Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

First, it is fair to say Fianna Fáil has always supported this industry, even when other people were severely criticising it and saying we were only doing it for the great and the good. The reality is, as the Minister rightly points out, there is huge employment in this industry and it is very important to us as a nation. We have some natural advantages when it comes to this industry and there are not many industries where we could say we have as much natural advantage. However, it is not so long ago that certain parties represented in Dáil Éireann were severely critical of the policy in place in regard to tax relief on stallion coverings, at a time when we had some 40% of world stallion coverings. I remember how that tax relief was totally misrepresented and how people tried to say the whole horse industry was tax exempt when it was not. This tax break was a very limited part, and a part that drew world attention and brought people to this country. I am pleased the Minister is so supportive of what is a major employer in rural Ireland. At the time, we again and again pointed out that if we were getting the kind of numbers out of multinationals per investment that we were getting out of this industry, people would be writing it up in lights and calling it a fantastic achievement.

The question I have for the Minister is slightly different. Unusually, we brought in legislation in 2001 which, although the Department of Finance does not like this, effectively introduced hypothecation, which meant the tax revenue that came in was directly streamed into the industry. I believe that was a good idea. It meant the more the industry succeeded, the more money it got, and one got into a virtuous circle. It failed because the revenue from betting tax dropped due to the migration of people, not from betting to not betting, but from betting in betting shops to betting online. All anyone need do is use their phone to realise why people would not bother going to a betting shop when they can do it all online on their phones.

Has the Minister a commitment from the Minister for Finance that, when the new Bill is enacted next year, please God, there will be hypothecation in what will then be the betting (Amendment) Act 2013? In other words, will all of the proceeds from the betting tax go back into the horse industry? This would have two big advantages for the Minister. First, it would stop him having to take money every year out of his budget that could be spent on cattle, sheep, pigs and all the other things we would like to spend money on. Second, it would ensure the revenue stream for the horse industry in this country.

When we get offline betting, will we get hypothecation and will the money go into the horse and greyhound industry or not? Let us not forget the importance of the greyhound industry. It might be the Cinderella of the two industries but it is very pervasive and important around the country. In any case, if we are not going to get hypothecation, the Minister might as well scrap the whole idea of a levy where half of the levy goes into the fund and the other half goes to general taxation. My view is that half-hypothecation is not sustainable in the long term and the Minister might as well throw all the tax into the Exchequer. However, I believe that would be wrong.

The idea of hypothecation was very simple, as I have tried to explain. With most budget items, people can see straight away why we spend the money. However, I think it fair to say that, in times of recession, many people do not see the horse industry as an industry and they have a resistance to spending money on what they consider a sport. If it appears as a budget line, with no matching funds, there will be ever greater resistance and people will say "Sure we can take €20 or €30 million off it. It is only the horse guys. They have these fantastic studs. Look at the hedges round them. In most places, you cannot get in the gates, they are so valuable". The idea of the hypothecated fund was that it clearly showed the connection between the money in and the money out. The Minister could say quite simply that we are funding this out of the industry itself and what is coming in on one side, we are putting back into the industry because of the employment and so on. Therefore, the link between the income and the expenditure would be reconnected in people's minds.

My fear is that if the Department of Finance does what it has always wanted to do in this case, and the money is put into general taxation and gets lost in the maw of the €30 billion plus of taxation, and then, on a separate sheet of paper, €55 million appears for the horse and greyhound industry at a time when we are cutting carer's allowance and so on, it will be said this is a crazy thing to do, forgetting, of course, that if that industry did not exist, the betting industry would not exist here either.

We will obviously approve the motion today. However, I put down a clear marker that if the betting tax proposal does not go back to full hypothecation, that is, if the money collected from the betting tax does not go straight into the industry, we will not be supporting the Bill. I have to make that absolutely clear. This half-hypothecation is a cod - it is a nonsense at this stage.