Imputation 1: Mr V'landys, as Chief Executive Officer of Racing NSW, callously permitted the wholesale slaughter of thoroughbred horses
85 The first imputation that Mr V'landys alleged was conveyed by the report was that he, "as Chief Executive Officer of Racing NSW, callously permitted the wholesale slaughter of thoroughbred horses".
86 This imputation has, at least implicitly, two essential elements. The first is that Mr V'landys knew that a large number of racehorses, including those from New South Wales, were being slaughtered at the Meramist abattoir in Queensland and in knackeries in New South Wales as depicted in the report. The second is that, despite knowing about the slaughter of racehorses at those facilities, he deliberately and insensitively allowed it to continue. These two elements are implicit in the statement that Mr V'landys "callously permitted" the "wholesale slaughter" of racehorses. Mr V'landys could obviously only be said to have "callously permitted" the slaughter of racehorses if he actually knew that it was occurring.
87 The problem for Mr V'landys in demonstrating that this imputation was conveyed is that nowhere in the report is it explicitly stated that he knew that large numbers of racehorses were being slaughtered at the Meramist abattoir in Queensland, or the two knackeries featured in the report, or in indeed in any abattoir or knackery. Nor can it be concluded, in all the circumstances, that the report inferred, implied or imputed that Mr V'landys possessed any such knowledge.
88 I do not accept that anything said or shown in the report, or the report in its entirety, would have conveyed to the ordinary reasonable viewer or reader that Mr V'landys knew about the slaughter of racehorses as revealed in the report, or that he callously permitted that to occur despite that knowledge. Indeed, the overall impression and message that was conveyed by the report was that the slaughter of racehorses at abattoirs and knackeries was occurring, not because Racing NSW and the other horse racing regulators knowingly permitted it to occur, but because the rules and regulations that had supposedly been put in place to stop it from occurring were inadequate and ineffective and were not being effectively policed. That allowed unscrupulous elements of the industry, and unscrupulous operators of some abattoirs, to exploit the system. The result was that the regulators did not know that the slaughter of thoroughbreds was occurring; that they were, to put it in colloquial terms, asleep at the wheel.
89 Mr V'landys' contention that the report inferred or implied that he knew that large numbers of racehorses were being slaughtered at the relevant abattoir and knackeries was substantially based on the proposition that the ordinary reasonable viewer would have believed or understood that, like Professor McGreevy and Mr Celotto, Mr V'landys had seen the footage from the Meramist abattoir and the knackeries. I do not accept that proposition.
90 The report included images of both Professor McGreevy and Mr Celotto viewing the relevant footage and expressing their views about it. The report does not, however, include any images of Mr V'landys viewing the footage. More significantly, the nature and tenor of the questions that were put to Mr V'landys by Ms Meldrum-Hanna, and the nature and tenor of Mr V'landys' responses to those questions, make it quite obvious that he had not seen the footage.
91 As the summary of the report given earlier indicated, at the very end of the report, after all the footage from the abattoir and knackeries had been shown, Ms Meldrum-Hanna put a question to Mr V'landys in hypothetical terms: "I'm going to give you a worst-case scenario and you tell me how bad this scenario would be". Ms Meldrum-Hanna then told Mr V'landys that the ABC had been "told" that New South Wales racehorses were being sent interstate for slaughter and were also being "knackered" in New South Wales. She did not say that the ABC had video footage of racehorses being slaughtered in an abattoir, or being transported to knackeries. Ms Meldrum-Hanna then asked Mr V'landys: "[i]f that is happening, what is your response?" The hypothetical nature of Ms Meldrum-Hanna's question was entirely inconsistent with Mr V'landys having been shown, or having seen, any of the video footage of the slaughter of horses at the Meramist abattoir or the footage relating to the knackeries.
92 Mr V'landys' response to that question was also entirely inconsistent with any suggestion that he had seen that footage. His response was that: "[i]f it is happening, we will put the full force of the law against them". If Mr V'landys had seen the relevant footage, it is almost inconceivable that he would have responded in terms qualified by the words "[i]f it is happening". There could be no denying the footage. The ordinary reasonable viewer would have understood that to be the case and understood that Mr V'landys had not seen the footage.
93 There was a similar exchange earlier in the report. After Mr V'landys had responded to a question by stating, in effect, that the data available to him indicated that "zero" horses in New South Wales were ending up in knackeries or abattoirs, Ms Meldrum-Hanna put to Mr V'landys: "[w]hat if I told you that's not correct" and that there "are New South Wales horses ending up at a knackery and an abattoir". The tenor of that exchange is again inconsistent with Mr V'landys having seen the video footage from that abattoir and knackery. It is difficult to comprehend how or why Mr V'landys would or could possibly have so confidently asserted that no horses were being slaughtered at abattoirs and knackeries if he had seen the footage. It would also hardly have been necessary for Ms Meldrum-Hanna to tell Mr V'landys that New South Wales horses were ending up in an abattoir and knackery if she had shown him the footage.
94 Mr V'landys' response to Ms Meldrum-Hanna's revelation was also inconsistent with him having seen the relevant footage. His response was: "[w]ell, if there is, it means that the people have acted against the rules of racing and if we have evidence of that, they will be dealt with pretty severely". The video footage obviously amounted to evidence that it was occurring. If there was any suggestion that Mr V'landys had seen the footage, the ordinary reasonable viewer would no doubt have wondered why Ms Meldrum-Hanna would not have responded by saying something like: "well, you have just seen evidence that it is happening". At no point during any of the extracts of the interview between Ms Meldrum-Hanna and Mr V'landys which appeared in the report is there any reference to the existence of video footage of racehorses being slaughtered in an abattoir, or racehorses being transported to knackeries.
95 Also important is that, at no point during the report does Ms Meldrum-Hanna assert, or put to Mr V'landys, that he, or Racing NSW, knew that New South Wales racehorses were being sent to the Meramist abattoir, or to knackeries in New South Wales, contrary to the rules and regulations that Racing NSW had put in place to prevent that occurring, and contrary to public assurances or the data provided by Racing NSW. The ordinary reasonable viewer of a serious and respected current affairs program such as 7.30, and a serious report produced by an experienced journalist such as Ms Meldrum-Hanna, would no doubt expect that, if it was to be suggested that Mr V'landys was being untruthful and that, contrary to what he had claimed, he in fact knew that large numbers of New South Wales racehorses were being slaughtered in abattoirs and knackeries, Mr V'landys would, at the very least, have been asked in clear terms whether he was being untruthful. That did not occur.
96 The only statement in the report that came close to saying that regulators, such as Racing NSW, knew that large numbers of racehorses were being slaughtered in abattoirs and knackeries, was a statement by Mr Celotto. As indicated in the summary of the report given earlier in these reasons, after Mr V'landys is shown telling Ms Meldrum-Hanna that Racing NSW's "data" told him that no New South Wales horses were ending up in a knackery or abattoir, Mr Celotto is shown stating that "[t]hey produce data that they want to release to the general public to give the impression that they're looking after these horses and they're not". That statement does not directly assert that the regulators knew that racehorses were being slaughtered in abattoirs and knackeries, but it comes fairly close.
97 Significantly, however, Ms Meldrum-Hanna did not embrace or endorse Mr Celotto's statement. Rather, she stated: "[b]ut the regulator is confident its integrity is intact, its rules are working" and that "[i]t says it hasn't found any proof of unauthorised slaughter at abattoirs interstate or at New South Wales knackeries". A portion of Mr V'landys' interview is then shown during which he says that if, contrary to what he believed to be the case, racehorses were ending up in abattoirs or knackeries, then "it means that the people have acted against the rules of racing" and that if Racing NSW had evidence that was occurring, those people would be "dealt with pretty severely". Ms Meldrum-Hanna did not challenge that statement by Mr V'landys. She did not ask Mr V'landys whether that statement was untruthful, let alone suggest to him that he knew, or must have known, that racehorses were in fact ending up in abattoirs and knackeries, or that he had seen evidence of that occurring, or that he had in fact done nothing in terms of dealing with the offenders.
98 The suggestion that the report conveyed that Mr V'landys knew that New South Wales racehorses were being slaughtered at the Meramist abattoir and the two knackeries was also, at least to a certain extent, belied by the concluding observations of Ms Sales. Ms Sales noted that, following the interview with Racing NSW, which was obviously a reference to the interview with Mr V'landys, the ABC had "provided the regulator with further information regarding the knackeries and the abattoir mentioned in this program and also the names of the racehorses featured tonight". That, of course, would have been an utterly pointless gesture and would have made no sense if, as Mr V'landys contended, the report had conveyed that Mr V'landys and Racing NSW already knew that the "wholesale slaughter" of racehorses was occurring and had already seen the video footage of that occurring.
99 It may be accepted that the juxtaposition of Mr V'landys' confident assertions, based mainly on the "rules of racing", that New South Wales racehorses were not being slaughtered in abattoirs or knackeries, with the powerful and disturbing undercover video footage which demonstrated quite to the contrary, tended to make Mr V'landys' assertions appear somewhat naïve, misplaced and perhaps even foolish. The same could perhaps be said about the interweaving of Mr V'landys' assertions with the claims to the contrary made by Professor McGreevy and Mr Celotto.
100 The overriding impression, however, was not that Mr V'landys in fact knew that the "wholesale slaughter" of racehorses was occurring and was lying when he said that it was not occurring. Rather, the overriding impression was that the regulators, including Mr V'landys, did not really know what was going on; that their "data" was inaccurate and unreliable and that, to the extent that rules and regulations had been put in place to address the problem of "wastage", those rules and regulations were ineffective and inadequately enforced. That may have conveyed that the regulators, including Mr V'landys, were somewhat incompetent or ineffective. It did not, however, convey that they were dishonest and untruthful.
101 The mere fact that the report showed that Mr V'landys' confident assertions that no New South Wales racehorses ended up in abattoirs were wrong and that the rules and regulations that he, as Chief Executive Officer of Racing NSW, had put in place had been ineffective to stamp out that practice, does not mean that the report conveyed or implied that Mr V'landys had "callously permitted the wholesale slaughter of thoroughbred horses". While the report clearly conveyed that the rules and regulations that Mr V'landys had championed had been shown to be inadequate and ineffective, that is not to say that it conveyed that Mr V'landys "permitted" the slaughter of racehorses in abattoirs and knackeries.
102 "Permitted" suggests or implies that the practice was knowingly allowed to continue. For the reasons already given, the report would not have conveyed to the ordinary reasonable viewer that Mr V'landys knew that the wholesale slaughter of racehorses was occurring. Nor could it be said that the report conveyed that Mr V'landys allowed that practice to continue. It is one thing to say that the rules and regulations that had been put in place had been shown to be inadequate and ineffective. It is another to say that the practice was allowed or permitted to continue.
103 Nor could it be said that, by conveying that the rules and regulations put in place by Racing NSW had been ineffective, the report conveyed that Mr V'landys had acted in any way "callously", which implies that Mr V'landys was completely insensitive to the slaughter of racehorses. I am not persuaded that the report conveyed that Mr V'landys was insensitive to the slaughter of racehorses. Rather, it conveyed him to be a committed and staunch defender of the sport who had at least taken some steps in an attempt to deal with the problem of wastage and the welfare of retired thoroughbreds. While his overconfident assertions concerning the efficacy of the rules he had put in place and his staunch defence of the horse racing industry may have been viewed negatively and with some derision by the ordinary reasonable viewer, given that his assertions had been shown to be wrong and his defence of the industry difficult to sustain, it does not follow that he was portrayed as having acted "callously".
104 Mr V'landys' submission that the report depicted him as the "face of the industry" and that he was portrayed as the real guilty party in respect of the industry's failings in respect of the slaughter of racehorses also cannot be accepted. It is neither a fair nor accurate characterisation of the report for a number of reasons.
105 First, while Mr V'landys was certainly the only person from any of the state-based thoroughbred regulators who was interviewed for the purposes of the report, it was made abundantly clear that that was because other regulators, including Racing Queensland and Racing Australia, had said that they were not available for interviews. It should also be noted that Mr Dumesny, the Chief Executive Officer of Harness Racing NSW, was also interviewed and that an extract from that interview was included in the report. In all the circumstances, the report would not have led the ordinary reasonable viewer or reader to equate Mr V'landys with the industry. Rather, it conveyed that Mr V'landys was the one regulator, aside from Mr Dumesny, who was prepared to front the camera and be interviewed for the report. The ordinary reasonable viewer or reader would have viewed that as a positive, not a negative, reflection on Mr V'landys.
106 Second, and perhaps more significantly, it would also be fair to say that the regulators, or racing industry leaders, including Mr V'landys, were not portrayed as being the main guilty parties insofar as the slaughter of retired racehorses was concerned. It is true, as has already been discussed at length, that the report conveyed that the attempts by the regulators to deal with the issue of wastage had been shown to be ineffective and their claims to the contrary had been shown to be wrong and misplaced. The real 'villains' identified by the report, however, were the individuals who operated, worked at, or were associated with the abattoirs and knackeries which featured in the report. It was the workers in the Meramist abattoir who were shown to engage in gratuitous and unspeakable cruelty to horses. It was the "doggers", those who operated and profited from the slaughter of horses for the greyhound racing industry, or the pet food industry generally, who were shown to have acted callously and cruelly towards former racehorses. It was the operators of the abattoirs and knackeries who were shown to be unwilling to appear and answer Ms Meldrum-Hanna's questions about the practices in which they were engaged. Those were the people who the report really held up to scorn.
107 It would also be fair to say that, insofar as blame in respect of the slaughter of racehorses was directed at the racing industry generally, that blame was primarily directed at the unscrupulous individuals who acted contrary to the rules and regulations that had been put in place, at least in New South Wales, and who had lied to the regulators. Mr V'landys candidly conceded that the efficacy of the rules that had been put in place by Racing NSW relied, and based its data, to a significant extent, on the honesty and integrity of people in the industry. According to him, there was "always going to be an element that do the wrong thing" and "[n]o matter how good you are as an administrator, no matter how solid your systems and processes are, you'll never eradicate" that element. The report conveyed that it was that element of the industry which was largely responsible for the callous slaughter of former racehorses. To the extent that the regulators were to blame, it was for failing to effectively stamp out that element.
108 I am not persuaded, in all the circumstances, that the first imputation alleged by Mr V'landys was in fact conveyed by the report. I am not satisfied that the report conveyed, or would have conveyed, to the ordinary reasonable viewer or reader that Mr V'landys, as Chief Executive Officer of Racing NSW, callously permitted the wholesale slaughter of thoroughbred horses.