Mr. Dermot Murphy:

We have been examining this legislation. Overall, it has served the country well. As Deputy Penrose recalled, we had a major issue in 1996 with the dangers posed by horses in green areas. The Control of Horses Act 1996 has worked well in controlling what were very dangerous situations. Other developments at European level have impinged upon the Act. As the chief veterinary officer stated, we are much more advanced now, with identification and microchipping, than in 2009. Those controls are being strengthened all the time. Certain elements of the Act could be reviewed, such as licensing and similar aspects. Other elements of the Act are, however, still relevant to what can be done by local authorities regarding exclusion areas. They can be very beneficial.

We will certainly continue to work with representatives of the Local Government Management Agency, LGMA, some of whom are present, to refine the concept of what a new Bill might look like. That said, I would not want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The Act has worked well in providing greater security in green areas over the years. There have been fewer accidents and the local authorities have been better able to interact with contractors to seize horses. Critically, the situation is improving. There have been many more possibilities to rehome horses on the Continent in recent years. While seizures are falling the proportion of horses being rehomed, and indeed being returned to their owners, has been increasing. That has been a welcome development recently. We will continue to look at the elements of the Act that might be improved upon but it has served the country well over the last 23 years.