Not for one moment do I believe that greyhound "racing" is a threat leading to the mistreatment of animals.
What is being revealed is the mistreatment of coursing dogs off the field. That focus reduces any accusation of cruelty considerably.

And reducing the problem further: Out of all the coursing dog handlers, most I could only imagine, treat their dogs humanly. That normal exercise of animal husbandry would include food, shelter and veterinary attention when necessary...(the ideal world).

Then we move outwards in the circle of coursing dogs, and inspect the down side. Bordering on the unacceptable is the offer of "blooding" the hound. This practice has pay-offs: for in the next circle outwards is the betting industry. Wagering is the ultimate driver of the Greyhound coursing industry itself.

Observing all the above layers of Greyhound racing, and its alleged negative side, the mistreatment of animals; which part of this industry would it become obvious to amend, in order to improve the welfare of animals?

We could remove the dogs from the track, (crude fix). We could remove the illegal blooding of Greyhounds, (already illegal), or we could ban wagering on coursing dogs, (impossible)!

So now we may study the reason behind the ban on greyhound racing in NSW.
What is obvious, is the simplicity of the problem. A simple problem that was given a sledge hammer fix, where a simple jigging of its working mechanism would suffice.

Prosecute the individuals responsible for mistreatment of animals.
If a dog is given the tag of unwanted and euthanised. There is nothing criminal about that decision.
It is "how" the dog is euthanised which may lead to a charge of mistreatment.
(The kindest way to euthanise a dog is with a bullet. It is very swift if done correctly and with compassion, is not an event of cruelty)

Cont.,

Cont...

Euthanising unwanted dogs appears to be the area which, in some power circles, is the most obnoxious. Dogs are more often trailed on private tracks to sort out the under performing animals for culling; outside the official gaze. This is an area to intercept cruelty, at the culling stage, and explains mass greyhound graves!

The dictatorial Gillardesque approach taken by the Baird Government is really bazar, and should be subject to close inspection. Banning a complete industry overnight, is reason for concern and anxiety about the sanity of the Baird Government and its willingness to a acquiesce with minority groups with a foot in the door of parliament. What is their hold on this State Government?

Why doesn't this article include one of our most commonplace forms of animal cruelty - battery hen farming?

For decades, this horrifically inhumane industry keeps defying any attempts to close it down, despite the fact that humane and cost-effective free-range alternatives are available.

Progress on this issue is excruciatingly slow. Even though free-range hen farming still has its problems - i.e. enclosing thousands of hens into small areas where they have limited opportunity to roam free - it's at least a step in the right direction.

The EU has placed limited bans on the practice, simply insisting on 'larger' cages, while some countries such as Switzerland have banned it outright, with no ill economic effects. Other than dubious claims to profit, there is no practical reason for continuing this horror.

Killarney, how can it have no economic effect.

If a farmer were to make 50 cents per dozen for eggs (just a number) and, it costs say $1,000 per square meter to build a shed, then an increase in the shed size means an increase in costs, which leads to less profits. Its simple math.

Just because the price of something doesn't go up for the consumer does not automatically mean no one is worse off.

People have to get their noses out of other peoples business. If you want cage free eggs, then buy them, but don't try to force everyone else to do the same.

Some people may wish to buy cheaper eggs and pay more for veggies or meat. What right do we have to take that away from them.

We have an economy that is heading south very quickly and unless we do something constructive about it, and fast, the last thing future generations are going to be concerned about is caged chooks.

People have to stop thinking with their hearts and start thinking with their minds. We are headed for big trouble, and fast.

As for unwanted greyhounds, send them off to the fertilizer plants. We do it with unwanted race horses. Its a business and if any tool of business under performs, you replace it. Thousands of jobs are at stake with this ban, people have to understand that.

For a detailed insight into the shortcomings of how the McHugh inquiry was conducted -- misconducted actually -- refer to Hedley Thomas article, "Greyhound racing industry dogged to its death by ‘social licence’", The Australian, 30 July 2016

rehctub

'People have to get their noses out of other peoples business. If you want cage free eggs, then buy them, but don't try to force everyone else to do the same.'

No. Callous and cruel people need government noses to be firmly stuck into their business. People who make a profit from cruelty should be treated with zero tolerance.

As for the economic argument, the price of free range eggs has been kept artificially high by the battery-biased poultry industries in several countries worldwide. Since legislation against battery farming has become more aggressive, especially in the EU (instead of leaving it to consumer supply-demand), the profitability gap between battery v. free range has closed considerably. One US study now puts it at only 15c per dozen.

Your argument that any legislative move against battery farming will send the economy off the edge is ludicrous. Rampant global speculation, US-led financial deregulation and neoliberal austerity economics are the leading causes of Australia's economic woes - not the humble hen