Howard Hamilton

WE HAVE travelled a long way in the series of articles on the developments in the racing industry.

We are at the stage where the expectations of a not-for-profit promoting company, owned and operated by the stakeholders of the industry, is in the hands of a receiver/manager.

With the change of government in 1980, so also was a change in philosophy. 'Socialist' ideals were an enigma and the structure of the management of the racing industry came in for changes which were to have the most far reaching effect on the industry.

Racing Promotions Ltd (RPL) had acquired the assets of Knutsford Park Ltd in 1978 and had assumed all debts and liabilities. The financial structure proved to be difficult to service leading to a state of insolvency in 1985.

The Racing Commission had refused to renew the promoter's licence and this contributed to the National Commercial Bank seeking to protect its interests 1985 was a year of trauma and tragedy. The Racing Year of that year recorded: "No praise is too high for the various segments of the industry in weathering the tensions and uncertainty of 1985 - those who rely on racing for their livelihood, those who have investments in the industry and those who support it at the betting windows. It also speaks well for the discipline among racing people that racing continued uninterruptedly amidst these turmoils". Unfortunately this "discipline" could not be sustained and there were major disruptions in 1987.

Licence

During all this time RPL attempted to operate without a licence and eventually ceased operations in May of 1987 . The Racing Commission granted a 60-day licence to Horseracing Promotions Ltd (HPL), a new company established bythe Government to promote racing on the basis of a lease of the race track and facilities.

There was much acrimony between RPL and HPL on the terms of the lease leading to even more disruptions in racing.

The fate of the industry and the turning point in its future was further determined by the forced acquisition of the assets of RPL by the Government through a transfer of these to the Commissioner of Lands in December of 1989. This was done in consideration of the outstanding taxes due of J$34,691,363.

There was a change of government in 1989 and once again a "new deal" was announced . The directors of HPL were replaced with a new group headed by Danny Melville was formed. This new group were given the assignment to formulate and submit for government's consideration appropriate plans for the restructuring of the company.

The most significant announcement at the time was the planned restructuring of the ownership of the assets of the Caymanas racing complex.

Horse Racing Promotions Ltd was to be capitalised at $60 million. Shares were to be offered to the public to the extent of $42 million. The remaining $18 million (30 per cent) was to be reserved by government for eventual distribution as detailed below:

	Gift to Horsemen's Association (grooms, trainers, jockeys) 10 per cent.
	To be taken up by Horsemen's Association for payment over three years ( owners, breeders, trainers, grooms and jockeys) 10 per cent.
	To be taken up by HPL workers for payment over three years. five per cent.
	Retained five per cent.

It was significant that the announcement of these plans coincided with the beginning of a new decade. All segments of the industry were hopeful that the mistakes of the past would not be repeated. The need for a strong financial base was recognised and everyone was excited about the proposed wide base of public participation.

Public ownership

In anticipation of this broad based public ownership, the assets held by the Commissioner of Lands was transferred in August of 1990. This transfer was effected by a consideration of $34,691,363 which would be paid by the issue to Government of fully paid up shares in the amount of $18 million and a debenture of $16,691,363. Caymanas Track Ltd assumed the responsibility for promoting races as HPL was phased out.

There is no doubt that the decade of the '90s saw the most significant positive changes in the industry - computerised totalisator system, expansion of the off-track sales and a significant increase in turnover at the pari mutuel. Purses were now structured as a percentage of turnover and the levels of expectation created a buoyancy in the industry.

This is now 2007 and the industry has failed to fulfill the hopes and aspirations of its stakeholders. The Government has failed to properly assess its need for revenue against the capacity of the industry to fill that need.

No industry can survive when it receives no income from more than 50 per cent of its output.

The constant factor in the failure of the industry to satisfy the minimum requirements of the participants is the inequitable taxation policy and the inability to bring the bookmakers' activities into the income stream of the promoters.

Your comments are welcomed.