Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021

Second Reading Debate

Debate resumed from 17 February 2021.

The Hon. MARK LATHAM (15:44:22):

One Nation opposes the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021 because most of its provisions are redundant. They have already been implemented by Racing NSW. Anyone who is a racing fan and was watching closely the second race at Warwick Farm today would have seen the slashing effort by Winning Point, co-owned by my good self, who ran in third. We are all very excited going forward to the three-year-old filly races. I come to the lectern as not only a parliamentarian but also a racing expert and lifelong fan.

I can assure the honourable member that Racing NSW has a very good rehoming scheme in place that I have had cause to use, because not every horse is as fast or as promising as Winning Point. Some of them could not run out of sight on a dark night. They unfortunately need to be rehomed, let down, and the rehoming scheme organised by Peter V'landys and others at Racing NSW is superb. They have gone to the trouble and expense of buying extensive properties in western New South Wales and putting the horses out there closer to their natural habitat. Nobody comes flying across in a helicopter to shoot them, as is the case, tragically, with the brumbies in the Snowy Mountains. If we are to focus as a Parliament on cruelty to horses, how can the Labor Party be so passive in allowing the shooting of horses from helicopters in the Snowy Mountains? The Animal Justice Party is quite rightly outraged about it, and we share that concern in One Nation. But for the beautiful thoroughbred horse, the rehoming scheme run by Racing NSW is one of the best in the world.

Objective (f) in the overview of the bill to establish that that scheme is not necessary at all. Objective (e) is to prohibit the slaughtering of horses registered under the Thoroughbred Racing Act. That is not happening because the rehoming scheme is so successful. Objective (d) is to prohibit the racing of a horse unless it is registered under the Act. Of course, these horses are registered on the studbook, which goes back centuries, and they are registered under the ownership provisions of Racing NSW.

The only useful objective is to prohibit a horse racing until they are three years old. Who is Mark Pearson to decide how old a horse needs to be before it can run? Horses are bred to run. They love to run. The faster they run, the greater the thrill they get out of it. It is for their owners and trainers who love these animals to decide at what age they can race. Most horses do start their racing career at three years or older. It is only those who show exceptional speed as two-year-olds that are set for races like the Golden Slipper. So there is no worry there. Objective (c) is to establish a registration scheme for horses owned, bred or kept for horseracing. We have that registration scheme. It is working very well. We do not need interference from this Parliament under this private member's bill.

Objective (b) is to prohibit the riding or driving of a horse that is fitted with a tongue tie. I do not know if the honourable member knows what a tongue tie achieves, but it is designed to stop the horse getting its tongue over the bit. If the horse gets its tongue over the bit for long enough, it could choke and die. So to have a tongue tie, which is not a painful apparatus, is an act of animal welfare. It is ridiculous to ban the use of the tongue tie when some horses will get their tongue over the bit and choke.

Finally, objective (a) of the overview of the bill is to prohibit the carrying or use of a whip or the wearing of spurs. The jockeys do not wear spurs and the whips these days are padded. So they do not cause any welt or physical damage to the horse's hide. Most jockeys, as we saw with the magnificent Winning Point earlier today, just wave the whip at the horse and do not apply it in a forceful, physical way. The whip rules now include the padded whip and restrictions on how often they can be used, and there are heavy fines. If a jockey breaks the whip rule, with overuse in the final furlong, there are very heavy fines and suspensions on that jockey. The changes several years ago to the whip rules have been very successful for animal welfare.

I have to ask the question, with all these Animal Justice Party schemes to ban greyhound racing, harness racing and thoroughbred racing or to fit up extra restrictions, as in this bill, what is the purpose and what would be the practical outcome? These animals are bred and sustained to run. If they do not run, they are probably going to breed out and they will not exist. For those that run successfully and go on to a stud career in particular—I pointed out to the House that if you believe in reincarnation and you ever want to come back as a particular animal, then you want to come back as Redoute's Choice. In his day, he was in that beautiful luxury mansion, serving up 300 or 400 mares a season.

The Hon. Daniel Mookhey:

An option for me.

The Hon. MARK LATHAM:

The Hon. Daniel Mookhey believes in reincarnation and wants to come back as Redoute's Choice. He likes the idea of serving 300 or 400 mares. Who wouldn't in that particular circumstance? It is good to see the Labor Party has a sense of their luxury. Redoute's Choice was living in air‑conditioned luxury in a stable that could easily have housed several public housing families out of south‑west Sydney. Those are wonderful circumstances. Other successful stallions have also lived in luxurious conditions. Not every horse gets to that standard, of course. But under the Racing NSW provisions about registration and rehoming, they all have a chance to stay alive. The past practices of putting horses down were unsatisfactory. I have owned a few—some fast, some slow—over the years. The idea that you would ever cause damage to your horse is abhorrent. You want the rehoming schemes to be a success. They are now. This bill is not needed. It has the stern opposition of One Nation and, I trust, members across the Chamber.

Ms ABIGAIL BOYD (15:50:41):

The Greens strongly support the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021. We thank the Animal Justice Party and the Hon. Mark Pearson for introducing it. The Greens know horseracing to be cruel and unjustifiable. As such, we campaigned for an end to the industry. With one horse dying every three days on Australian racetracks, there is simply no place for this industry in our society. It is time to shut it down. The Greens advocate for a phased transition towards a shutdown of the horseracing industry, including a national ban on horseracing, transitioning racing facilities to open green spaces, planning for and retraining of workers currently employed in the industry, and the assistance, rehabilitation and rehoming of horses—all funded by an increased betting levy.

However, we also support all reforms that improve welfare for horses while the racing industry continues. As such, we strongly support the bill. We know that the use of whips, spurs and tongue ties and the racing of horses before they are physically mature are particularly cruel. RSPCA Australia—along with countless other animal welfare organisations like the Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses—is opposed to the use of whips, spurs and tongue ties and has called for a prohibition on racing before a horse is mature in line with the asks of this bill. Even for the racing industry, New South Wales is behind the times. Spurs are banned under the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities, whips are banned by other jurisdictions like Norway, and tongue ties are banned in most non-racing equestrian sports internationally.

It is no surprise that the New South Wales thoroughbred racing industry does not support these sensible and measured reforms, however. It will not even enforce the paltry rules that it does have. For example, most breaches of whip use restrictions go unpunished by Racing NSW. Racing Australia's rules of racing allow a racehorse to be whipped up to five times prior to the final 100 metres of the race and with as much frequency as a jockey wishes in the final 100 metres. Take the most celebrated thoroughbred racing event on the calendar in New South Wales as an example. Over 10 per cent of horses raced at Randwick on Everest Day last year were whipped more than five times prior to the final 100 metres of their races and, of the 12 horses made to compete in the Everest race itself, half of them were whipped by their jockeys more than the rules allow.

Despite this, however, only one of those 12 jockeys who could not adhere to these measly whipping rules faced any consequences at all. In contrast, two trainers were fined for taking too long to declare who their horses' jockeys would be. Two out of two instances where the stewards were inconvenienced resulted in fines, while only one out of 12 instances of clear animal abuse resulted in a fine. As a further example, in New South Wales between Everest Day and Melbourne Cup Day, as reported in Racing NSW stewards' reports, 49 race meetings took place across 18 days. At only eight of those meets did breaches of whip use not occur. While 201 breaches of rules occurred across these 49 meets, 10 had action taken and 191 had no action taken at all.

The Greens thoroughly welcome the aspects of the bill that seek to prevent the disappearance of former racehorses—including the establishment of a registration scheme for horses owned, bred or kept by horseracing industry participants—that prohibit the slaughtering of racehorses, and that establish a rehoming program. The horseracing industry breeds upwards of 12,000 horses every year, but only around two‑thirds ever make it to training. Thanks to the fearless work of whistleblowers, activists and investigative journalists, it is now no secret that many of the horses that exit the racing industry end up in knackeries or the export meat market. Even more exit the industry in ways we simply cannot track. Exposé after exposé has shown that, even after Racing NSW banned the direct sale of horses from the industry to knackeries, the practice continues unpoliced. Industry self‑regulation on this front has clearly failed.

I commend my Greens colleague in the Federal Senate, Dr Mehreen Faruqi, who has been tireless in her advocacy for a national horse traceability register to ensure that we know what happens to these horses and for whole‑of‑life care for these animals, which earn the racing and gambling industry so many billions in profits. The bill is important for these reasons. But I suspect that, if the views of former Liberal Premiers are any indication, the Government will not support this crucial reform. When asked whether the racing industry has responsibility to look after horses for their lives, the former Premier Barry O'Farrell's extraordinary response was:

I think they have a responsibility up until the time they leave the racing industry. If I sell you my car … it's no longer my responsibility to maintain it: it's yours.

This industry and the politicians that it funds view these living, breathing, sentient beings as nothing more than machines and tools to exploit for their benefit. This may be a little radical, but I do not believe that a horse is a car. Even when the industry describes a racehorse collapsing from exhaustion or breaking a leg during a race as "breaking down", I still do not think that its mangled body is quite the same as a crashed rally car. Whipping a horse or stabbing it in its side with a sharp object to make it run faster is animal cruelty, not pushing the accelerator. No matter how the industry tries to hide it, the public is wising up to the inexcusable truth of the racing industry's cruelty. We will see an end to horseracing. In the meantime, The Greens welcome the reforms included in this bill.

The Hon. LOU AMATO (15:57:05):

The Government does not support the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021. While noting the good intentions of the Hon. Mark Pearson, the Government opposes this bill as it duplicates existing processes and undermines the industry's existing regulatory framework. Racing NSW was established as the industry's controlling body under the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996 and is responsible for the control, supervision and regulation of thoroughbred racing in New South Wales. Racing NSW balances the critical tasks of maintaining high standards of equine welfare, upholding the integrity of racing and fostering industry growth. Racing NSW already administers a registration scheme for New South Wales thoroughbred horses, through which participants must notify it about the retirement, transfer of ownership or change in location of a horse.

New South Wales was the first jurisdiction in Australia to introduce a rule prohibiting registered horses from being sent to a knackery or abattoir. Racing NSW strictly enforces this rule. Significant penalties can be imposed on any industry participant found to have breached the rules of racing, including prohibiting a person from attending race meetings, suspending or disqualifying a person from involvement in the industry, and fines of up to $100,000. In addition, the Government and the New South Wales racing industry are actively engaged in national work to develop a traceability register for all horses and are focused on ensuring that this work complements and bolsters current efforts to track retired horses. Independently of government, the racing industry has directed significant resources and expertise towards initiatives that focus on horse traceability. National racing industry bodies have allied with race clubs and industry participants to establish an industry-funded and industry‑led group to examine the welfare of horses retiring from racing.

Racing NSW and the thoroughbred racing industry in this State have also demonstrated their commitment to horse welfare by dedicating significant resources towards retirement and retraining programs. Since 2016 Racing NSW has invested $24 million into the purchase of and capital upgrades to properties for the exclusive use of its horse rehabilitation and retraining program for retired thoroughbreds. That is in addition to the funding dedicated through the Equine Welfare Fund, which is derived from 1 per cent of the prize money and generates around $2.5 million each year. Racing NSW has also partnered with several organisations to implement initiatives to rehabilitate, retrain and rehome horses.

The bill's proposal to amend the Thoroughbred Racing Act to require the Department of Customer Service to maintain a register of horses is impractical and unworkable. The proposal would create a significant administrative burden and would duplicate rather than build on the existing horse registration framework. The racing industry contributes in excess of $3.3 billion to the New South Wales economy and sustains more than 27½ thousand full-time-equivalent jobs across the State, with over half of the industry's economic impact occurring in regional areas. Legislative amendments that adversely affect racing in New South Wales or create disparity between New South Wales and other jurisdictions pose a significant risk to the employment and economic activity generated by the racing industry.

The New South Wales Government is committed to supporting a responsible, sustainable and competitive horseracing industry with the highest standards of animal welfare in Australia. However, the bill does not support the achievement of that goal. The bill proposes amendments that undermine the regulation of thoroughbred racing in this State. Racing NSW enforces the Rules of Racing of Racing NSW, which incorporate the Australian Rules of Racing and include animal welfare provisions. The rules of racing bind all thoroughbred racing participants in New South Wales.

More than 90,000 people directly participate in the industry as employees, participants or volunteers. Our State leads the way in horse welfare, being the only jurisdiction to have rules in place that require that all thoroughbred horses are suitably rehomed on retirement. Under those rules, Racing NSW must be notified of the new location of retired racehorses and a minimum standard of care must be provided at all times. In 2017 Racing NSW introduced amendments to the rules of racing to prohibit retired thoroughbred racehorses from being sent to an abattoir or knackery.

The rules of racing were further strengthened in 2020 when Racing NSW introduced an excluded list for any person considered to be unsuitable for the care of a New South Wales thoroughbred. Individuals can be placed on the list if they have previously sent a horse to a knackery or abattoir, if they have mistreated a horse or if their property does not meet the minimum standards set by Racing NSW. It is an offence for any New South Wales owner or licensed person to transfer, sell or gift a horse to a person on the excluded list, with participants subject to significant penalties if found to have breached that requirement.

The rules of racing also tightly control the use of whips, tongue ties and spurs. They include conditions regarding their design and specifications, as well as restrictions that limit their use during racing and training activities. Racing NSW can impose significant penalties on any individual found to have breached the rules of racing, including prohibiting a person from attending race meetings, suspending or disqualifying a person from involvement in the industry and fines of up to $100,000. Racing NSW has dedicated significant resources to rehoming and retraining retired racehorses, and New South Wales was the first jurisdiction in Australia to introduce an equine welfare fund.

As well as protection under the rules of racing, it is important to note that horses are well protected from harmful activities through the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [POCTA Act], which applies to racehorses just as it applies to all animals in New South Wales. Any person responsible for an animal in New South Wales, including a racehorse, has a responsibility to provide care and to treat that animal in a humane manner. Under the POCTA Act, cruelty is defined as any act or omission that results in an animal being unreasonably, unnecessarily or unjustifiably inflicted with pain. That definition already encompasses the inappropriate use of whips, tongue ties and spurs.

The provisions in the bill are unnecessary and impractical. They do not build on current government and industry initiatives to promote and safeguard equine welfare. The bill undermines the regulation of thoroughbred racing in New South Wales and does not contribute to the goal of furthering equine welfare in this State. Earlier today I heard, not from Mr Ed but still straight from the horse's mouth, that the State Labor conference is on the same day as The Everest. Shame on members opposite. The Government will not support the bill.

The Hon. COURTNEY HOUSSOS (16:05:58):

I lead for Labor on the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021. I indicate at the outset that Labor will oppose the bill. However, I acknowledge the work on this issue by the Hon. Mark Pearson as the first Animal Justice Party member elected in New South Wales. He has engaged with me and my Labor colleagues in a really professional and constructive manner, and he will be a sad loss to this Chamber. I thank him for that. The Hon. Mark Pearson moved the second reading of the bill on 17 February 2021. The bill amends the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 and the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996 to ban whips, tongue ties and spurs in horseracing. The bill increases the minimum age of racehorses to three years. It introduces a registration scheme for horses at least three years old, criminalises sending ex-racehorses to knackeries and introduces a rehoming scheme. The bill introduces section 17A to 17D of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals [POCTA] Act 1979.

At the outset, I reinforce that NSW Labor believes the racing industry is responsibly managing the welfare of horses, but it must continue to meet community expectations about how they are treated during and after their racing career. Racing NSW has invested significant funds and resources into the industry to rehome retired thoroughbreds and introduce minimum standards of equipment. The bill seeks to ban two-year-old horses from racing. That ban would end the Golden Slipper, which began in 1957. The Golden Slipper Stakes at Rosehill racecourse is a 1,200-metre group one race for two-year-old horses and is Sydney's richest autumn race. Situated in the heart of western Sydney, in Parramatta, it is worth more than $5 million in prize money, having increased this year.

It is worth noting that Racing NSW already has stringent rules for the use of whips, riding crops, tongue ties and spurs. Restrictions can also be put on any two-year-old horse who races. The current rules state that whips must be approved by Racing NSW. They must not be used excessively, used in consecutive strides before the 100‑metre mark or used on more than five occasions. Racing NSW allows riders to use spurs, but they must be blunt and must not be used in an excessive, unnecessary or improper manner. Tongue ties can only be used if they are a leather strap or a rubber band and meet specific measurement requirements.

Under the current regulations, any horse entered into a race or a race trial must be registered with Racing Australia. Within seven days of a decision to retire a horse, Racing Australia must be notified in writing. Racing Australia is also notified in the event of a horse not competing in any event for a period of at least six months. New South Wales has additional protections, as Racing NSW does not allow horses to be sent to knackeries or abattoirs to be destroyed or disposed of. Racing NSW is the only State racing organisation to prohibit a thoroughbred from being sent to an abattoir or knackery, and these rules only apply to horses within the New South Wales racing industry. Horses cannot be gifted or transferred to any person on the New South Wales excluded list for rehoming of thoroughbreds.

The thoroughbred racing industry contributes more than $3.5 million to the State and generates approximately 27,600 full-time equivalent jobs. It generates more than $1,971.1 million in household income for those employed in full-time, part-time or casual work. More than 48,000 individuals are involved in the thoroughbred industry as participants, employees and volunteers. As the previous speaker noted, the Everest is on this weekend and it will clash with the NSW Labor State Conference. As the shadow Minister for Racing, I will endeavour to meet both of these very important commitments, along with more than 40,000 other race fans. The Sydney Everest Carnival is expected to attract over 130,000 people and generate $100 million in economic benefit for New South Wales across retail, fashion, hospitality, accommodation and tourism. The carnival supports more than 2,000 full-time and part-time jobs.

As I said earlier, Australian racing authorities have a robust framework, including through Racing Australia and the Rules of Racing, to deliver high standards of animal welfare. I am advised that tongue ties are listed as approved gear in the Register of Nationally Approved Gear published by Racing Australia. Tongue ties are also approved gear in other major thoroughbred racing countries, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, the United States, France, Hong Kong and Japan. I understand that United Kingdom studies have shown that racehorses improve their performance when a tongue tie is used, and a Canadian study found that the use of tongue ties contributes to upper airway stability of horses during racing.

In relation to whip use, the Australian Rules of Racing, which includes rules governing the use of whips, are administered by Racing Australia and are informed by best practice standards of integrity and animal welfare. The whip is also used by jockeys to assist in safely controlling a horse during a race. Strict rules govern whip usage, as I said earlier, which have been introduced by Racing Australia to overcome concerns. Strict rules also cover whip design. The thoroughbred racing whip must be padded and of a design and specifications approved by Racing Australia, with the maximum length not exceeding 70 centimetres. The padding of the whip must be made of closed cell foam of not less than seven millimetres thick on each side of the whip. The outer layer of the padded segment of a whip must consist of approved material that does not harden over time and does not absorb water. From 1 August 2018 it is an offence for a person to have in their possession a whip that is not approved or has been modified. With those remarks I indicate, as I did at the outset, that NSW Labor opposes the bill.

The Hon. SCOTT BARRETT (16:13:01):

I oppose the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021 because it jeopardises the future of the wildly successful New South Wales racing industry and because there are already measures in place or on their way that cover what the bill intends to do. The bill also implies that the racing industry is a cruel and evil industry, which it is not. I was not in the House when the Hon. Mark Pearson introduced the bill, although I have read his second reading speech. It was a very considered, well-put-together and respectful speech. You would expect nothing less from the member. I have also appreciated the contributions of the Hon. Courtney Houssos, the Hon. Mark Latham and the Hon. Lou Amato.

New South Wales is one of the world's leading racing jurisdictions, with prize money that is the envy of the racing world; race meetings of global importance, including the Everest this weekend; and a breeding industry of world renown in the Hunter Valley. On top of that, we have welfare standards that lead the way in best practice. While punching above its weight on the global stage, the New South Wales racing industry delivers its benefits right here for the people of this State. It sustains some 30,000 jobs, with more than 90,000 people involved in the industry in some capacity, either as employees, participants or volunteers. In turn, this activity contributes more than $3.3 billion to the State economy every year, more than half of which goes to regional New South Wales.

Of course, it is for regional New South Wales that I oppose the bill. It threatens and attacks a key part of what makes regional New South Wales the best place to live, work and raise a family. I was lucky enough to see this for myself over the long weekend, when I took my young bloke, my wife and my mother to Nyngan for a race meet. The meet was thrown together at the last minute. With all the wet weather, a number of race meets have had to be cancelled. Devastatingly, the Louth Races and the Mungery Picnic Races were all cancelled. Nyngan was thrown an opportunity, which it seized, and did a fantastic job. I must congratulate the race club at Nyngan, and Wendy Robb in particular, on their work in pulling the meet together.

It was a lovely day and the course looked a treat. The Lions Club was there with a jumping castle, there was face painting, and the Nyngan Pony Club was there with a barbecue. There were people from all around. There were groups of mates clearly set for a big day out, a lot of couples enjoying the spring weather and families enjoying the sun and the activities on offer. My young bloke loves to see the horses—or the "neighs", as he calls them—and we thank the trainers who let us spend some time with them.

It was a lovely day out in Nyngan, in a scene that is mirrored right across regional New South Wales. I have had great days out at meets in Come By Chance, Cowra, Harden and Orange, just to name a few. In most regional towns and villages, the date of the race meet is circled on the calendar and looked forward to every year. I also visited the racecourse at Warren recently, the "Randwick of the west". It has wonderful facilities for horses, trainers and their teams, and racegoers. I spoke to Mayor Milton Quigley about how important the race meet is to the local town. He told me that it brings in visitors from all around the State, which of course provides a boost to the local economy. The meets also provide a great social event for the community.

I cannot stress enough how important these events are. There are four race meets in Warren: the Cattleman's Cup, the Golden Fleece, the Cotton Cup and the Twilight Race Meeting. Mayor Quigley said, "These are all important events on our calendar. They bring people out and they bring people together. The community would not be the same without them." Throughout the past few years, the racing industry should be congratulated on the path it took through the devastation that the COVID-19 pandemic had on our economy. The racing industry embraced the challenge of continuing to operate in uncertain times, sustaining employment and providing a source of enjoyment for the many people who watch races across the State. It did this by balancing the economic needs of the industry and its people with health measures to limit the spread of disease.

Indeed, the proactive approach of the racing industry to the pandemic is demonstrated in its approach to protecting the welfare of its animal participants. Racing NSW is established as the industry's controlling body under the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996 and is responsible for the control, supervision and regulation of thoroughbred racing in New South Wales. It balances the critical tasks of maintaining high standards of equine welfare and upholding the integrity of racing with fostering industry growth. The willingness of Racing NSW to get on the front foot to address industry challenges can be seen in its approach to animal welfare. Racing NSW already administers a registration scheme throughout the State for thoroughbred horses, through which participants must notify Racing NSW about the retirement, transfer of ownership or change in location of a horse.

Racing NSW was the first jurisdiction in Australia to introduce a rule prohibiting registered horses from being sent to a knackery or abattoir. The rules are strictly enforced by Racing NSW, which can impose significant penalties on breaches of the Rules of Racing, so that aspect of the bill is already covered. Racing NSW and the thoroughbred racing industry in this State have also demonstrated their commitment to horse welfare by dedicating significant resources towards retirement and retraining programs. In fact, I have owned a couple of those horses myself—the odd older, retired horse and a few that were never going to make it. They ended up being show horses, jumpers, trail horses and companion horses.

Since 2016 Racing NSW has invested $24 million in the purchase and capital upgrade of properties for the exclusive use of rehabilitation and retraining programs for retired thoroughbreds. One example of this is Bart's Farm, which is 137 acres located in the Nepean Valley, owned by Racing NSW and designed by Bart Cummings specifically as a retirement village for racehorses. If you own a retired racehorse that you cannot find a home for, Racing NSW will assist in the rehoming of that horse to somewhere like Bart's Farm or one of its other properties across New South Wales. There is a 200-acre property in Muswellbrook, there is Oxley Island on the North Coast and there is a 2,600-acre property north of Lithgow. As well as those properties, there is also dedicated funding from the Equine Welfare Fund, which is derived from 1 per cent of prize money and generates around $2.5 million each year. This has now been jacked up to 2½ per cent of prize money to provide more welfare protection.

Since July 2015 the New South Wales Government's reforms to the point of consumption tax have fed in an additional $200 million for programs for the racing industry, including for programs like the Equine Welfare Fund. The New South Wales Liberal-Nationals Government is the most ardent supporter in any jurisdiction when it comes to a vibrant and sustainable racing industry, which is why it announced a $67 million capital fund in the last budget to invest in regional race courses. There is a new poly-turf track in Cessnock, which is an all-weather training track to support the industry there. In Albury, there were new stables built and better facilities provided for trainers, stablehands, jockeys and horses. There was $600,000 delivered to the race club in Nowra to build its first female jockey room. We are seeing more and more female jockeys, so it is great that the Government can support that aspect of the industry.

It might seem that I have drifted away from the key aspects of the bill, but it is important that we have a strong industry, and this funding contributes to that strong industry. The stronger the industry is, the stronger the outcomes are for participants, including the horses, which are the key participants in the industry. The New South Wales Government and racing industry are committed to supporting a responsible, sustainable and competitive horseracing industry with the highest standards of animal welfare in Australia. The racing industry is not an evil industry. It is an important industry that is driven by good people who love and care for their horses. They are not evil people, nor is Delta Goodrem evil. I note that there have been many attacks on Delta for her support of the spring carnival. How could you attack Delta?

I oppose the bill. Its objects are redundant and duplicative, and it implies that the industry is cruel and unjust, which it is not. I note that the Hon. Mark Pearson's time in this Chamber is coming close to an end. I have not dealt with him on many things; we obviously have different priorities in this place. But from my first dealings with him, as a staffer many years ago, he has held himself to the highest possible standard. I thank him for that and congratulate him on what he has achieved as a member of this place.

The Hon. AILEEN MacDONALD (16:23:33):

I oppose the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021. As outlined by previous speakers, the bill before the House calls for legislative amendments that duplicate existing legislation that safeguards equine welfare. Along with other animals, the treatment of horses, including those retired from the racing industry, is covered by the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979, or the POCTA Act, which includes penalties for aggravated animal cruelty offences of up to $22,000 or two years' imprisonment, or both, for an individual and $110,000 for a corporation. In addition, the Crimes Act 1900 includes a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment for serious animal cruelty and three years' imprisonment for reckless animal cruelty. This legislation, together with the Rules of Racing of Racing NSW, provides robust safeguards to protect thoroughbred welfare in New South Wales.

Racing NSW is established as the industry's controlling body under the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996 and is responsible for the control, supervision and regulation of thoroughbred racing in New South Wales. Racing NSW currently has substantial powers to ensure the welfare of thoroughbred horses throughout their lives. It administers and enforces the Rules of Racing of Racing NSW, which include equine welfare provisions and bind all New South Wales racing industry participants. The industry already administers a horse registration system, with participants required to notify Racing NSW when a horse is retired or transferred to another owner or location. Amendments to the POCTA Act to prohibit racehorses from being sent to slaughter are simply unnecessary.

Racing NSW was the first jurisdiction in Australia to introduce a rule prohibiting a thoroughbred racehorse from being sent to an abattoir or knackery. It strictly enforces the Rules of Racing of Racing NSW and can impose significant penalties on any individual found to be in breach, including prohibiting a person from attending race meetings; suspending or disqualifying a person from involvement in the industry; and imposing fines of up to $100,000. The bill also proposes to prohibit the use of whips, spurs and tongue ties through amendments to the POCTA Act. Again, these amendments are unnecessary, as this equipment is regulated by Racing NSW through the Rules of Racing of Racing NSW, which include conditions on the design and specification of such equipment and limitations on its use during racing and training. The inappropriate use of whips, spurs or tongue ties can also be pursued under existing provisions in the POCTA Act, which defines an act of cruelty as any act or omission that results in an animal being unreasonably, unnecessarily or unjustifiably inflicted with pain.

The bill also proposes to prohibit the racing of a horse unless it is at least three years old. This proposal is not founded in sound research, as several studies indicate that commencing racing as a two-year-old is not only not detrimental but may prolong a horse's racing career. I note that the bill's second reading speech erroneously states that the racing of two-year-old horses was first introduced in Australia in the 1980s; however, as the Hon. Courtney Houssos mentioned, that is incorrect. The racing of two-year-old horses has occurred in Australia and around the world since at least the late 1800s. It is also noted that the Golden Slipper, a New South Wales feature race for two-year-old horses, was first run in 1957. The New South Wales Government and racing industry are committed to supporting a responsible, sustainable and competitive horseracing industry with the highest standards of animal welfare in Australia. I oppose the bill because it duplicates existing welfare legislation and the Rules of Racing of Racing NSW and undermines the current regulatory scheme for thoroughbred racing in this State.

The Hon. MARK PEARSON (16:28:45):

In reply: I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate on the Racehorse Legislation Amendment (Welfare and Registration) Bill 2021. The positive and collaborative way that has occurred is very welcome. Two hundred years ago, Richard Martin introduced a bill into Westminster for the fifth time. The bill was called the Ill‑Treatment of Cattle Bill. Essentially, it was a bill to stop the whipping of horses and cattle in the streets of London and elsewhere in Britain. Richard Martin tried over five years to introduce the legislation. Finally, an argument from the great philosopher Jeremy Bentham got everybody—or almost everybody—over the line. He said:

Can they reason?Can they talk?Can they suffer?

The question is not or but

So the very first legislation in the world to protect animals was based on the abhorrence of witnessing the whipping of two species: horses and cattle. Here we are, 200 years later, arguing that whipping an animal for entertainment should be acceptable. Think about it. The animal does not need to be whipped to prevent harm to itself or to a rider. I have just returned from Norway and Sweden. In Norway, the whip has not been used and spurs have not been used since 1973. There have been no accidents or harm caused to a horse or a jockey as a consequence of that decision of the Norwegian Government. Sweden, 10 years later, followed suit. Denmark is now introducing similar legislation, as is the Netherlands.

Whipping an animal for entertainment and for absolutely no other purpose should never be acceptable, in any terms. The bill introduces more restrictions in relation to the tracking of horses and other aspects of the care, wellbeing, welfare and protection of horses. The bill is about bringing in laws to uphold what, apparently, are the purposes and the meaning of the rules and the guidelines that the horseracing industry have. But they are not strong enough. As my colleague Ms Abigail Boyd pointed out, of all of the breaches of the rules and guidelines of Racing NSW, very few attracted the penalties that they deserved, and virtually none were referred to the authorities which administer the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.

So it simply is not the case that protections are already in place for the wellbeing of these animals. Why would we not want to uphold the rules and strengthen them by incorporating them into the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, which is the high bar that is necessary to protect animals? What the ABC exposed in the horseracing industry was utterly horrific. It showed that many horses do end up in knackeries; they do end up not being registered. They become untraceable ghost animals. I acknowledge there is considerable opposition to this bill. But I ask every member: Is it acceptable for us to continue to condone the whipping of an animal, whether it be a padded whip or not? The evidence is clear that it is excruciatingly painful for a horse. Equine experts have upheld that. If a fly lands on the rump of a horse, the horse will spin around and nudge the fly away. If a horse can feel a fly landing on its rump, it is going to feel a whip—padded or not. Just on that simple principle, I call on members to support and uphold the bill. I commend the bill to the House.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT (The Hon. Wes Fang):

The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion negatived.

‍