Greyhound racing industry takes court action
Photo:
PHOTOSPORT
Lawyers for the Greyhound Racing Association have told the High Court in Wellington that the ban on greyhound racing will have a devastating effect on the livelihoods of more than 1000 people.
Last December, Racing Minister Winston Peters announced the sport would be banned from August 2026.
On Thursday, the association argued in court that the work of a ministerial advisory committee tasked with implementing the ban should be stopped, until a judicial review of the legislation was heard.
Lawyer Chris Finlayson said the government had erred in directing the industry to monitor and improve animal welfare standards, only to ignore the results in cabinet's decision-making process.
The court was told the racing industry had engaged with three reviews of the sport in just over a decade and had consistently shown willingness to comply with directives to improve animal welfare, and controls surrounding injuries and deaths, as well as track standards and rehoming initiatives.
He said the cabinet paper - on which the decision to ban the sport was based - was "misleading" and a "very selective characterisation" of the key issues facing cabinet, which he argued was the industry's animal welfare standards, not the erosion of public license - society's acceptance of the practices of the sport.
Finlayson said the government - after directing the industry to undertake a statutory process and then "blandly ignore it" - contradicted its obligation to consider the expertise of the industry in legislating towards the sport.
Lawyers for the Greyhound Racing Association (left to right) Chris Finlayson KC and Jonathan Kaye at the High Court in Wellington.
Photo:
RNZ/Bill Hickman
"The standard of animal welfare of greyhound racing is high," Finlayson said. "It aligns with the standards in other jurisdictions and is applied with significantly more rigour than pet dogs."
Finlayson said the uncertainty over the recommendations of the ministerial advisory committee's plan to wind down the sport was resulting in members of the industry leaving the country before the ban, a collapse in breeding numbers and serious mental-health issues in participants of the industry.
He argued, after the ban, New Zealanders could still bet on Australian dog races, which had "equal or lesser" animal welfare standards than Aotearoa's racing industry.
Counsel for the Attorney General - acting on behalf of the Minister of Racing - said interim relief application was "fundamentally premised on a need to stop the legislation".
Lawyer Katherine Anderson said the action, if successful, "would frustrate the introduction of the bill to Parliament".
She said it was "undeniably clear" the court could not make an order to prevent the introduction of a bill.
"It's very clear that the applicant fundamentally [says] the decision is wrong and is attempting to draw you in."
She said it was up to the Minister to decide "how and if" parties would be consulted before the bill was put to Parliament.
Lawyers for the Attorney General - acting on behalf of the Minister of Racing - (left to right) Katherine Anderson and Emma Dowse at the High Court in Wellington.
Photo:
RNZ/Bill Hickman
"There's no straight jacket on the minister to go to the racing industry saying, 'Is there a ban on greyhound racing that's required on welfare grounds?'.
"They've been elected to make policy decisions and, if people don't like it, they can be un-elected," Anderson said.
Throughout proceedings, Judge Dale La Hood pressed the Greyhound Racing Association's counsel to clarify how the action would benefit the industry, if it's success was not to prevent the ban.
"You need to explain to me... what you're seeking to have... stopped, other than preventing a ban on greyhound racing. I don't know if I understand what the benefit of interim relief would be to your client, if it doesn't halt the ban.
"That's crucial to my decision on whether you've got a case," La Hood said.
Finlayson said he would undertake to clarify his client's intent in a memorandum to the judge after the day's proceedings.
Judge La Hood reserved his decision.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
9 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
KiwiRail settles with Hyundai over cancelled ferries with $144 million payment
'But these are some of the same people who accepted Project iReX ballooning from $1.45 billion when approved in 2021 to Treasury warning it was on course to $4b in 2023 thanks to eyes-bigger-than-their-mouths ambitions and absentee management. Even their criticisms blew out.' He said the net $144m payment covered costs incurred by Hyundai and its global suppliers, and was fair given the decision to cancel Project iRex 'was never a reflection on Hyundai'. 'As $300m was originally provisioned to cover the potential cost of exiting iReX commitments, including settling the contract with Hyundai, more funding is now available for other government projects.' Rail Minister Winston Peters said the cancellation was not a reflection on Hyundai. Photo / Mark Mitchell Ferry Holdings' engagement with shipbuilders for new ferries is 'progressing well', said Peters, as is work on infrastructure at Picton and Wellington. Finance Minister Nicola Willis said the forecast cost of the previous project had increased significantly by the time it was cancelled in December 2023. This was largely down to increases in the landside infrastructure costs. 'No government should be advised of billion-dollar blowouts in a major infrastructure programme upon being elected, as was the case after the 2023 general election. 'I am pleased that a more pragmatic solution is now in place that will ensure a safe, reliable Cook Strait service at an affordable price.' Last month, Peters announced agreements had been met with CentrePort, Port Marlborough and KiwiRail on the infrastructure scope. 'This is not our first regatta, as this no-nonsense infrastructure focus is what was supposed to happen in 2020 until poor management and a lack of oversight allowed iReX to blow out. We will save the taxpayer billions through our disciplined approach. 'The agreements entered into effectively mean the ports and KiwiRail are in, boots and all, with Cabinet's preferred low-cost option. 'The focus of the agreements is primarily about the marine infrastructure. In Picton, new wharves and linkspans will be built while in Wellington we will be maximising the use of the existing Aratere infrastructure by modifying and strengthening the existing wharf to suit new ferries for the next 30 years and building a new linkspan.' He said there was minimal scope for improvements to the yards.
RNZ News
39 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Why has trust in news fallen? The answer is more complicated than we thought
By Greg Treadwell, Merja Myllylahti of In April only one in three people said they trusted the media in general - a slight fall from last year. Photo: Supplied / Stuff / NZ Herald / Newsroom / ODT / TVNZ We live in an age of declining trust in public institutions: Parliament, the health and education systems, courts and police have all suffered over the past decade, both in New Zealand and internationally. And, of course, trust in the news has declined precipitously, according to regular surveys, including our own research. So, it might be tempting to roll declining trust in news media into this wider decline of trust in public institutions in general. But this is where our research disagrees . News isn't just another institution like the state, a corporation or a non-profit organisation. Ideally, it's the democratic expression of the public interest in these things. An institutional approach may help us explore the structural issues democracies face (for example, critiquing the nature of media ownership). But it also generalises, and risks obscuring the specifics of the trust problem public interest journalism faces. Nor does it recognise the distinctiveness of the " social contract of the press " - the necessary bond of trust between journalism and its audiences, which is key to the success of the wider social contract between the public and its institutions. Our research shows trust in news has plummeted from 58 percent of New Zealanders agreeing they can trust "most of the news most of the time" in 2020, to just 32 percent in 2025. Survey respondents tell us they perceive the news to be politically biased (both left and right), and because too much seems to be opinion masquerading as news. These seemed very different from the trust issues faced by government, business and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Declining trust in those institutions has been driven more by wars, financial crises, the rise of populism and the Covid pandemic. To differentiate journalism's trust issues, we explored whether falling trust in news was (or wasn't) linked to declines in trust in other social institutions. We looked at research from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and the global Edelman Trust Barometer , as well as our own research. We found the trajectories of trust levels for other social institutions - governments, business, NGOs - showed clear links to each other as they rose and fell, more or less in sync, over time. Trust in news, however, has been in its own lane, perhaps influenced by the others, but clearly not tethered to them. A fall in trust in government and politics, in other words, is not a predictor of a fall in trust in news. Globally, we found trust in government, business and NGOs fell and then rose, roughly together, from 2020 to 2024. While not tracking each other exactly, there's a clear grouping of data points. From 2020, trust in all of them (including media in general - television, internet, radio and movies) fell rapidly and levelled out in 2021 before rising again slightly by 2024. Trust in news itself, however, behaved in almost exactly opposite ways, rising from 2020 to 2021 before falling again and levelling out in 2023. Global trust in media, news and social institutions has dropped since the Covid-19 pandemic. Photo: The Conversation Given its impact, the global pandemic is likely a cause for these changes in 2020. However, as trust in government fell, news media - to which the public has historically turned in a crisis - actually rose. In Aotearoa New Zealand, things were very different. While it fell globally, trust in institutions in New Zealand rose from 2020, before falling in 2022. Trust in news, however, was not rising in the early days of the pandemic as it was elsewhere. It was falling. And it continued to fall steadily until 2023. (In 2024, it would fall even more dramatically, but that data was not captured by this study.) A drop in trust in the media needs to be addressed separately from the drop in trust of government and non-government institutions. Photo: The Conversation Both sets of data - global and local - show trust in news doing largely the opposite of what trust in government and other institutions has been doing, rising when they were falling and vice versa. When journalism does its job well and exposes failings in government, we would indeed expect one to rise and the other to fall. So, we can see there may well be links between changes in levels of trust. But we can also see trust levels are not responding in unison to external socio-political pressures. In focus groups, we explored if there were connections between trust in news and trust in government. Older New Zealanders who didn't trust the news told us there were institutions they mistrusted: banks, insurance companies and universities, some to very high levels, and mostly born from personal experience. But they did not particularly mistrust government as an institution. And we found no direct link between their mistrust of news and their mistrust of other social institutions. Which supports the evidence we found in the global and local trust data trends. It seems the trust problems democracies have with their news services need to be addressed on their own terms, not as part of an overall picture. This story was originally published on The Conversation.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Resource Management Act changes will allow power plants to be built faster
Energy Resources Aotearoa chief executive John Carnegie. Photo: Supplied / Rob Tucker A group representing big energy producers said changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) will allow power plants to be built faster, and reduce price volatility in the electricity market. Parliament passed the amendment yesterday, which means councils will now need to grant consents for certain energy infrastructure within a year. Energy Resources Aotearoa's chief executive, John Carnegie, told Morning Report that it's great news for electricity consumers - big and small. He said the slow consenting processes previously had added to costs and uncertainty. Carnegie said more he's now expecting faster and more certain consenting processes for both fossil fuel and renewable power generation. It has potential to take price volatility out of the electricity market, and deliver a more resilient system that can better handle unexpected weather he events, he said. Carnegie said while renewables remain the backbone of the electricity system, New Zealand needs more fossil fuel and gas generating plants to "fill the gaps" when hydro, solar and wind outputs are low. He said the country needs to build capacity and not be responding in crisis mode. The tight supply of gas meant more demand for back up power, said Carnegie. When asked about the carbon and environmental costs the changes may bring, Carnegie said New Zealand would otherwise be facing energy scarcity and skyrocketing prices. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
