Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Our technicians are responsible for sampling. Veterinary assistants employed by the Turf Club take urine samples. Blood samples are taken by veterinary officers. Crucially, samples are taken under the direct observation of a representative, usually a trainer. The representative or trainer goes into the box with the horse when the sample is taken. There are issues with that practice in terms of health and safety and so on but the direct observation is important. The representative will then sign to confirm they have seen the sample being taken. That is the start of a chain of custody that continues right through to laboratory analysis. I have not been in my current position for very long but the chain of custody in the Turf Club is a particularly impressive aspect of the system. The Turf Club has employees who transport the samples and everything is checked off and balanced all the way through.

Deputy Martin Kenny asked how fearful owners and trainers are. The answer to that question comes down to the word "confidence" that has been mentioned a few times this afternoon. It is crucial that owners and trainers have confidence in the processes. We have work to do in terms of explaining some of those processes because they possibly have been in the background for a long time. Like everything, it is only when there is a problem that the issue comes to the fore and questions are asked. The testing process has been going on for some time, probably quite well, but it is right that questions are asked when things go wrong. We have had high-profile cases, in the course of which there has been a review of practices. There is not currently a systematic process of review. I hope that measure will be put in place. A new head of legal and compliance has been appointed this year along with several further changes in our team. The new head of legal and compliance may wish to put in place a review process.

Samples going to different laboratories is a very interesting issue. We are lucky in horse racing, as someone said today, that there have been long-standing efforts to harmonise our international approaches to the issue. The screening limits that have been discussed are harmonised internationally in different racing laboratories and are published on the IFHA website for all to see. A laboratory is normally working towards achieving that screening limit or threshold and it may be that the country concerned cannot sign up to it until that level of testing is achieved. However, the limits are in place and harmonised.

In terms of the issue of counter-analysis, that is, analysing an A portion and a B portion of the same sample, both when I worked in Great Britain and now, the trainer can choose whether he or she wishes to have the B sample analysed. There tends to be a case-by-case assessment and it is their choice. There are occasions, in both the UK and Ireland, on which the regulatory authority can require that the B sample be tested. Some substances break down very quickly and there is no time to delay in testing the second sample. One example of that would be dissolved carbon dioxide. That is a bit like fizzy Coke - if one shakes it enough, it goes flat. A sample has to be analysed for dissolved carbon dioxide very quickly and the second analysis would therefore be prompt but that is the exception rather than the rule. As a rule, split sample analysis would take place and the second sample would be analysed in a different laboratory.