Paul Daly (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Dr. Hillyer here this evening. I will start on a positive note. By virtue of the fact that she has been invited here to give her presentation and to give us an opportunity to question her as part of our pre-legislative scrutiny on the greyhound industry Bill augurs well for the horse racing industry, which has been identified as having expertise in the area, in the past decade in particular. As someone who is involved in racing I believe the issue has been very well handled by the Turf Club, which is rightly considered a world leader in anti-doping, rightly so given that this country is a world leader in the equine industry.

I will ask Dr. Hillyer to elaborate on a few points, although they do not directly relate to the medical or science area which is where her expertise lies. She mentioned that it is not sufficient simply to test a horse after it has won a race, that one needs to carry out testing on an ongoing basis. Reference was made to off-course testing. How does that work? What right does the Turf Club have to test a horse in a stable or trainer's yard? Is testing carried out by appointment? What if a horse is receiving veterinary-prescribed treatment, which will go out of the system in a certain amount of time and the trainer will have allowed for that prior to a horse competing?

Can the Turf Club turn up on spec and test the horse, and what consequence might that have?

I remember a decade or more ago when horse racing was in the same position that the greyhound industry is now. One of the major changes made at the time, science aside, was security. Unless one is a trainer or stablehand for the horse, not even the owner can get into a race track's security yard.

In terms of greyhounds, the person who is accused - the trainer or owner - following a positive test may not be the person who is at fault. There can be tampering. The issue of appeals and inquiries following a positive test does not relate to the scientific side, so it is not Dr. Hillyer's brief, and horses and dogs cannot be interviewed, but what appeals and investigative procedures would be most effective where there has been a positive test? A high-profile case in the horse racing circle is ongoing in England, with the trainer saying that he will appeal the decision to the ends of the Earth because there is no way that he is guilty. I do not know whether that means there was interference or the substance came from a source that he did not recognise, that is, food. How would Dr. Hillyer like to see appeal situations handled?