Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would like to make a couple of points. I am not making any assumptions or presumptions about China, Macau and Pakistan.

We have the graphic evidence, statistics and details of what happens in those places from animal welfare groups. This is an opportunity to prevent Irish greyhounds from ending up in such places, where we know they will not be treated properly. Surely a difficulty with implementing something is not a reason for it not to be done. Although we can only try to do our best with implementing the Bill's provisions, they must be in the Bill in the first instance if they are to have any sort of chance. This is an opportunity for us to signal that we are serious about greyhound welfare.

We know what happens in the countries in question. I could provide the names of the Irish greyhounds that have ended up there, but I will not at this point. I might save that until the Bill has been taken further. We have the documentary evidence. I am not making assumptions or presumptions. I know what is happening. If we care about greyhounds and their welfare, we will do our best to ensure that they do not end up in such places. I am not stating that everything would be great and the provision would work wonders, but it would signal our seriousness about the welfare of our greyhounds, especially when they were not making money in Ireland.

It is thanks to welfare groups that it is now realised that greyhounds make good pets. It was not thanks to the greyhound industry, which only came in later. Australia has banned the export of greyhounds to China and there are airlines that will not take greyhounds to certain countries, yet Ireland is now stating that, because it will be difficult to implement this provision, we will not do anything to prevent their export. I do not accept that.