In the NHA’s weekly Registrations and Changes sheet Volume 115 Issue 50 (dated 8 July 2016), the very last item on the list of Amendments to the Rules was 94.4 which read, “Twenty percent of all fines imposed and deposits forfeited shall be transferred from the general funds of the NATIONAL HORSERACING AUTHORITY to the funds of the Trainers’ and Riders’ Benevolent Fund.” The rule was struck out in its entirety, effective 11 July 2016.
On enquiry with the NHA, new CEO Mr Lyndon Barends explained that “at the meeting of the National Board which took place on 30 July 2015, the Board took the decision to wind down the Riders’ and Trainers’ Benevolent Fund. This decision followed lengthy discussions regarding the core functions and responsibilities of the NHA.”
He said the Board took into account that there are currently a number of Benevolent Funds which serve the same, or a similar, purpose (KZN, Western Cape and Gauteng) and therefore in some instances there was deemed to be a degree of duplication.
It was the decision of the Board that no further amounts would be paid into the Fund and once the Fund was exhausted, the remaining beneficiaries would be paid from the NHA’s general funds. In other words, people who are currently receiving grants from the Fund will continue to do so, but any new applicants will need to be catered for by the other Benevolent Funds.
Interestingly, the decision to wind down the Benevolent Fund seems to have been taken nearly a year ago, but the Rule was only changed now. Given the lengthy time period, one wonders why there was no consultation with the Riders or Trainers?
Other Benevolent Funds
Benevolent fund
As it all takes a little time, effort and migraine medication to unravel, I’ll start with the easy bit -the notion of the ‘other Benevolent Funds’ from KZN, Western Cape and Gauteng and the duplication of activities. For starters, it seems two of those regions’ Benevolent Funds are independently managed and funded. Also, two out of the three Funds cater only for Trainers and the occasional owner. All invest and manage their monies to benefit their Fund.
To be fair, Mr Barends did state ‘a degree of duplication’ and only ‘in some instances’, but what of the ‘Riders’ then? Jockeys continue to be fined regularly – why are they being side-lined, particularly without any consultation whatsoever and particularly given the fact that the rule change was a whole year in coming?
While it’s kind (benevolent?) of the NHA to care-take current beneficiaries until the Fund runs out, what of new people who may be in need? Particularly if their families have contributed to the fund via fines? Most particularly, what about Riders’ families who may need access to assistance?
Before anyone gets too excited about vast sums of money sitting in a treasure chest somewhere, I’m afraid that’s not quite the case as a brief history (as compiled by my good self from the limited resources available) will reflect.
Trying to unravel it all
Widows and orphans
It is difficult to trace exactly, but the Jockey Club Calendar makes mention of a Riders and Trainers Benevolent Fund being established sometime in the early 1900’s, stating that:-
“This Fund has been created by the Executive Stewards of the Jockey Club of South Africa for the Relief of Trainers and Riders and their Widows and Orphans or Dependents when in necessitous circumstances arising from Sickness, Accident or other misfortune. Each application for relief will be considered on its merits.” It also stipulated that “All License Fees of Jockeys and Trainers, Gentlemen Riders’ Donations, and Fines imposed and collected at the several Meetings shall go towards this Fund.”
There was also a directive that “The Funds shall be vested in and managed by Trustees, who shall be the Executive Stewards of the Jockey Club.”
So this fine tradition has stood for the better part of a century and all fines imposed (most of which, one imagines, are imposed on Riders and Trainers) were set aside to go towards any of these parties (or the families) who need them further down the road. Bear in mind it says Trainers AND Riders.
Fast forward
I have to jump around a bit for the next part. I was first made aware of the Benevolent Fund at the NHA AGM in January 2015. At the meeting, Adv Maselle raised a complaint about an apparent accounting anomaly in the Financial Statements, saying it looked as though funds were not being channelled to the Benevolent Fund the way they should. It also seemed that the Funds were not being invested as per the original directive. The NHA investigated and published a report on their findings at the end of March. As it was written in legal-ese, I have attempted to translate it for ease of comprehension.
Rewind
At some stage (sadly I do not have access to the date or the reason), it would seem that the NHA changed Rule 95.4 to read as follows: “ALL fines and deposits forfeited shall be transferred from the general funds of the NATIONAL HORSERACING AUTHORITY to the funds of Trainers’ and Riders’ Benevolent Fund and the account of the ACADEMY in such proportions as the NATIONAL BOARD, in its discretion, may determine.”
During this indeterminate period which lasted up to January 2004, it seems the Jockey Academy fell under ‘integral operations’ of the NHA and therefore the ‘fines and deposits forfeited’ were split between the Benevolent Fund and the Jockey Academy (as per the bit about the National Board using its discretion). According to Mr Pillay, the NHA’s financial statements reflected that fines were utilized in the ratio of 15% to the Fund and 85% to the Academy and this was borne out by the statements for the years 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002.
What happened next?
The NHA’s responsibility for contributing toward the funding of the Academy ceased in 2002. In a handwritten annotation by the late Mr Ray Harper regarding the changes to be implemented, he commented as follows regarding Rule 95.4: “This Rule is to be amended. The Academy no longer receives any portion of the fines.”
So, as the NHA no longer needed to fund the Jockey Academy, at the end of January 2002 they decided to increase the percentage of the Fines allocated to the Benevolent Fund (yay!) from 15% to 25%, with the balance of the fines to continue to be reflected in the NHA income to offset their disciplinary and legal costs. What?
I’ll repeat, it seems that at their meeting of 31 January 2002, the allocation of 25% of registrations and fines was implemented, together with the offsetting of disciplinary costs against the remaining percentage of the fines and this percentage allocation continued to be implemented until January 2013.
But here’s the snag
It seems that while there was a resolution to make the changes (and they do appear to be implemented from January 2002 onwards), these changes were not actually DOCUMENTED or reflected within the rules. Whoops.
Now, two years later, in 2004, a number of the NHA Rules needed updating to reflect changes which had been agreed to by the National Board, apparently exercising its powers in terms of clause 16.2.1 (unfortunately Rule 16.2 has been deleted from the Rule Book, so I have no idea what it said). With the Academy no longer falling under the auspices of the NHA, they finally got round to amending Rule 95.4 as indicated by the annotation by the late Mr Harper in 2002. It seems they INTENDED to change it to the following:-
“95.4 All Twenty-five percent of fines and deposits forfeited shall be transferred from the general funds of the NATIONAL HORSERACING AUTHORITY to the funds of the Trainers’ and Riders’ Benevolent Fund and the account of the ACADEMY in such proportions as the NATIONAL BOARD, in its discretion, may determine”.
What actually happened though is that the change was incorrectly recorded and the Rule ended up reading as follows:-
“95.4 All fines and deposits forfeited shall be transferred from the general funds of the NATIONAL HORSERACING AUTHORITY to the funds of the Trainers’ and Riders’ Benevolent Fund and the account of the ACADEMY in such proportions as the NATIONAL BOARD, in its discretion, may determine”. Oh dear.
So from 2004 onwards, the NHA allocated a percentage of monies as per their INTENTIONS, rather than as per their Rules.
But wait, there’s more
Why no consultation?
In December 2012 the NHA made some more rule changes, effective 1 January 2013. Included in the changes was (you guessed) Rule 95.4 which was changed from its 2004 status of ALL FINES AND DEPOSITS to ‘twenty percent’ by a board which does not enjoy representation from either of the two parties which this rule directly affects and neither the trainers or jockeys were consulted either.
Despite an apparent 80% reduction in the funding, the error was not picked up by the rules committee (which according to the Annual Report at the time, comprised Mr C S Beyleveld (Chairman), Mr R L Bruss, Mr P Davis, Mr R D de Kock, Mr G T Hawkins, Adv. A P Joubert, Mr D H McGillivray, Mr D J Pillay and Mr R J Trotter).
It was only at the NHA’s AGM in 2015 when Adv Maselle raised it as a query that the mistake was realised. But as the Rule had changed to reflect the 20% contribution in 2013, the NHA felt “no purpose will be served to rectify the Rule historically.” They did however take care to pass a resolution on 19 March 2015 recording the fact that the January 2002 decision to allocate 25% of fines to the Fund had not been correctly recorded. But, they felt, the implementation had been correct, so no harm, no foul. Anyone else feeling a little dizzy? I’m admittedly not that all that good at maths, but I’m not sure the stated percentages stack up either.
This was documented in March 2015. Four months later, the NHA Board decided to scrap the Fund altogether. Without any consultation with members, or indeed with the Jockeys and Trainers who a) pay the majority of the fines and b) stood to benefit. The Rules Committee at the time comprised Mr C S Beyleveld (Chairman), Mr P Davis, Mr G T Hawkins, Mr C B Hall, Mr A D Hyde and Mr R J Trotter. Messrs McGillivray and Pillay stopped serving prior to July 2015, but the latest NHA Annual Report which should reflect their replacements has not been published yet). The new Rule was published on 8 July 2016 and came into effect on July 2016.
Questions
Why did it take a year to change the Rule and why did the NHA not use that time to consult anyone? Also, considering some of the eye-watering fines dished out recently, what will these funds go towards in future? And while Trainers do seem to have access to ‘Other’ Benevolent Funds, what about needy Jockeys and their families?
Mr Barends’ invited readers to ‘always contact the organisation in question’. I have been asking for information on the Benevolent Fund for a number of weeks now. There has been no response to date.
