{"id":"qld:sl-2016-0096","name":"Racing Integrity Regulation 2016","slug":"racing-integrity-regulation-2016","collection":"regulation","jurisdiction":"qld","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"96 of 2016","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":175064,"registerId":"qld-qld:sl-2016-0096-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-05","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"pt.1","sectionType":"part","heading":"Preliminary","content":"# Preliminary","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"sec.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title","content":"### sec.1 Short title\n\nThis regulation may be cited as the Racing Integrity Regulation 2016 .","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"sec.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commencement","content":"### sec.2 Commencement\n\nThis regulation commences on 1 July 2016.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"pt.2","sectionType":"part","heading":"Prescribed matters for Act","content":"# Prescribed matters for Act","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"sec.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Matters for operational plan— Act , s 53","content":"### sec.3 Matters for operational plan— Act , s 53\n\nFor section 53 (2) of the Act , an operational plan must include a program to audit the suitability of licensed animals and participants to continue to be licensed for the relevant financial year.\nSee also section 41 (3) of the Act .\nA program mentioned in subsection (1) must include the following—\nthe categories of licensed animals and participants being audited by the program;\nthe focus of the audits for each category of licensed animal or participant;\nthe number of audits planned for each category of licensed animal or participant.\nSubsection (4) applies if, as a result of auditing licensed animals or participants, the commission identifies an issue about the suitability of licensed animals or participants to continue to be licensed that is not within the focus of the audits.\nThe program for the next financial year must include a summary of the issue and state whether the issue is addressed by the program.\n(sec.3-ssec.1) For section 53 (2) of the Act , an operational plan must include a program to audit the suitability of licensed animals and participants to continue to be licensed for the relevant financial year. See also section 41 (3) of the Act .\n(sec.3-ssec.2) A program mentioned in subsection (1) must include the following— the categories of licensed animals and participants being audited by the program; the focus of the audits for each category of licensed animal or participant; the number of audits planned for each category of licensed animal or participant.\n(sec.3-ssec.3) Subsection (4) applies if, as a result of auditing licensed animals or participants, the commission identifies an issue about the suitability of licensed animals or participants to continue to be licensed that is not within the focus of the audits.\n(sec.3-ssec.4) The program for the next financial year must include a summary of the issue and state whether the issue is addressed by the program.\n- (a) the categories of licensed animals and participants being audited by the program;\n- (b) the focus of the audits for each category of licensed animal or participant;\n- (c) the number of audits planned for each category of licensed animal or participant.","sortOrder":4},{"sectionNumber":"sec.3A","sectionType":"section","heading":"Relevant agencies for exchange of information— Act , s 53A","content":"### sec.3A Relevant agencies for exchange of information— Act , s 53A\n\nFor section 53A (5) of the Act , definition relevant agency , paragraph (d) , each person stated in schedule 1AA is a relevant agency.\ns 3A ins 2019 SL No. 84 s 3\namd 2020 Act No. 23 s 69 s ch 1 pt 1","sortOrder":5},{"sectionNumber":"sec.4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Prescribed laws about racing or betting— Act , s 101","content":"### sec.4 Prescribed laws about racing or betting— Act , s 101\n\nFor section 101 (1) (b) (ii) of the Act , each law of another State that is stated in schedule 1 is a law about racing or betting.","sortOrder":6},{"sectionNumber":"sec.5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Approved place for paying and settling particular bets— Act , s 140","content":"### sec.5 Approved place for paying and settling particular bets— Act , s 140\n\nFor section 140 (2) of the Act , the Tattersall’s Club Rooms at 215 Queen Street, Brisbane is an approved place.","sortOrder":7},{"sectionNumber":"sec.6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Persons for appointment as authorised officers— Act , s 145","content":"### sec.6 Persons for appointment as authorised officers— Act , s 145\n\nFor section 145 (1) (b) of the Act , the commissioner may appoint a race day steward as an authorised officer.","sortOrder":8},{"sectionNumber":"sec.6A","sectionType":"section","heading":"Record to be kept by owner of livestock slaughter facility— Act , s 210B","content":"### sec.6A Record to be kept by owner of livestock slaughter facility— Act , s 210B\n\nFor section 210B (1) (d) of the Act , the owner of the livestock slaughter facility must keep a record of the colour and sex of each horse that arrives at the facility.\ns 6A ins 2023 SL No. 150 s 3","sortOrder":9},{"sectionNumber":"sec.6B","sectionType":"section","heading":"Matters for report— Act , s 210C","content":"### sec.6B Matters for report— Act , s 210C\n\nFor section 210C (1) (a) (ii) of the Act , the following information is prescribed for a report about a horse that arrives at a livestock slaughter facility—\nthe information given to the owner about the supply of the horse under section 210A of the Act ;\nthe colour and sex of the horse;\nthe day the horse arrived at the facility.\ns 6B ins 2023 SL No. 150 s 3\n- (a) the information given to the owner about the supply of the horse under section 210A of the Act ;\n- (b) the colour and sex of the horse;\n- (c) the day the horse arrived at the facility.","sortOrder":10},{"sectionNumber":"pt.3","sectionType":"part","heading":"Fees","content":"# Fees","sortOrder":11},{"sectionNumber":"sec.7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Application fee for racing bookmaker’s licence— Act , s 79","content":"### sec.7 Application fee for racing bookmaker’s licence— Act , s 79\n\nFor section 79 (2) (a) of the Act , the application fee for a racing bookmaker’s licence is—\nif the applicant is an individual—2,609 fee units; or\nif the applicant is a corporation—7,505 fee units.\ns 7 sub 2022 SL No. 65 s 3\n- (a) if the applicant is an individual—2,609 fee units; or\n- (b) if the applicant is a corporation—7,505 fee units.","sortOrder":12},{"sectionNumber":"sec.8","sectionType":"section","heading":"Rounding of amounts expressed as numbers of fee units","content":"### sec.8 Rounding of amounts expressed as numbers of fee units\n\nThis section applies for working out the amount of a fee expressed in section 7 as a number of fee units.\nFor the purpose of the Acts Interpretation Act 1954 , section 48C (3) , the amount is to be rounded downwards to the nearest dollar.\nIf the number of dollars obtained by multiplying a number of fee units mentioned in section 7 by the value of a fee unit were $2,648.75, the amount of the application fee, after rounding, would be $2,648.\ns 8 ins 2022 SL No. 65 s 3\n(sec.8-ssec.1) This section applies for working out the amount of a fee expressed in section 7 as a number of fee units.\n(sec.8-ssec.2) For the purpose of the Acts Interpretation Act 1954 , section 48C (3) , the amount is to be rounded downwards to the nearest dollar. If the number of dollars obtained by multiplying a number of fee units mentioned in section 7 by the value of a fee unit were $2,648.75, the amount of the application fee, after rounding, would be $2,648.","sortOrder":13},{"sectionNumber":"sch.1AA-pt.1","sectionType":"part","heading":"Corporations","content":"# Corporations","sortOrder":14},{"sectionNumber":"sch.1AA-pt.2","sectionType":"part","heading":"Other Persons","content":"# Other Persons","sortOrder":15}],"analysis":{"summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The regulation's scope has expanded beyond its original 2016 intent. It began as a procedural instrument covering audits, bookmaker fees, betting places, and officer appointments. Subsequent amendments added information-sharing agency provisions (2019/2020) and, most significantly, horse welfare and traceability requirements for livestock slaughter facilities (2023) — a materially different subject matter that reflects growing legislative concern about the welfare of retired racehorses."},"complexity_factors":["Cross-references to multiple sections of the parent Act (Racing Integrity Act) require reading in context to fully understand","Fee unit system requires understanding of the Acts Interpretation Act 1954 and an external fee unit value to calculate actual dollar amounts","Amendments added over time (2019, 2020, 2022, 2023) mean the regulation has evolved and readers must track which version applies","Schedule references (Schedule 1, Schedule 1AA) are not fully reproduced, leaving gaps in the visible content","Dual audience — applies to both individuals and corporations with different obligations and fee structures"],"plain_english_summary":"## Racing Integrity Regulation 2016\n\nThis is a Queensland regulation that supports the broader Racing Integrity Act by filling in specific operational details. It essentially **sets the rules for how Queensland's racing commission oversees the integrity of horse and animal racing**.\n\n### Who does this affect?\n- **Racing participants and licensed animals** (racehorses, greyhounds, etc.) — they can be audited to check if they should keep their licences\n- **Racing bookmakers** — they must pay a significant application fee to get a licence (individuals pay around $2,600+; corporations around $7,500+)\n- **Livestock slaughter facilities** that receive horses — they must keep records of each horse's colour, sex, and arrival date, and report this information\n- **Race day stewards** — they can be appointed as authorised officers with investigative powers\n\n### What does it actually do?\n1. **Audit program requirements**: The racing commission must publish annual plans detailing which licence holders (animals and people) will be audited, why, and how many audits will happen. If unexpected integrity issues are found during audits, they must be flagged for the following year's plan.\n\n2. **Information sharing**: Certain organisations (listed in a schedule) are recognised as agencies that can share information with the racing commission.\n\n3. **Approved betting locations**: The Tattersall's Club Rooms in Brisbane is officially approved for paying and settling certain bets.\n\n4. **Bookmaker licence fees**: Sets the cost to apply for a racing bookmaker's licence, with fees expressed in 'fee units' (a flexible dollar amount tied to an index, rounded down to the nearest dollar).\n\n5. **Horse slaughter facility records**: Added in 2023 — facilities that slaughter horses must record and report specific details about each horse they receive. This is a **horse welfare and traceability measure**.\n\n### Why does it matter?\nIt provides the practical machinery for Queensland's racing integrity system — ensuring transparency, accountability, and animal welfare across the racing industry."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"sec.3 (subsections 3-4)","severity":"medium","reasoning":"Subsection (3) triggers when the commission identifies a suitability issue outside the audit focus. Subsection (4) only requires the issue to appear in the *next* financial year's program, with no obligation to actually address the issue or take interim action. This creates a structural gap where the regulation acknowledges the issue but provides no timely response mechanism, potentially undermining the integrity purpose of the Act.","confidence":0.72,"description":"The obligation to report an out-of-focus audit issue is deferred to the 'next financial year' plan, meaning there is no mechanism to address a discovered suitability issue within the current audit cycle. A serious licensing suitability concern could sit unaddressed for up to 12 months before even being summarised."},{"type":"other","section":"sec.3 (subsection 4)","severity":"medium","reasoning":"The drafting permits full compliance by simply stating 'this issue is not addressed by this program.' There is no downstream obligation triggered by that statement, meaning the safeguard loop never closes. A regulator could perpetually carry forward unaddressed issues while remaining technically compliant.","confidence":0.78,"description":"The program for the next financial year must 'state whether the issue is addressed by the program' — but there is no obligation that it actually be addressed. The regulation is satisfied by a declaration that the issue is *not* addressed, rendering the disclosure requirement largely toothless."},{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"sec.5","severity":"medium","reasoning":"Hardcoding a specific street address in delegated legislation with no fallback or ministerial discretion to approve alternative premises creates a brittle rule. Any change to the physical premises or tenancy would create a legal void — there would be no approved place — yet no mechanism exists within the regulation itself to remedy this.","confidence":0.81,"description":"The regulation permanently fixes 'Tattersall's Club Rooms at 215 Queen Street, Brisbane' as the approved place for paying and settling certain bets. If the premises close, relocate, or are demolished, compliance with the Act becomes physically impossible without amending subordinate legislation."},{"type":"other","section":"sec.3 (structure)","severity":"low","reasoning":"Triplication of substantive provisions within the same section is a drafting anomaly that, while currently harmless, is an absurdity in legislative form. It also inflates the apparent complexity of compliance obligations.","confidence":0.85,"description":"Section 3 duplicates its own substantive content verbatim. Each subsection is stated once in narrative form and then repeated identically with explicit subsection labels (sec.3-ssec.1 through sec.3-ssec.4), and the list items are then repeated a third time as dot points. This structural redundancy creates interpretive risk: if the duplicated text ever diverges (e.g., through selective amendment), the section would be internally self-contradicting."},{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"sch.1AA-pt.1 and sch.1AA-pt.2","severity":"high","reasoning":"Section 3A prescribes that 'each person stated in schedule 1AA is a relevant agency.' If Schedule 1AA contains no persons or corporations, then there are zero prescribed relevant agencies under paragraph (d) of the Act's definition. This renders section 3A a nullity — it purports to prescribe relevant agencies but prescribes none. Information exchange powers dependent on this paragraph would be unexercisable.","confidence":0.88,"description":"Schedule 1AA, which is referenced by section 3A as the source of prescribed 'relevant agencies' for information exchange, appears to be entirely empty — the headings 'Corporations' and 'Other Persons' are present but contain no listed entities."},{"type":"other","section":"sec.8 (subsection 2, example)","severity":"low","reasoning":"The example depends on a fee unit value that is set externally and changes annually. A reader cannot confirm the example is accurate without consulting external instruments. While examples are not binding, a misleading or unverifiable example in delegated legislation undermines legal certainty.","confidence":0.65,"description":"Section 8 provides an example of rounding ($2,648.75 rounds to $2,648) that is arithmetically correct but serves a circular purpose: the example uses a dollar figure that is itself derived from multiplying fee units by a unit value not stated anywhere in the regulation. The example cannot be verified or falsified from the face of the legislation."}],"contradictions":[{"severity":"high","section_a":"sec.3A","section_b":"sch.1AA-pt.1 and sch.1AA-pt.2","confidence":0.87,"description":"Section 3A declares that 'each person stated in schedule 1AA is a relevant agency,' affirmatively prescribing relevant agencies for the purposes of the Act. Schedule 1AA contains no persons or corporations. The operative provision therefore prescribes something that the schedule makes impossible to give effect to."},{"severity":"medium","section_a":"sec.3 (subsection 1)","section_b":"sec.3 (subsections 3-4)","confidence":0.68,"description":"Subsection (1) requires the operational plan to include an audit program covering the *relevant financial year*, implying the plan must be adequate and complete for that year. Subsections (3)-(4) permit significant suitability issues discovered during that year to be deferred to the *next* year's plan with no requirement for in-year action. This creates a tension between the completeness implied by subsection (1) and the explicit deferral mechanism in subsections (3)-(4)."},{"severity":"medium","section_a":"sec.6A","section_b":"sec.6B","confidence":0.74,"description":"Section 6A requires the owner of a livestock slaughter facility to keep a record of 'the colour and sex of each horse that arrives.' Section 6B requires a report to include 'the colour and sex of the horse' as prescribed information. However, section 6B(a) also requires the report to include 'the information given to the owner about the supply of the horse under section 210A of the Act,' yet section 6A imposes no corresponding record-keeping obligation regarding supply information. This asymmetry means the reportable matters exceed the mandated records, creating a gap where a required report element may have no underlying record to draw from."}]},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The regulation appears to maintain its original scope as a standard 'machinery' regulation that prescribes operational details for the parent Racing Integrity Act. The additions (sections 3A, 6A, 6B) expand specific operational matters (information sharing agencies, horse slaughter records) but remain within the regulation's original purpose of filling in procedural and administrative gaps in the primary legislation."},"complexity_factors":["Short document (approximately 10 operative sections)","Minimal defined terms (relies on definitions in parent Act)","Straightforward prescriptive provisions without nested conditions","Simple fee calculation with explicit rounding rule","Most sections are single-purpose (e.g., 'prescribe X for section Y of the Act')","Limited cross-referencing (primarily back to parent Act sections)","No exceptions to exceptions or complex conditional logic"],"plain_english_summary":"This regulation sets out detailed rules for how horse racing and betting are managed in Queensland, working alongside the main Racing Integrity Act.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Audits:** Requires the racing regulator to run yearly programs checking that licensed horses and racing participants (trainers, jockeys, etc.) are still suitable to hold their licences. If problems are found outside the planned audit focus, they must be addressed in next year's plan.\n- **Information sharing:** Lists specific government agencies and corporations that can share information with the racing regulator to help with investigations or compliance.\n- **Cross-border recognition:** Names racing and betting laws from other Australian states that Queensland recognises for enforcement purposes.\n- **Betting locations:** Officially approves the Tattersall's Club Rooms in Brisbane as a place where certain bets can be paid out and settled.\n- **Enforcement powers:** Allows race day stewards to be appointed as authorised officers with powers to investigate and enforce rules.\n- **Horse welfare:** Requires slaughterhouses that process horses to keep records of each horse's colour and sex, and to report this information along with details about who supplied the horse and when it arrived.\n- **Fees:** Sets the application fees for bookmaker licences (2,609 fee units for individuals, 7,505 for corporations) and explains how to convert these fee units into actual dollars (rounding down to the nearest dollar).\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- Racing participants (trainers, jockeys, owners)\n- Bookmakers and betting operators\n- The racing regulator and its staff\n- Slaughterhouse operators who handle horses\n- Other government agencies that share information with the racing regulator\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis regulation fills in the practical details left open in the main Act. It ensures racing integrity through active monitoring, protects horse welfare by tracking horses that end up at slaughterhouses, and establishes the practical costs of entering the bookmaking business."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/racing-integrity-regulation-2016","history":"/api/acts/racing-integrity-regulation-2016/history","analysis":"/api/acts/racing-integrity-regulation-2016/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/racing-integrity-regulation-2016/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/racing-integrity-regulation-2016/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/racing-integrity-regulation-2016/documents"}}