Time to go

It was probably clear anyway with the departure of Nic Coward; but in case there was any doubt, today's Racing Post reinforces the obvious point: it's time for Paul Roy to step down as Chairman of the BHA.

It's not news that I have long thought that his policy was at fault, but it's not for that that I think he should now go: a policy disagreement is not a good reason for believing someone should move on. Tempting though it is to cite that wonderful line, 'you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts' in support of my proposition that he is on the wrong side of the Betfair argument, it remains true that until now, I've disputed only his view of the world rather than his suitability for the job. But I think that it's now time he resigned because he has run out of ideas, as he has proved this morning in print.

The evidence is on page 5 of today's  Racing Post , where a number of industry figures are asked for their 'Mandela moment'. If you have been snowed under or stuffed with too much turkey, this follows on from Paul Lee's comments at the Gimcrack dinner .

Paul Roy's reply is that the Levy Board's 'Mandela moment' must be getting "exchanges and their business users" to pay levy; the government's, ensuring that it 'safeguard[s] racing's income from the Tote disposal'; and racing's needs to be having its two main stakeholders agree commercial terms. In other words, his three ideas are the ones he has been championing without success for the length of his tenure in High Holborn.

I would have thought a 'Mandela moment' pretty clearly indicates the needs to reach across a divide to break down arguments of the past, rather than continue to bang on with the same old entrenched positions; to turn to someone who may even formerly have been seen as a pariah by some on the far extreme of one side of the argument, and have him or her show the leadership necessary to bring both sides together, despite the depth of animosity which exists between them. and somehow find a way forward.

That makes the question "what is racing's Mandela moment?" not even an argument about whether Paul Roy's wish-list for racing should happen or shouldn't. His view (shared by many) that it should is well-known, and he has pursued it, to his credit, with vigour. But it is also irrelevant - particularly as all those things are in discussion already, and are likely to be resolved to the great dissatisfaction of one side or the other by spring.

The question therefore now being asked is, "how can a way forward from entrenched positions then be achieved (once these things have all had judgments passed down in a way that inevitably is going to be to the delight of one party in each case and the horror of the other) for the good of the sport, without resurrecting the same debates and wasting more time trying to get a different outcome at the Xth time of asking?"

It should surely by now be abundantly clear that arguing the same rights and wrongs - for which read banging heads against brick walls - is not a solution. If Racing loses this battle again, it cannot resurrect it, but needs, instead, to set itself new goals. Paul Lee alludes to this in calling for a "Mandela moment", and most respondents to the question in the Racing Post recognise it in their answers. Paul Roy doesn't, unfortunately. That means it's time the sport was led by someone else, who does.