Murray Acklin has a confession - he hates gaming machines.
In an interview with the Otago Daily Times this week, the Queenstown-based racing identity said he knew the introduction of gaming machines - or pokies - would pose a "huge threat" to the racing industry.
"I don't like them... I don't mind having a small bet on a horse because I study the horse form, but putting money into a machine that is calibrated to pay you less than what you put in is pure luck."
So why would a former chairman of New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing become so heavily involved in a product he so detests?Mr Acklin said he could see the introduction of the machines was a fait accompli, and he had witnessed first hand in Australia sporting clubs which had benefited from them.
His belief they would threaten the racing industry proved correct after the introduction of the machines in 1991 saw the gaming market grow rapidly in New Zealand while wagering "stagnated", he said.
Department of Internal Affairs figures show gaming machine expenditure increased from $107 million in 1991 to $950 million in 2008, while racing expenditure increased from $222 million to $269 million during the same period.
Mr Acklin said the viability of racing, an industry which employs more than 18,000 people and produces exports worth an estimated $200 million per annum, was under direct threat from the machines so he arranged a meeting with a charitable trust in 2000 in his capacity as NZTR chairman.
The trust was the Community Grants Foundation, which later changed its name to The Trusts Charitable Foundation, (TTCF), on which Mr Acklin serves as a trustee.
And the outcome of that meeting?
"If we couldn't beat them, then we would join them."
As the result of intense lobbying from the industry, racing becoming an "authorised purpose" under the 2003 Gambling Act, which allowed for the payment of stakes, he said.
The Act enabled previously struggling racecourses to apply for gaming machine grants, which helped them carry out deferred maintenance, improve safety and increase stake money - and "allowed the business to grow", he said.
Mr Acklin maintains racing clubs are about more than "having a bet" and provide valuable facilities for the community, and the 2003 decision helped boost the more than 100-year-old industry.
However, he concedes gaming machine proceeds going towards racing, and in particular stake money, remains "contentious" in the eyes of the public.
That scrutiny may lead to TTCF - at present the largest gaming machine funder of the racing industry - to continue to fund the racing industry, but not race stakes.
"We are conscious of public perception," he said.
The foundation was a significant funder of racing, largely because 16 of the 27 TAB-operated venues were aligned with it, with the remainder belonging to the Lion Foundation.
But in order for TTCF to continue to grant money to applicants, particularly in light of it having lost 20% of its venues in 2005 to other gaming societies, it needed to retain and secure more venues.
One consequence of the 2003 Gambling Act was a dramatic reduction in the number of gaming machines, which resulted in gaming machine societies becoming more aggressive because of the contracting market.
As a response to losing venues, Mr Acklin was appointed as business development trustee by his fellow TTCF trustees on April 10, 2006.
"The rationale behind this appointment was two-fold. To increase business for [TTCF] and protect its position in a contracting marketplace."
The position, which commanded an annual fee of $120,000, resulted in Mr Acklin securing or retaining 26 venues for TTCF.
He denies any claims of offering inducements to publicans for getting them to sign a contract - ranging from six months to three years - if they switched allegiance to TTCF.
"I didn't offer any inducements.
"It would be naive to think in the past inducements weren't part of the game."
Asked to elaborate, Mr Acklin said older publicans spoke of inducements, but this was no longer the case.
Mr Acklin said TTCF's high return to the community; its policy of returning funds to the community where they were raised; and his own high profile in the racing industry helped attract publicans to TTCF.
As part of his role he would travel around the country, particularly to any new pubs on the market and where the new owners might be open to signing a new venue agreement.
In 2006, an estimated 14% of all pubs changed owners, and venues with significant revenue were likely to get a visit from TTCF's business development trustee.
However, this success aroused the suspicions of the Department of Internal Affairs, which began investigating Mr Acklin over inducements allegedly offered to venues so they would switch to TTCF.
The allegations were unsubstantiated, but on May 1, 2009, Mr Acklin, following advice from Internal Affairs, resigned from his position as business development trustee, but remains a TTCF trustee.
The foundation, aggrieved by a two-day suspension handed out by Internal Affairs for excessive payments and unnecessary expenses, appealed the decision to the Gambling Commission.
As part of its May decision, the commission noted TTCF's "success, relative to other societies, appears, at least in part, to have been derived from its decision to spend aggressively in pursuit of `market share' and it must bear the consequence of the punitive consequences of running that particular risk".
The commission dismissed the appeal and issued TTCF a six-day suspension.
The Gambling Commission noted in its decision expenditure on business development for gaining or retaining venues was "not necessary".
"Such expenditure is not available as a response to competition for desirable venues."
Mr Acklin said for the three financial years since April 1, 2006, TTCF had returned 50% of its revenue to the community.
This compared with 40% for most other trusts, with all trusts required by law to return at least 37.1%.
Any loss of venues represented a loss to the community, he said.
The cost of his now-defunct role was "outweighed by the community dividend", he said.
A dividend, he said, which was under direct threat.
Mr Acklin said in the year following his 2009 resignation from his business development role, TTCF lost 15% of its venues to other gaming societies, a loss he claimed had come at a heavy cost to the community.
He hoped the Department of Internal Affairs would heed the advice of the Gambling Commission and police its decision.
"We are not a bad group of guys; we want to be compliant."
