I have been following the NHRA debate with interest, writes Neill de Bruyn in the Sporting Post Mailbag.
As I understand it, the possible introduction of a Supervisory Board in effect means supervising the supervisor, not so?
This would work if the Supervisory Board is a policy/lawmaking entity and the NHRA is the executive arm, only applying the laws or initiating changes to the laws.
Another alternative could be that we don’t use the Supervisory Board concept but create impartiality of the NHRA by ensuring that the number of independent members of the regulator’s board is at least equal to the number of ‘executives’ – and then on the proviso that decisions are made on a voting basis.
Furthermore, and this will perhaps not be popular with the racing industry, 50% of the independents to come from the National Gambling Board?
Just a thought.
