Latest news with #EdwardRennell
NZ Herald
3 days ago
- Business
- NZ Herald
Greyhound ban gathers pace: Compensation plan; rehoming strategy revealed
'All aspects to do with the ownership, the compensation and the conclusion of this business [the greyhound industry] is under the committee's consideration,' Peters told the Herald. However, Peters said compensation will not extend to payouts for not being able to race any more, or for assets accrued by those involved in the sport which will become redundant. Greyhounds chase a lure at Cambridge Raceway in January. Photo / Yvette Bodiam He said just like saddle makers lost money when transport changed from horseback to cars, 'change is inevitable and that's the point'. 'It won't be compensation for not being able to do dog racing anymore but in dealing with the dogs as they're being rehomed – that cost,' Peters said. It's estimated about 1500 ex-racing dogs will need to be rehomed when the sport ends in July next year, although the exact time it'll take to rehome all dogs isn't known. Edward Rennell is the CEO of Greyhound Racing NZ and has announced plans to fight the Government's plan to ban the sport in the High Court. Greyhound Racing New Zealand (GRNZ) CEO Edward Rennell suggested it would cost $40 million to look after greyhounds for a period of three years post the end of racing. In June, he said that was a cost that would need to be fronted by the taxpayer. 'Current rehoming costs are met by GRNZ, funded by revenue from racing. There will be no racing after July 2026, so rehoming costs post-closure will have to be funded from alternative sources,' Rennell said. The committee's compensation plan means the TAB – now operated by international sports betting and gambling company Entain – will be asked to help pay for rehoming rather than the taxpayer. Peters said new laws may be introduced which would effectively force the TAB – which earns millions from greyhound racing – to help pay for rehoming costs. 'Bear in mind of course that if there was universality and acceptance, legislation may not be required.' Peters said GRNZ's three-year estimate to rehome dogs was a pessimistic outlook and he was confident the job could be done much quicker. Any recommendations made by the committee would need to be considered by Cabinet before any decisions are made. Co-ordinated rehoming strategy SPCA chief science officer Dr Arnja Dale. Photo supplied. The committee also wants a shake-up of the current greyhound rehoming model with the creation of a single entity to co-ordinate efforts to get dogs adopted. GRNZ currently co-ordinates greyhound rehoming under its 'Great Mates' programme. The programme has contracts with various agencies, including adoption kennels in Feilding known as Nightrave Greyhounds. The Herald understands the committee wants to reorganise and expand rehoming efforts by: Establishing a single, co-ordinated rehoming programme. Use common branding for all advertising. Introduce a standard set of welfare and contractual arrangements. Increase the number of locations where dogs can be viewed. The SPCA's chief scientific officer Arnja Dale told the Herald her agency 'absolutely supports' improving rehoming efforts. 'It's really critically important that we have consistent standards and policies that govern the rehoming and that there's a central port, so essentially a central website where all the greyhounds are listed for adoption,' she said. Dale backed moves to ask the TAB to help fund rehoming costs providing the industry also pitched in. 'We support it if Greyhound Racing New Zealand and their millions and millions in reserves help support that as well,' she said. The SPCA is willing to be involved in a future greyhound rehoming drive and Dale is 'confident New Zealanders will stand up' and help with adoptions when the need arises. 'When we made a call out [for adoptions] when Covid-19 got to New Zealand, we got thousands of animals into homes over a very short period of time,' she said. Greyhounds as Pets spokesperson Daniel Bohan Daniel Bohan from Greyhounds as Pets – NZ's oldest adoption charity – told the Herald he backs a co-ordinated approach to rehoming. 'Greyhounds as Pets would support any initiative to co-ordinate rehoming efforts at a national level and apply effective, consistent marketing and adoption policies across all agencies,' he said. In terms of funding rehoming, Bohan said he supports any plan that treats all stakeholders 'fairly and equitably'. Court action looms GRNZ is going to court next month in an attempt to overturn the Government's plans to ban the sport. Rennell claimed in May a judicial review of the proposal would expose the Government's 'cavalier attitude' in the lead-up to its decision. GRNZ's High Court application will argue political leaders rushed the decision and failed to consult industry before making the call to end the sport. 'This is an injustice to greyhound breeders, owners, trainers and all other industry participants, as well as a dereliction of duty to New Zealanders,' Rennell said. Rennell told the Herald it was 'deeply cynical' and 'hypocritical' to ban greyhound racing in NZ while accepting millions in revenue from Australian dog races. He said if a ban does proceed, it must be implemented with 'impeccable fairness' to those who will lose their incomes. Peters pushed back on claims the industry wasn't consulted, saying there have been three separate reviews of the sport – including the 2017 review by High Court Judge Rodney Hansen – which found 1140 dogs were euthanised in just four years. Peters, who was Racing Minister in 2017, said at the time the Hansen report findings were 'disturbing and deeply disappointing'. That was followed by another review by Sir Bruce Robertson in 2021 which found issues with data recording, animal welfare and industry transparency. At the time, then Racing Minister Grant Robertson put the industry on notice. In 2023, a Racing Integrity Board report found the industry was making 'slow progress' in five out of 15 key areas including bringing down injury rates. Peters told the Herald he regrets having to make the call to end the sport but said the industry had 'failed to meet their requirements'. He said it was 'breathtaking' to claim the decision was rushed given the longstanding issues identified in multiple reports over consecutive years. 'To say that we're [the Government] being cavalier, is to be perhaps looking in the mirror.' Michael Morrah is a senior investigative reporter/team leader at the Herald. He won News Journalist of the Year at the 2025 Voyager Media Awards and has twice been named reporter of the year at the NZ Television Awards. He has been a broadcast journalist for 20 years and joined the Herald's video team in July 2024.
Otago Daily Times
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
Poll: Bid to overturn greyhound racing ban
Greyhound Racing New Zealand has filed a case in the High Court, challenging the Government's decision to ban greyhound racing from July 31 next year. The organisation has accused the Government of rushing the decision without proper consultation, ignoring established procedures, and relying on selective or incomplete information in official briefings. The move follows Cabinet's decision in December 2024 to end greyhound racing in New Zealand, based largely on a paper prepared by the Department of Internal Affairs. That report, according to GRNZ, focused narrowly on animal welfare concerns while omitting key evidence that supported the industry's standards and progress. In a statement, GRNZ said the Cabinet paper failed to reflect the full picture, particularly overlooking a November 2024 Racing Integrity Board (RIB) report which found that greyhound welfare standards in New Zealand were not only being met but often exceeded those in other animal sports or overseas greyhound racing jurisdictions. GRNZ also said there was no evidence that advice was sought from the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee before the decision was made. Chief Executive Edward Rennell said the Government's handling of the issue lacked due process and failed to respect the livelihoods of thousands of New Zealanders involved in the industry. He said the greyhound racing community, which includes breeders, owners, trainers, and support staff, had been blindsided by the Government's announcement and left with no option but to seek judicial intervention. Last week's poll results: Should the city council stop collecting the targeted rate for the Christ Church Cathedral reinstatement project? Yes 58% No 42%
RNZ News
26-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Greyhound Racing NZ applies for judicial review of ban
Photo: Photosport Greyhound Racing NZ has applied for a judicial review of the government's decision to ban greyhound racing. In December, Racing Minister Winston Peters announced the practice would be banned from 31 July 2026. He said the decision had been made to protect the welfare of racing dogs , and although the industry had made progress injury rates remained persistenty high. Urgent legislation to prevent the destruction of dogs while the industry was wound down passed with the support of all parties in the House. It is estimated around 1000 people will be affected by the ban, with around 3000 dogs expected to need to be rehomed. Greyhound Racing NZ, which had been vocal in opposing the ban, has now applied through its counsel to the High Court to have the ban reviewed. Chief executive Edward Rennell said the review would "expose the government's cavalier attitude to policymaking adversely impacting the livelihoods of thousands". Its application said there was a duty to consult with the industry on the ban, but it had not happened. It said the Cabinet paper produced by the Department of Internal Affairs was selective in its use of reports from the Racing Integrity Board, and included no information from the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, and accused officials of having already made up their minds. It said decision-makers appeared to have acted in a way that made the decision a foregone conclusion, saying the prime minister had also already made up his mind and stated it publicy. "The government took its decision too lightly and too quickly, without due care and due diligence. It was a rushed and inadequate Cabinet paper," Rennell said. It claimed there were only a "few short steps" from Peters seeking a report in June 2024 on banning the sport, and Cabinet deciding to do so in December. Greyhound Racing NZ has also sought a Court order to stop the Crown from working on the ban while the review is carried out. RNZ has approached the Racing Minister for comment.
Scoop
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Greyhounds Starts Judicial Review Proceedings
Greyhound Racing New Zealand (GRNZ) has today applied, through its Counsel to the High Court, for a Judicial Review of the Government's decision to ban greyhound racing from 31 July 2026. The statement of claim made to the Court says the decision broke fundamental rules of law, being inadequately informed, prepared and consulted on. There were only a few short steps from the Minister for Racing seeking a report in June 2024 on banning the sport, to the Cabinet deciding to do so in December 2024. The Cabinet paper produced by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) focused on animal welfare but was selective in its use of reports from the Racing Integrity Board (RIB) and included no information from the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC). For example, an RIB November 2024 report stated that GRNZ met welfare standards, often better than other animal sports or greyhound racing worldwide, but this information was left out of the DIA report and Cabinet paper. GRNZ's application says there was a duty, promise and expectation to consult with GRNZ on the decision which never happened, despite a history of constructive engagement on animal welfare. GRNZ CEO Edward Rennell said 'the organisation had decided on a judicial review to expose the Government's cavalier attitude to policymaking adversely impacting the livelihoods of thousands. 'This was a Cabinet paper from public officials who had made up their minds, for a Prime Minister who had made up his mind and stated it publicly. 'The Government took its decision too lightly and too quickly, without due care and due diligence. It was a rushed and inadequate Cabinet paper. 'This is an injustice to greyhound breeders, owners, trainers and all other industry participants, as well as a dereliction of duty to New Zealanders. 'Decisions that impact the lives and livelihoods of people must be extremely well articulated and evidenced. This decision was not, highlighting an emerging pattern of short-cutting in policymaking. New Zealand deserves better.' Edward Rennell said. Case explainer The GRNZ statement of claim under the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016: The essence of the GRNZ case is that the way the Cabinet decision to ban Greyhound racing was reached and the decision itself broke many fundamental rules of administrative law. It is rare to challenge a Cabinet decision, but the decision-making process was so inadequate and erroneous that it warrants judicial intervention. It clarifies that the Cabinet decision was a 'reviewable decision' under the Judicial Review Procedure Act 2016. The first cause of action was the failure to consult. GRNZ says consultation is a legal duty that arose from being promised to Greyhound Racing, and because of the hugely significant implications to the detriment of many hundreds of hardworking New Zealanders. The Department of Internal Affairs officials said no decision would be made without Greyhound Racing being consulted – but it did not happen. The second cause of action is legitimate expectation. A legitimate expectation about a certain process can be established by what has been said or done by a decision maker. GRNZ says DIA's course of conduct since 2021 created a legitimate expectation that the industry would be able to make submissions on any proposed ban. The third point is that the process broke all the rules about procedural fairness. Decisionmakers must act reasonably to ensure the process undertaken is fair and not a foregone conclusion. That has not happened here. The fourth and fifth causes of action deal with the failure to make relevant considerations. Either the Minister was unaware of the development of the Cabinet paper and the background circumstances, or the Minister knew exactly what was going on and was instrumental in its sign-off and presentation. The fourth cause of action says that if the Minister was unaware, then the officials failed by not bringing to the Minister's attention certain key relevant considerations The fifth cause of action proceeds on the basis that the Minister did know what was going on. Interim Relief. GRNZ is applying for 'interim relief' – a Court order to stop the Crown working on the ban (via the Ministerial Advisory Committee) while the judicial review is undertaken. No further steps to give effect to the ban should be taken unless and until the Court has had an opportunity of scrutinising the claim.
