Yes Minister

It's approaching two years since an Anti-Doping Task Force recommended how the Irish bloodstock industry could best preserve its reputation after various steroids controversies. The news the Task Force has been reconvened because one of its central recommendations - a protocol to allow testing on stud farms - still can't be agreed is stark evidence of a stalled process. So in return for state support now is the time for the Minister for Agriculture to demand better standards than this farce.

It seem everyone agrees there's no problem. But implementing an anti-doping system to provide assurance of that is apparently impossible. A bloodstock sector that includes most of racing's powerbrokers appears to have continually dragged its feet on the idea of Turf Club officials gaining access to unlicensed premises. This has included ludicrously arguing for notice before inspections and quibbling over the nature of intelligence and its use in relation to inspections.

The situation prodded Horse Racing Ireland into stepping in between the breeders and the Turf Club to try and find a resolution. Less than two months ago Brian Kavanagh confidently predicted a protocol would be in place before the end of this year. That crystal ball looks a lot more opaque now. The Task Force taking to sea again however is surely a signal for government to declare enough is enough.

Part of the state pay-off for its €64 million subsidy to racing is reputational and the general sense of prevarication surrounding this issue is doing no one's reputation any good. If everything really is hunky dory then proving it is in everyone's best interests. So the obvious question is why has this stalling been facilitated when all foot-dragging does is provoke suspicion? And another obvious question is what sort of industry is so insular that it clearly doesn't care how that looks?

It has reached a stage where expecting the industry to police itself on this matter is clearly expecting too much. So if the bloodstock sector can't or won't face up to its responsibilities then it's up to Michael Creed to insist the doping issue is taken a lot more seriously than it is.

The state has a stake in this. It is subsidising an industry generating hundreds of millions a year, that projects a valuable global image of this country, and employs thousands. Yet despite drugs scandals, medication regulation continues to be so light-touch as to be almost invisible and with little or no apparent urgency present about changing that. If some stakeholders don't recognise that as unsustainable that doesn't give the government permission to turn a blind eye too.

Everyone has an idea about how racing's €64 million should be best spent but it's about time government did also.

Department vets and officials have enough to do without diverting extra resources to babysit the horse game. But one valid and proactive step would be to ring-fence €1 million of the Horse & Greyhound Fund to specifically finance a thorough and rigorous testing regime which would provide a vital and meaningful deterrent. Such a move would also send out a signal of intent and seriousness on the matter that is sorely lacking at the moment.

No protocol is required for department vets and officials to enter premises. They can go where they want. So let them go into stud farms and other premises, regularly and unannounced, without fear or favour, and do what has to be done, but financed as part of the racing budget. The state is providing a subsidy anyway so it should demand certain standards in return rather than permitting this nonsense to continue.

That the racing industry generally seems unable to appreciate the urgency of this matter is perhaps the most dispiriting aspect of all this. There seems to be a glaring absence of internal political will. So it's hardly unreasonable for wider political considerations to come to the fore. If the industry isn't prepared to do what's necessary then it's reasonable for government to insist on it.

In other news there has been a lot of examination of Aidan O'Brien's superb achievement in breaking the world record for Group 1 wins in a year, both in terms of the man himself and how he does what he does. This is just one such piece -

There Has To Be More To Aidan O'Brien's Success Than Just Luck

O'Brien is clearly a master of his profession and considering he is just 48 racing's record book is likely to need several redrafts by the time he's finished. We are witnessing something truly extraordinary and there's inevitable fascination with how the man does it. But if there's one cliché deserving of a break in terms of examining O'Brien's modus operandi it is surely 'attention to detail.'

There's little doubt the man has eyes like a hawk. But trotting out 'attention to detail' as supposedly some third-eye insight into his success suggests O'Brien's competition are going around every day with their thumbs up their bottoms and staring at the sky. It's just way too pat.

Ruby Walsh looked to find himself in an unenviable position at Wexford on Sunday when riding the Willie Mullins trained Itsonlyrocknroll into fourth in a maiden hurdle. The champion jockey was hardly at his most animated in the closing stages and if the stewards hadn't asked questions afterwards punters would have been entitled to ask why not considering the new rule's emphasis on a horse being seen to run on its merits.

But appearances can be deceptive and Walsh genuinely looked to have little or nothing to go to work on. After a mistake at the fourth last, the horse, who has raced 'buzzy' in the past, started racing sooner than his jockey wanted and simply emptied. It also emerged at the enquiry that the horse was still blowing hard 25 minutes after the race.

Had Walsh persevered in pushing the horse out, in all likelihood it would have been completely futile. So it's interesting to ponder whether he still had a responsibility to be seen to go through the motions. Common sense prevailed on this occasion. But it's an interesting conundrum in terms of substance and appearance, something that may yet come down to eventually defining what constitutes a "reasonable and informed member of the racing public."

Plenty were convinced the decision of the Leopardstown stewards to demote Larchmont Lad in favour of Making Light in the Knockaire Stakes on Saturday was straightforward. She lost by just a nose and was gaining at the line. You can see why the call was made but it was hardly straightforward.

How much was intimidation and how much of it was Making Light simply ducking? It's encouraging that the benefit of the doubt went to the runner up. But any appeal will make for interesting viewing.