5-YEAR WELFARE PLAN, FIASCO AT HUNTINGDON, CONSTITUTION HILL & HOW TIMES HAVE CHANGED.

There is no more important subject in the whole of the racing world than the welfare of racehorses. Welfare is above all other considerations, including prize-money, as without public and government confidence in the integrity of those involved with racehorses at all levels within the sport, there will be in the future no horse racing and no need to breed racehorses. It is why it was so important for breeders and auction houses to contribute financially to the care of retired racehorses, an intiative that came from a letter on the subject I had published in The Racing Post. That is not an empty boast but a statement of pride.

The Horse Welfare Board Strategy 'A Life Well-Lived' has already produced a change of mind-set within the sport. When the sport was governed by The Jockey Club, the official narrative was that horse welfare was not their concern, it was the right of owners to decide the fate of the horses they owned. Now it would be a scandal, as it was back in the day when Grand National winner Hallo Dandy was found on a waste tip, neglected and in need of rescue, if a former racehorse is found in a distressed condition. Now, it is the aim of the Welfare Board to have 100% traceability of all former racehorses, with details kept on  data-base, among twenty other priorities that include veterinary research, injury prevention and aftercare.

The quote I take from The Racing Post's report in today's paper is 'public view of equine welfare is one of the most pressing issues for the sport'. As someone who lives far outside of any horse racing hotspot or racecourse, I can assure anyone reading this that the main stumbling block for greater inclusion in our sport from the general public is the whip and equine fatalities. The latter is out of our influence to change, the former though is more easily managed. Without talk of the whip, the Welfare Board are batting with one eye closed.

As always, I am not suggesting use of the whip has any element of cruelty about it, yet if you look closely at a photograph of a tight finish, the look is not good for the sport, with jockeys with whips raised and extreme effort written large on thier faces, as if winning is a matter of all cost. I fear we will never win over the non-racing general public if we do not restrict use of the whip to its minimum and to me that is 'one hit and that's it.' There is no point in having occasional 'hands and heels' races for apprentices if once a professional these riders will have the emphasis put on them to use a whip in a finish. When Tod Sloan and others brought the 'monkey up a stick' style of riding, as it was labelled at the time, to this country there were those who thought it an abomination and death to the beauty of proper riding. The same furore will occur if the whip were restricted today, with jockeys having to learn how to ride a finish using only their hands, heels and vocal cords. If someone is seen beating his or her dog in a park, for instance, it might result in a public prosecution. Yet in public, men and women are allowed to hit a horse. The end is nigh, I fear!

It will be interesting when the B.H.A. sit down next week to decide who, if anyone, was at fault for the fiasco of the last race at Huntingdon being abandoned mid-race. Tom Bellamy chose, as his horse, withdrawn at the start for unruly behaviour, would not turn right, to return to the paddock in the opposite direction of those still in the race, causing the clerk of the course, perhaps in a panic, imagining a head-on collision occuring, to sound the trumpets and stop the race. The initial thought was that Bellamy might be out-of-control, though he maintains he was aware of the threat he was becoming and had his horse at a walk in the passing area. I suspect this was a fiasco that had no one at fault for its creation, though I also suspect that Bellamy will receive a caution of some kind as the B.H.A. are loathed to sanction racecourse officials.

As I thought, Nicky Henderson has paid no attention to my advice and has decided, even though he has been at pains in his preference to see Constitution Hill run on a turf surface, to go to Kempton in two-weeks. I thought Toulouse in a Group 3 (or was it a listed race - there is a ten-furlong listed race today at Toulouse) Do not ask me to remember something I wrote several weeks ago, please! Where we both agree, though, is that those people who think the horse should be retired should go boil their heads. It makes no difference if the horse is campaigned in handicaps, Group races or races at the lowest of all levels, the main consideration is whether Constitution Hill is happy with his life, and all the evidence suggests he is.