the decline did not begin recently.

​Writing in 1975, the retired trainer Joe Hartigan made this observation: As we are today, the policy seems to be, ‘Let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’. However, as the vast majority are in the poorer bracket, it seems only a matter of time before the pendulum swings to help the small men. Otherwise, it will mean a dozen trainers, and a handful of millionaires as owners, will control racing, and that will bore us all.
In hindsight, of course, it was the wisdom of Solomon and as can be expected his warning went unheeded, perhaps, at the time, even derided.
Two years later, he wrote an addendum to the book which has proved equally astute: Since I first sat down to write this book (To Become A Racehorse Trainer) the Trainers lot has changed more than at any time in our racing history. Lads wages continually increase. Fodder goes up by leaps and bounds. Mr. Tom Blackwell’s Report suggests a minimum training charge, and for an alteration to the apprentice indenture system. On the brighter side there is to be a slight increase in the overall stake money. In view of these changes, and no doubt countless more to come, I have not rewritten in order to catch up. If I did so, I fear that I might discourage the new young trainer even further and that as you know is not my intention. ‘I never promised you a rose garden’.
Prophetic words. You’ll doubtless agree.
To allude to the book ‘To Become A Racehorse Trainer’ for a short paragraph. As a historical overview of the sport the book is excellent and, in some ways, as long as the young, prospective trainer, is of an optimistic mindset, the book possesses a mine of useful advice. Sadly, Joe Hartigan’s misgivings of a career he loved remain as relevant today, sadly, perhaps unforgivably, as they were back in 1975.
As Emanual Macron told the French people, ‘The days of abundance are over’. Whether he gave any explanation for his dire warning or any advice on how to survive the new status quo, I cannot say. Yet that same phrase may well apply to horse racing around the world. This sport, as I repeatedly say, is a working-class sport underpinned by the wealth and enthusiasm of the mega-rich. If the rich lose their wealth who or what will underpin or finance the sport, and without wealthy owners what will happen to the working classes that oil the wheels of equine industry?
Where are the captains of this industry who might right the ship, to keep it afloat, to offer the coordinated response to the cost-of-living crisis that might yet sink our great sport to the sea-bed of yesterday’s way of life.
The publication of the 2023 racing calendar was a prime example of lazy governance. While the B.H.A. were putting together next year’s race programme, all the problems of today and beyond were in the public domain, yet they were either in ignorance of the financial problems of the world or blithely took the view to carry on regardless.
By common consent, there is too much racing, so the B.H.A. have given the sport exactly the same problem to deal with next year, with no regard to the possibility that the tribulations of next year might be the straw that finally breaks the camel’s back.
Here are three proposals that might ease the sport’s financial woes, or at least the financial woes of racecourse executives, and I will not include the bloody obvious suggestion of cutting 500 or more races from the calendar, if only on a temporary basis.
Number one: electricity prices will be a huge drain on racecourse finances. So, no floodlight racing for one, two or three seasons. It must be hugely expensive to power floodlights, so eliminating this outlay can only be of benefit to everyone, including betting shops as they no longer would need to stay open past naturally occurring daylight hours. It would also be of benefit to stable staff for obvious reasons.
Number two: on the same theme, no evening racing with the exception of during the summer months. The use of electricity must be sparing, with racecourses perhaps investing in a turbine or solar panels to cut costs and power all their electrical needs.
Number three: here I am making an assumption, which may be false, though being wrong has never stopped me airing my thoughts in the past and will not do so now. It must be more expensive overall to set-up a racecourse for racing for ten, say, one-day meetings, than it would be for a two-or three-day meetings, so I propose as few one-day meetings as possible.
There must be a hundred or more ways, some small, some substantial, for racecourses to save money in order to ensure they can pay their staff and maintain the racecourse and its facilities in a fit state to be able to open the gates to the public and the racing community. But where is the B.H.A. with a ready plan, a task force to lead the sport to healthier times. In its history, racing has had to navigate its way through other troubled times, for instance, after two world wars, yet for all their faults, the Jockey Club had the authority and concern for the sport to lead the way. I only wish I had the same confidence in this damn tripartite group to come together and speak as one voice.