Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will read the note on privilege. Witnesses giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to a committee. This means they have a full defence in any defamation action for anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair's direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard. They are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse commentary should be made against an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses who give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence within the parliamentary precincts. They may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to publication by them of any matters arising from the proceedings outside the proceedings held by the committee.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Parliamentary privilege is considered to apply to utterances of members participating online in the committee meeting when their participation is from within the parliamentary precincts. Members may not participate online in a public meeting from outside the parliamentary precincts. Any attempt to do so will result in a member having their online access removed.

The purpose of the second session of this meeting is for the committee to undertake an examination of horse welfare concerns and compliance with legislation. The committee will hear from Mr. John Condon, director of services for water services, environment, climate change and agriculture, emergency services and elections in Mayo County Council, on behalf of the County and City Management Association, CCMA. He is very welcome to the meeting. I will allow him five minutes to read an opening statement, after which we will proceed into a question and answer session. By way of explanation, a vote is taking place in the Dáil so there are only Senators are present and the Deputies will join us on completion of the vote.

Mr. John Condon:

A Cathaoirleach Gníomhach agus a dhaoine uaisle, is mór an onóir dom a bheith anseo libh inniu. On behalf of the CCMA, I thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach and the members of this committee for inviting me to set out the city and county managers' positions on the review of the Control of Horses Act 1996, which this committee is undertaking at the moment.

The CCMA made a written submission in September last year, which sets out in detail our views on the review of the legislation and I will briefly deal with them in my opening statement.

The first point that we think is important is the time limits and types of notices served following the impoundment and disposal of horses. They should be standardised in the primary legislation. At the moment, they are covered in by-laws made by each individual local authority. The difficulty with that is it varies from local authority to local authority and people who are legitimately in the horse industry find that the rules vary throughout the State. If it was in primary legislation, it would be consistent throughout the State.

The next issue is that local authority vets should have more discretion when they find a distressed horse, with a view to having it rehomed. At the moment, we have to go through processes and observe time limits, and the horse might get worse before we get control of it. We also believe that where a horse has been detained on multiple occasions, time limits should be shortened because people who are what might be called "serial" offenders are able to play the system and this frustrates the enforcement of the legislation. The ability of local authorities to make by-laws to have exclusion areas where horses cannot be brought should be maintained. Local councillors in each area will know best which parts of their local authority areas should have exclusion zones. Similarly, legislation should have a general prohibition on grazing in public areas. That is sometimes done by by-laws but if there was a general prohibition on grazing in public areas, it would make enforcement easier. It is also the CCMA's view that there should be a general prohibition on riding or driving horses in public areas. That could be roads or streets. At the moment, exceptions are made for hackneys and different types of carriages. There should be a general prohibition. It would be a matter for the local authorities in places such as Killarney and St. Stephen's Green to designate certain roads or streets where such activity would be allowed. That would greatly help to improve the situation throughout the country.

Two other matters should be considered. There should be a centralised equine database. Horses are meant to be microchipped but there are different databases. There should be one centralised equine database. This would improve traceability and accountability and would help the enforcement of the legislation. Our final suggestion is that there should be a regime in place whereby equine premises can be inspected. To own a horse, the owner should have sufficient land and proper premises to accommodate the horse., otherwise there is a risk of cruelty, abuse and nuisance to neighbours and so on. Currently there is no regime for checking that the owner who applies for a licence has adequate premises and facilities. Any review of the legislation should provide for that.

It is also the view of the local authorities involved that updating the legislation is important but does not solve the entire problem. It is important in that it gives us a greater basis on which to work but horse control is not a core local authority function. If local authorities end up having to do more work in this area, additional resources will be required, otherwise some of the work we are doing by way of core services for the people we serve would have to perhaps be reduced. We do not want that to happen. I thank the Chair and members of the committee for the invitation to put forward the views of the local authority sector on this important topic. If there are questions, I will do my best to answer them. I think I have managed to say within five minutes.

Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go raibh maith agat. I have a couple of questions and a bit of expansion on the opening statement. In the current circumstances under which the CCMA works, how does it find that it is answerable to the Department of housing and local government, yet when there is an issue with a horse or animal, it will invariably end up with the Department of agriculture? Council vets will probably be answerable to the Department of agriculture. Is there an issue with the cross-departmental involvement? I find, with a lot of issues, those that will create the most hassle and be the most difficult to resolve are the ones where we are told it is cross-departmental. It is never easy when there is more than one Department involved.

Mr. John Condon:

That issue occurs regularly. From a local authority perspective, the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 makes the Department of agriculture responsible for animal welfare. While local authorities can legally appoint animal welfare officers under the legislation, we do not have any funding to do so. If we do so, it means something else has to perhaps take a hit to spare resources. The other thing is that the Department of agriculture, certainly in respect of large animals, has more skin in the game and expertise than local authorities. Different legislation is often applied across a number of Departments. That could happen here with appropriate amendments.

Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Regarding the prohibition of horses being ridden or jaunted or pulling carriages on roads, with exceptions, I presume Mr. Condon means that there would be the potential, if that change were to happen, for anybody concerned to apply for a licence. He mentioned Killarney. I know he is talking about the jaunting cars and the roads they use but there are loads of genuine examples. I am familiar with one thoroughbred horse trainer who has to walk his horses down the public road every morning from his yard to his gallop. That is just one example. I presume, with a prohibition, that there would have to be an allowance by which he could a licence or permission to do that.

Mr. John Condon:

We suggest that there should be a general prohibition so that if nothing is done, it is prohibited. However, individual local authorities could designate roads or streets on which they know such activity would be carried out, would be acceptable and perhaps necessary for things like the situation described. The individual local authorities would be better placed to decide on which roads in counties Tipperary or Mayo it should be allowed, rather than just having it decided at national level.

Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The final issue is what Mr. Condon finished up on: identification of owners and ownership and the property owned by somebody. He said they would need to have a certain amount of property before they could be recognised as a horse owner. How does one prove somebody is a horse owner? Mr. Condon also mentioned the broad database. If there is an issue with horses, you will not be long finding out that they are probably not chipped, so there is no way of proving ownership. The man or woman somebody might say is the owner will say, "I do not know anything. They are not mine. I do not own them. Check the chip". It is all good and fine saying we have a full database, but how can having all horses chipped in order to be on that database be enforced?

Mr. John Condon:

That was a big problem about ten years ago following the crash, when people abandoned horses they had bought for the children as they did not have the resources to maintain them. We often ended up, as local authorities, impounding them. It is true; a lot of them were not chipped but we found other situations in which a horse might have had two chips, which should not happen either. I was aware of various marts along the Border at which horses could be bought by teenagers for between €10 and €20. That kind of situation was very hard to regulate.

Now, as a result of enforcement, and I am particularly familiar with the situation in Mayo, we have demanded that the horses be inspected, scanned and microchipped, and if they have not been microchipped and licensed, we will impound them. When we started that process, it led to an increase. If a horse can be microchipped once, they will be in the system, and once they are into the net, there will be a better chance of maintaining that. The microchipping of horses is important in order that we will have some hope of establishing who the owners are, especially in case something happens and damage is done as a result. In a similar way, we are trying to enforce the microchipping of dogs, because it would be great if every dog were microchipped. If a sheep is killed, for example, at least the owner could be held accountable for that.

Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Condon for joining us all the way from Mayo. It is welcome to have him on board and it is important to get the views of the CCMA, which brings great knowledge to this issue. He might elaborate on the financial implications of trying to deal with it. The local authorities are invested in trying to make sure the controls are appropriate. Are there enough vets within the local authority system to deal with these issues? Are there enough compounds and other places in which to store these horses if they need to be stored? How do the local authorities feel that is going to be looked at in a practical sense? Are they capable of dealing with these issues, both financially and in the context of staffing?

Mr. John Condon:

At the moment, it varies from local authority to local authority. Some local authorities have a number of full-time vets and might have their own pounds and premises to be able to do it. Other local authorities, such as ours, do not have to impound many horses in a year. In the past year, for example, Mayo County Council had to deal with between five and ten horses. We work with the horse charities and make contributions to them, and when we need their services, they will take the animals to a safe place and ultimately arrange for them to be rehomed, where, we hope, they will no longer be stray or cause problems for people.

Ten or 15 years ago, we were dealing with between 200 and 300 horses a year, and that was following the downturn when people just abandoned large numbers of horses. We used to get funding from the Department of agriculture that helped cover our costs, but as the number of horses increased, as it did over three or four years, the Department gradually cut the sum it was prepared to recoup to us, which meant it was eating further and further into our resources. The problem has abated considerably, but we are anxious that with whatever amendments are made to the legislation, if the local authorities have to spend money on this, they need to have a budget for it because it can be expensive. By working with the voluntary sector, we are often able to get these things done in a cost-efficient way without breaking the bank.

Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Some local authorities feel this is a bigger issue than others. It could be argued that some of the urban local authorities would be under more pressure from this issue. Mr. Condon stated that Mayo County Council had to deal with only five to ten horses last year. I take it that other local authorities have larger numbers of horses to deal with.

Mr. John Condon:

Yes, certain local authorities, especially certain urban ones, would have much larger numbers. It would be inappropriate for me to start naming individual ones. It is obviously a much bigger problem in urban areas than in rural areas.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for being absent; we were voting in the Chamber. What percentage of horses have not been microchipped?

Mr. John Condon:

I cannot give a definitive figure for that. Fewer than half of the stray horses we have collected over the years were microchipped. Where they have been microchipped, we scan them, and in some cases, that has helped us trace the owner. If a horse had, for example, escaped and disappeared, the microchip has often helped us reunite it with its owner, although we would charge for the cost of collecting and minding it and so on. The ones we have found to have strayed make up a low percentage. I expect there to be a higher degree of compliance for horses that are owned by people who are legitimately in the horse business, but they would not come across our radar because they would not be strays.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there a compliance regime in place to try to ensure more horses are microchipped? All cattle, for example, have to be identified for legal reasons. Is it the remit of the CCMA or the Department of agriculture to ensure there is compliance with the legislation as regards microchipping?

Mr. John Condon:

Microchipping itself comes under the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and it implements that regime. The difference between horses and cattle is that all sorts of other payments are associated with cattle, which probably leads to a high degree of compliance. I am not sure there is the same payment regime for horses, and that might not encourage compliance.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In my county, however, there are a lot of issues with trespassing, which has recently resulted in a couple of serious accidents, and in virtually all the cases the horses were not microchipped. If there is legislation for microchipping, surely it is someone's responsibility to ensure it is implemented. Irrespective of what payment regime is in place, ownership of an animal brings responsibility with it and the owner should be obliged to comply with that. Mr. Condon stated the legislation comes under the Department of agriculture. Are any spot-checks carried out on people with horses to see whether they have been microchipped, or is it just a matter of letting the owners work away and we do not bother them?

Mr. John Condon:

The only role the local authorities have relates to stray horses, that is, horses that are wandering unsupervised, out of control, on public roads or in public places. When our horse wardens detain those horses, they scan them and try to find out which database they are on if they have a chip. If we impound a horse, we will ultimately release it to the owner when he or she has paid the charges, but we will insist it be microchipped before it is released, and we will insist the owner has the necessary licence before we return the horse. In a sense, therefore, if we do impound a stray animal, we try to ensure it will at least become compliant. In the case of horses on farms, stud farms and so on that are not stray, however, we have no jurisdiction there. We would not have any jurisdiction to go onto a private farm or into any kind of horse premises, but the Department of agriculture in its role does have that right and also has the responsibility for enforcing the microchipping regulations.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question is probably unfair to ask of Mr. Condon because he is not representing the Department. Am I correct in thinking that, in his view, no compliance checks are carried out on horses unless they are trespassing or wandering on their own?

Mr. John Condon:

No checks are carried out by local authority horse wardens. I cannot say what inspections the Department of agriculture carries out because we are not part of that.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the county where I live, a large amount of land is owned by Bord na Móna, where huge herds of horses wander around. As I said, this has caused a number of accidents recently. I do not see anyone doing a check on that. I am not saying it is the local authority's job. I accept it is to do with the Department and legislation. We need a different witness to answer those questions. County council responsibility only occurs when a horse is in a public place or on a public road.

Mr. John Condon:

Yes, or if it is a stray. If the horse has an owner with it who keeps it under control, we might not even have a role at all.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be very brief. I welcome Mr. Condon. I was a long-time member of Mayo County Council and he is a long-time official there. You will not get a better official than him. He has everything at the top of his finger.

I have two or three quick questions. Do we have a horse warden in County Mayo? Who takes that job or role?

Mr. John Condon:

Dog wardens perform that duty in County Mayo. That makes sense because there are not enough horses to keep dog wardens occupied and they can do it as part of their duties.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My other question is on whether the same legislation will cover this. As Mr. Condon knows, because he and I have suffered this over the years, we get many complaints about sheep coming down from commonage onto main roads. Is there any legislation in that regard? Does existing legislation cover that situation?

Mr. John Condon:

No.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a big problem in areas of north and west Mayo in particular, especially sheep coming down onto the roads at night-time. There have been many accidents over the years.

Mr. John Condon:

The only responsibility local authorities have relates to horses and dogs. Animals such as sheep, and even cattle in certain places, are covered by the Animals Act 1985. Farmers and owners of animals have a responsibility to keep them fenced in. However, in parts of the country, such as the Curragh in County Kildare and places in Achill and the west of Ireland, it is not normal to fence in animals. As those animals do not have to be fenced in those cases, drivers have to be particularly careful because they have to expect animals may be on the roads in these places. In most parts of the country where animals are fenced in, the onus is on landowners to keep them off the roads but not in certain parts of the country, as the Deputy mentioned.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Department of agriculture still pay for the funding for vets in county councils every year?

Mr. John Condon:

The answer to that is we are in transition. I will be very brief on that. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI, recoups the cost of local authority vets because the bulk of its work involves the inspection of abattoirs and food premises under the legislation, which is very important for Ireland's food industry and so on. That situation is about to change, with effect from the end of October, whereby the work done by local authority vets will be taken over by the Department of agriculture.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is an interesting move because over the years a lot of these inspectors came out and many abattoirs were closed down, which has created a big problem. It is interesting that is moving away from the county council and the FSAI.

Mr. John Condon:

That is what I meant when I said it is in transition at the moment. That is what has been decided at national level.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Condon. I am sorry I am late; we were voting in the Dáil. On abattoirs, there is a lot of confusion at present, which might not affect Mayo as much as some other counties. The FSAI is also involved in giving county councils funding.

Mr. John Condon:

That is correct.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There seems to be a problem with getting export certificates because councils now have a rolling three-month contract. Is that correct?

Mr. John Condon:

It is a rolling contract that, at present, has been extended until the end of October. It is expected that at the end of October, local authorities should be finished and the Department of agriculture will replace them in that regard.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is some confusion at the moment with Brexit and export certificates. Some councils are not issuing them. They are saying resources have not been allocated to them, which is causing a problem, although it may not be affecting County Mayo.

I have a question on horses. If horses in a field are causing a problem, is it the local authority that should always be contacted? This is if you do not know who owns them.

Mr. John Condon:

Yes, it would be the local authority. For example, we often get reports from people whose horses are missing to see whether we know where they are. If we have that information, we pass it on to them. If horses are in a field, however, while they are in that field they are the responsibility of the landowner.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cattle have to be tagged and sheep are tagged. Are there many horses going round that have not had this microchip identification put into them?

Mr. John Condon:

As I said, less than half of the ones we impound are compliant. I cannot speak about the bulk of horses that never come near us. Unless they are stray, we do not get involved with them. Most horses are still probably on various farms and similar places and would never stray onto a public road. I cannot say what the level enforcement is in that regard because that is a matter for the Department of agriculture.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there a zapper machine or what that allows you to go beside a horse and-----

Mr. John Condon:

Yes. You can buy a little handheld unit. If it is held beside the horse's ear, I suppose, it can read the microchip number, assuming a microchip is installed.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Has the Government put a fund in place for each council for the rounding up of stray horses? How is that done?

Mr. John Condon:

We used to get funding from the Department. Some 15 or 20 years ago, we used to get funding every time we rounded up stray horses. We could submit the invoices for that to the Department of agriculture and we were 100% recouped. That made it easy to enforce. Following the downturn, however, and what might be described as an epidemic of stray horses, as the number of such horses and the number of invoices increased, the Department of agriculture gradually reduced what it was recouping to local authorities. That caused a problem because it meant that money had to come out of something else in order to do this. Thankfully, that problem has receded because the numbers we are currently dealing with are not as drastic as they were ten or 15 years ago.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Condon said the money had reduced. What percentage do councils get compared with the 100% they got at one time?

Mr. John Condon:

We were getting less than 20%.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Was the remainder coming out of the funds councils had to run every other thing?

Mr. John Condon:

It was, yes. At one stage, it was costing Mayo County Council €200,000 to €300,000. That is money we badly need for our normal business.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The committee needs to look into that matter. I thank Mr. Condon for his time.

Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Most of the questions have been asked. Will Mr. Condon give an individual example of what it would cost if, tomorrow morning, the council has to round up a stray horse, bring it in, impound it, it is not claimed and the council has to keep it, and whatever happens to it after that? What would the full cost of that be?

Mr. John Condon:

If we were doing that on a commercial basis, it would probably cost us approximately €1,500, if we had to keep the animal for about a week. However, as I said, in Mayo we have managed to get around that. We give contributions to voluntary animal welfare organisations. We give a particular welfare organisation that deals with horses a small contribution every year. When we have a horse that has to be dealt with, that organisation takes it and does it for us. As I said, there are ways to do it without having to spend too much money.

Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Has the CCMA sent amendments to the Department that the association would like to see in the legislation?

Mr. John Condon:

Yes.

Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What has been the response?

Mr. John Condon:

As I said in my opening statement, we made a detailed submission in September 2023 to the Department. I know this meeting was originally meant to take place in February but it had to be rescheduled on a number of occasions. Last February, as part of our preparation for this meeting, we sent in a copy of the opening statement, which I have made today, and we also sent in a full copy of the submission we had made. I understand that both of those documents were circulated to all members of this committee but if there is any problem, I can supply copies.

Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The recommendations submitted were not amendments. Does Mr. Condon know what I mean?

Mr. John Condon:

No. They are amendments that we suggest should be considered as part of any legislation. The legislation can only be amended by the Oireachtas. Our submission contains, which I spoke about earlier, the amendments that we would like to see to the legislation.

Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As Mr. Condon mentioned, the by-laws were not consistent across county councils. What would the CCMA like see done about that? Does the association think they should be standardised?

Mr. John Condon:

Horses are currently regulated under the Control of Horses Act 1996, which is being reviewed with a view to amending that legislation. The Control of Dogs Act 1986 has a similar regime for dogs. The difference is that the processes, time limits and notices that must be used are set out in the Control of Dogs Act 1986, which means they are the same in each local authority throughout the State. Under the Control of Horses Act 1996, it is a matter for each local authority to make by-laws. As a result, there are 31 different sets of by-laws and, therefore, 31 different types of law throughout the country. People who carry out a legitimate business in the horse industry but must travel up and down the country as part of that business are subject to different rules, which must be difficult for them to comprehend.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the committee, I thank Mr. Condon for his contribution. As Deputy Ring said, he knows his brief inside out and backside up. A few questions have arisen that we need to ask the Department about but that is for another day.

The next public meeting of the committee will take place at 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 8 May, when the committee will examine VAT refunds to unregistered farmers and Ireland's forestry strategy implementation plan.