Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The Petrus Consulting report, which highlighted how racecourses are not generating sufficient profits to fund necessary development to maintain current infrastructure in the future, was mentioned. Reductions in the Horse and Greyhound Fund have taken their toll, but the Government has worked hard to maintain funding levels, knowing that previous reductions cut to the bone.

The new media rights deal has been quite lucrative and one from which racecourses have got significant income. However, it does not necessarily mean that extra people are attending race meetings and it does not put an onus on the racecourses to get extra punters in through the gate.

The HRI has its role to play from a marketing point of view but what efforts have individual racecourses made to try to increase that? It possibly ties in with Mr. Cox's presentation around the experience of the punter. He or she does not have the same experience if not many people are there. I know we have industry days but we also have some excellent days out such as one we experienced last weekend where the buzz is present. When one gets the big crowd in, it leads on to that "feel good" factor and racecourses have other ways of getting income if they get them through the door. What efforts are being made by the association and the racecourses in this regard? Every sector is doing more with less and trying to improve its figures.
I take on board Mr. Walsh's points regarding a proxy for a member. My colleagues have made comments previously and I think every group that has been in here has raised the point regarding membership of the board, which is something for us to consider. The proxy seems to be valid point, particularly in light of the fact that the association's representative will invariably be a busy manager of a racecourse and have other constraints as well.
Mr. Walsh spoke about the conflict of interest and how the status quo is maintained. My next question, which is perhaps a difficult one to answer, concerns a conflict of interest. We raised it previously with HRI. It has been a necessary for HRI to step in and play a role in the management of some racecourses. As an ongoing long-term plan, it is ideal for HRI to have control over four or five racecourses? How does this dynamic work with other racecourses and has the association experienced a conflict of interest in the past? Is that something that this committee needs to be mindful of?
Mr. Walsh spoke about media rights. We have had the jockeys in here previously who would have staked a claim to media rights. In his presentation, Mr. Walsh has been very matter-of-fact that racecourses own the media rights and that HRI could be open to challenge on that and that if passed, this legislation could be open to challenge. Do others outside the racecourses have an entitlement to media rights? What is the view of the association on that and previous submissions here? What is its response to those who argue that perhaps racecourses should not have exclusive access to media rights?
I take on board the association's comments about the membership of committees such as the race fixtures committee and the race programme committee looking like it would fall. It appears that the move is to regularise all of the subcommittees going from seven to five and then from three to five. One can see that. The association is looking, as is its right, at how that impacts on its role in that and the chairmanship it had. That is plenty for us to consider.