One issue raised by Channel 4's ace caller Simon Holt this week is the effect that outlawing the whip at the end of a race would have on integrity.
A jockey's whip use is a sure barometer of how hard he or she is trying to win a race - take it away and what do you have? A dozen or so riders crouching low, and pushing and shoving - but nobody knows how hard.
The bottom end of our sport will become a haven for any gangster who wants to sign up some struggling riders for horses that aren't supposed to win.
There will be grubby stories about the laying of non-triers every day of the week - and British racing will be the dirtiest, rather than the best, in the world.
It suits those who want to take British racing out of step with every other major racing country on the planet - either by banning the whip or by disqualifying horses whose jockeys have broken the rules - to paint this as a debate between free thinkers and flat-earthers.
This, of course, is nonsense. Just because I oppose these barmy suggestions does not mean I'm in favour of putting small boys up chimneys.
It merely signifies that I'm in harmony with the bosses of racing in Ireland, France, Hong Kong, Japan, Australia and the United States.
Also, don't be conned by those who try to draw parallels with others sports - that 'offside' means 'no goal' and that 'no ball' means 'no wicket'.
In football, players are not allowed a certain number of offside offences - any more than a bowler is given a quota of no balls.
However much the person peddling this argument waves his arms around, the comparison is utter guff.
The way to go is not to throw the baby out with the bath water, but to concentrate on education and punishments. Educate jockeys to ride like the best, and show whip-happy riders, through suspensions, that they must change.
And those, I hope, are my last words on the matter until the autumn.
You will be well aware by now that many things that go on in the BHA's Race Planning department are beyond my ken.
The latest is the number of jumps meetings to take place in Britain since Good Friday.
The National Hunt season ended with the mixed Bet365 Gold Cup card at Sandown on Saturday - with four other jumps cards, versus two on the Flat.
There were a further two meetings over the sticks on Sunday, followed by five (versus three Flat) on Bank Holiday Monday.
Two on Tuesday, one on Wednesday, but then three jumps cards on Thursday followed by another three yesterday.
Race Planning can't control the weather, and the lack of rain has decimated the fields - but do we REALLY need this many National Hunt fixtures?
Recent Posts
Download
Saturday, 30 April 2011
British Horseracing Authority's review into the use of the whip is scheduled to come out in October - and I intend to make these my final thoughts on the matter until then.
Wednesday, 27 April 2011
Has Prince William personally banned Tony Blair from the royal wedding
There is, however, a perfectly neat and plausible explanation, and it’s this.
Prince William cannot stand Tony Blair, whom he blames for making political capital out of the death of his mother – “the People’s Princess”, as Blair’s spin doctors dubbed her within hours of her death.
The Prince has a long memory and a capacity for cold fury. We catch a glimpse of it in the section of Blair’s memoirs relating to the week after Diana’s death: “I had also spoken to William who was not only still grieving but angry. He knew, rationally, why the week between Diana’s death and the funeral had to be as it had been. But he felt acutely the conflict between public position and private emotion.”
That anger is likely to have reawakened by Blair’s decision to record such a private conversation in the book. It is not hard to imagine William saying “I’m not having that man at my wedding” – and getting his way: after all, in nearly 60 years, only one of the Queen’s prime ministers has twisted her arm to persuade her to do something that went against her instincts, and that was Tony Blair virtually demanding that she broadcast to the nation after the death of William’s mother. And can anyone doubt that the Royal family dislikes blabbermouth Cherie more than any other prime ministerial spouse?
My guess is that the Blairs were never on the wedding list, and that this also explains the absence of the Browns. Inviting Brown but not Blair would have brought the feud into the open: the Palace could not even have trotted out its implausible Knights of the Garter story. If I’m right, then one can’t help feeling a bit sorry for Gordon and Sarah, who are being punished for the crimes of their predecessors. But perhaps they saw it coming: one doesn’t have to spend long in royal company to know that forgiveness doesn’t come easily to the Windsors.
Thursday, 21 April 2011
More than 21,000 drug addicts and alcoholics have been claiming sickness benefits for longer than 10 years, it has been disclosed.
The taxpayer-funded handouts form part of the £7 billion a year paid in incapacity benefit. New figures from the Department for Work and Pensions show that 80,000 people are claiming incapacity benefit for being an alcoholic, a drug addict or too obese to work. Of these, 12,000 alcoholics and 9,200 drug addicts have been drawing the benefit for more than a decade at a cost estimated at around £1 billion. Each claimant has been able to claim an average £4,700 a year.
Thousands of others can claim for conditions such as headaches, acne, coughs and eating disorders. Short-term IB is £69 a week for the first 28 weeks, from weeks 29-52 at £81 a week with longer-term IB, paid after a year, £91.40 a week.
Chris Grayling, the employment minister, said: “It’s not fair on anyone for this situation to continue. Far from being the safety net it should be the benefits system has trapped thousands in a cycle of addiction and welfare dependency with no prospect of getting back to work.
“We are putting an end to this, we won’t allow people to be left on benefits and forgotten about, that’s why we have already started reassessing everyone on incapacity benefit [IB] and will support people with addictions to help them back into work.”
Ministers are angry that claimants have been left on IB, with the state washing its hands of responsibility to get them over their addictions and into work. Under plans from the Department for Work and Pensions, everyone on IB will be reassessed to see whether they are capable of some work, and what help they might need to return to employment.
The tests began this month. Assessors will determine whether people on IB can start looking for work straight away or if they will initially need the employment and support allowance. Mr Grayling said 10,000 people a week will be asked to take part to look at “what they can do, and what they can’t do”.
He said those with “complex barriers” will be helped through the new Work Programme, which begins this summer. It has been described by Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, as the biggest “welfare to work” programme attempted in Britain. Private and voluntary sector organisations will be asked to get people back to work, with rewards for their success rates.
Wednesday, 20 April 2011
Clegg urges end to AV referendum 'mudslinging
Nick Clegg has called for an end to the "mudslinging" in the debate on the AV referendum and for both sides to treat the public "like adults".
Campaigning ahead of English council elections and the 5 May referendum, the Lib Dem leader told the BBC that voters were turned off by "personal vitriol".
Senior Lib Dems have urged David Cameron to disassociate himself from attacks on Mr Clegg by the No campaign.
Mr Clegg also said he was standing up to the PM when he disagreed with him.
The deputy prime minister was asked by the BBC's Political Editor Nick Robinson, who is interviewing the leaders of the three main parties on the campaign trail, whether he should publicly pick more fights with the prime minister on issues where they differ.
Wednesday, 13 April 2011
British prisoners should be given the vote.
British prisoners should be given the vote. Instead, it has given the Government a six-month deadline to change the law.
Rarely has there been a more blatant challenge to parliamentary sovereignty. This judgment has been handed down just two months after MPs voted by 234 votes to 22 to reject the ruling. So an unelected, unaccountable panel of judges drawn from countries across Europe, some of which have only the flimsiest judicial traditions, is not only defying the clearly expressed views of the House of Commons, but is also seeking to impose new legislation.
If the law is not changed in the way prescribed in Strasbourg, the court will order compensation payments to be paid to the 4,000-odd prisoners who claim that their human rights have been infringed by being deprived of the vote – a restriction that has always existed in Britain. The bill to the taxpayer could run to £150 million, but that would be just the first instalment: thousands more prisoners would undoubtedly climb aboard the bandwagon.
This is intolerable. When the ECHR first delivered its verdict, David Cameron said that it made him feel "physically sick", so we assume he is ready for a fight. Certainly, there could be no better ground to fight on. For years, sensible people have watched with mounting anger as the court has handed out judgments that pander to the rights of the criminal and the feckless at the expense of the law-abiding majority. It is time a line was drawn in the sand.
We believe the Government should refuse to accept this judgment. If the ECHR then orders compensation to be paid, ministers should bring forward legislation outlawing such payments. Two of our own most senior judicial figures have cleared the way for such unilateral action.
David Cameron says that immigrants should learn English
David Cameron will warn that immigrants unable to speak English or unwilling to integrate have created a "kind of discomfort and disjointedness" which has disrupted communities across Britain.
In his most outspoken speech on immigration since becoming prime minister, Cameron will blame Labour for allowing immigration to become "too high" and for adopting an approach that allowed the British National party to flourish.
The prime minister will open his speech, in Hampshire, by saying that immigration is a hugely emotive subject that must be handled with sensitivity. But he will then say that Labour presided over the "largest influx" of immigration in British history, which saw 2.2 million more people settling in Britain between 1997 and 2009 than leaving to live abroad.
Cameron will say this has placed serious pressure on schools, housing and the NHS, and has also created social pressures.
"Real communities are bound by common experiences forged by friendship and conversation, knitted together by all the rituals of the neighbourhood, from the school run to the chat down the pub. And these bonds can take time," he will say.
"So real integration takes time. That's why, when there have been significant numbers of new people arriving in neighbourhoods, perhaps not able to speak the same language as those living there, on occasions not really wanting or even willing to integrate, that has created a kind of discomfort and disjointedness in some neighbourhoods. This has been the experience for many people in our country – and I believe it is untruthful and unfair not to speak about it and address it."
Prime Minister went for the journalist who had reported his remark and said, "You f.....!"
When David Cameron flew back from Pakistan he learned of the row caused by his comment. His statement was that Britain is to blame for many of the world's problems became front-page news in Britain.
The Prime Minister went for the journalist who had reported his remark and said, "You f.....!". Mr Cameron admitted that the press quoted his remark accurately but said further that it was all "blown up out of all proportion".
Mr Cameron did not know that his remark became front page until he boarded the plane the next day. He was chatting to the press when he found out that it was described as diplomatic gaffe. There was a lot of tension building up when he had the customary end-of-trip glass of drink and his mood was pretty sour.
Saturday, 9 April 2011
FOREIGN Secretary William Hague plunged the Government’s defence policy into chaos yesterday by declaring there will be no major re-think on cuts
Prime Minister David Cameron is facing demands to reopen the Strategic Defence and Security Review as the conflict in Libya stretches our armed forces to breaking point. But Mr Hague said that while the Treasury was being “helpful” over a £1billion black hole in this year’s MoD budget, major decisions such as scrapping the Nimrod MRA4 surveillance aircraft would not be reversed.
He said: “It would be wrong to think we are re-opening the defence review. There are adjustments every year as you go along in a defence budget. That is what is happening here.”
An order for Chinook helicopters, which the Tories demanded in opposition, will be delayed as the price of the stop-gap deal with Chancellor George Osborne for more cash. Defence expert Professor Malcolm Chalmers, of the Royal United Services Institute, said the Government was just storing up problems for the future.
Monday, 4 April 2011
Hundreds of NHS staff sacked over the past few weeks could be re-employed
Hundreds of NHS staff sacked over the past few weeks could be re-employed after David Cameron indicated the NHS reform Bill could be delayed.
The news comes amid speculation that the radical plans are set to be watered down, including the key proposal of abolishing Primary Care Trusts and handing the job of commissioning patient services to GPs.
The Prime Minister has taken personal control of approving changes to the Health and Social Care Bill.
He and Nick Clegg are preparing to launch a 'listening exercise' later this week in a bid to reassure critics of the shake-up, which will see GPs handed control of commissioning services.
They are believed to be frustrated that Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has failed to explain why the changes are necessary. Mr Lansley is due to address parliament on the subject this afternoon.
David Cameron will announce this week another humiliating climbdown,
David Cameron will announce this week another humiliating climbdown, putting the brakes on the Government's health reforms in a desperate attempt to rescue his reputation as a defender of the NHS.
In the latest embarrassing example of the Prime Minister being forced to intervene in the policy of one of his ministers, Mr Cameron will publicly admit to mistakes in the plan by the Secretary of State, Andrew Lansley, to hand £80bn of health spending to family doctors, characterised by critics as privatisation by the back door.
Mr Cameron will announce a "pause" of up to three months in the progress of the Health and Social Care Bill through Parliament, to allow for more time to reassure clinicians, patients and coalition MPs. One option being considered is a series of public meetings at which Mr Lansley would be forced to restate the case for reform in a less confrontational manner.
Details of a new flat-rate state pension thought to be worth £155-a-week will be unveiled later on Monday.
It will replace existing means-tested arrangements for new, but not existing, pensioners from 2015 or 2016.
The current full state pension is £97.65-a-week, but is topped up to ensure a minimum income of £132.60.
This is to be replaced by a new £140 flat rate, with inflation expected to push this up to £155 by the time it comes into effect.
"Tomorrow's pensioners do face a very different world," said Pensions Minister Steve Webb.
"They will, on average, be working for a lot longer, they will be retired for longer, they will not on the whole have final salary guaranteed pensions in the way that perhaps their parents did.
"We therefore need a simpler, clearer foundation because more of them will now be asked to save for their retirement."
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan-Smith has also indicated that the retirement age will rise to 66 for both men and women by 2020, as European law requires the same age for both genders.
Ed Miliband will seek to turn the screw on David Cameron over controversial NHS reforms by accusing him of "betraying" Britain's proudest institution.
Amid speculation that the radical plans are set to be watered down, the Labour leader will say the coalition's policy has descended into "utter confusion and chaos".
He will dismiss the Health & Social Care Bill as "broken", and offer cross-party co-operation to develop replacement proposals.
The attack comes as Mr Cameron and Nick Clegg prepare to launch a "listening exercise" later this week in a bid to reassure critics of the shake-up, which will see GPs handed control of commissioning services.
However, Government sources denied they were considering fundamental concessions, or that ministers wanted to "press the pause button".
A Downing Street spokesman said: "The Government is utterly committed to the NHS and its principles. We are also committed to modernising the NHS. Progress on the ground continues to be impressive."
Concerns have been growing about a public backlash against the flagship Bill, with doctors lining up to criticise key elements. The Liberal Democrat leadership is also struggling to appease the party's grass roots, who overwhelmingly voted to reject the plans at spring conference last month.
Delivering a speech in London, Mr Miliband will complain that after "sustained and substantial improvement" under Labour the NHS is suffering because of desperate "horse trading" between the coalition partners.
"I believe David Cameron is betraying the trust he asked the public to put in him at the election," Mr Miliband is expected to say. "The way this Conservative-led Government has gone about NHS reform is a disgrace."
Mr Miliband will add: "It is an insult to the people who work in the health service, it is an insult to the people who use it and the Prime Minister should be ashamed of the way he is running the NHS, the proudest institution of Britain. He is treating those who have spent eight months uncertain about their jobs and their future with utter contempt."
The Government will today launch its crackdown on sickness benefits with ministers suggesting that half a million people could be ready to start work immediately.
Letters are being sent out to people on the Disability Living Allowance, asking them to submit reassessments.
There are currently around two million adults claiming the allowance.
The move comes after a trial review found that almost a third of people in Burnley and Aberdeen were fit for work and 38 per cent had the potential to work with the correct support.
By the end of this week 7,000 people will receive the letter from the Department for Work and Pensions followed by 10,000 a week by the end of April.
It is hoped that the first assessments will take place in June.
Out of the 1,626 people assessed in Burnley and Aberdeen a third of those questioned were taken off the DLA and instead put onto Jobseeker's Allowance.
Almost two fifths were told they could work with the right support and nearly a third were placed in a support group for Employment and Support Allowance. This means they will receive unconditional support and not be expected to look for work.
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said the DLA had become an 'abused' benefit.
Employment Minister Chris Grayling: A life on benefits is 'no longer an option'
He said: 'It became very easy to get on to it and once you were on it you never had to look for work - it became a great way of shielding yourself from work.'
Employment minister Chris Grayling said the pilot study suggested that 500,000 on incapacity benefits are fit to start work immediately.
Mr Grayling said taxpayers had a right to expect that those fit to work looked for employment. He added: 'A life on benefits is no longer an option.'
About 2.1million people are on incapacity benefits, which is worth £91.40 a week.
Studies show that after two years on the benefit claimants are more likely to die or retire than get a job.
The Government has insisted that people who are genuinely too sick to work will continue to receive unconditional support from the state, and will not be expected to look for work.
They will also receive a higher rate of benefit than they currently receive.Private companies will be used to help people off benefits and back into work, and rewarded with fees of up to £14,000 for each individual case.
Critics claim the examinations, carried out by private sector doctors, are loaded against the claimants.
Friday, 1 April 2011
Country was facing 'national crisis' before budget, admits Oliver Letwin
The country is facing a “national crisis” because of less growth and unemployment, one of David Cameron’s closest Cabinet colleagues has admitted.Oliver Letwin, the Prime Minister’s key policy adviser, revealed that last week’s Budget was thrashed out in reaction to the problem with growth and jobs.
Labour seized on the comments and claimed Mr Letwin had “let the cat out of the bag.”
Mr Letwin told the environmental audit select committee: “Leading up to the recent Budget, we took the view collectively in Cabinet that we faced an immediate national crisis in the form of less growth and jobs than we needed. And we were determined collectively to try to increase that growth and those jobs.”
He said that realization “set in train” a process in which all departments tried to come up with plans to help boost growth – the results of which were seen in last week’s Budget.
Angela Eagle, a shadow Treasury spokesman said: “With unemployment at a 17 year high and the economy contracting at the end of last year, there is a jobs and growth crisis in Britain.
“But it’s a crisis of George Osborne’s own making and the government still seems to be in denial.
“Recognising that there’s a problem is a good start. But there’s no point having crisis talks if you then decide to carry on regardless with a reckless plan that is hurting but isn’t working.”
But the Conservatives shrugged off Mr Letwin’s comments and instead pointed to remarks by Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor.
Mr Balls told the New Statesman: “In retrospect, three years on, it was clear once the financial crisis had hit that people reappraised what their view of trend growth was and – in retrospect – of course there was a structural deficit.”
Matthew Hancock, a Tory backbench MP, said: “At the start of a new fiscal year it is clear that Labour’s economic credibility lies in tatters. After months absurdly claiming Labour managed the economy well, Ed Balls has finally been forced to admit that Labour mismanaged the public finances and went into the financial crisis with a structural deficit.
“So he admitted that the cuts are Labour’s cuts.”