about 20 per cent of its elite personnel as proven animal abusers? Should greyhound racing be an exception to the standards which apply to everyone else?
Other jurisdictions have also concluded that continuing greyhound racing is not viable. It is banned or not conducted in 45 of the 50 states of the USA and only four countries in Europe have it. Locally, the ACT quickly followed NSW’s lead on a ban.
The government has been reasonable and sympathetic to the effect its decision has on those involved in greyhound racing. It has not announced an immediate halt to racing. A transitional plan over a year will involve a welfare plan for existing greyhounds and an adjustment package to ensure that the adverse impact on individuals is minimised as much as reasonably possible.
A softer response was not an option. Tighter regulation without an outright ban would have shut down a large part of the industry anyway because of the compliance costs and greater policing would be at a massive cost to the community in place of other essential government services — all to stop practices that no reasonable cohort of people should have been involved in anyway.
The breeders and racers were given every opportunity to be heard, were consulted and given an opportunity to put forward all evidence in support of their industry.
But in the end a former High Court judge put all of the relevant evidence before the government — and the evidence was so horribly damning it necessitated decisive action.
Alister Henskens SC was counsel assisting the equine influenza inquiry, a member of the 2015 parliamentary inquiry into companion animal breeding practices and is the Liberal member for Ku-ring-gai.http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/no-choice-but-to-ban-the-dogs/news...
Forum
Pages: 1 
