Pat Deering (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have apologies from the Chairman, who is unavoidably absent, and from Deputy Ferris. I remind members to switch off their mobile telephones. I welcome the Minister and his officials to discuss the motion referred by both Houses relating to the Horse and Greyhound Racing Fund, HGRF. I understand members have been briefed with all the relevant material. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I ask the Minister to make his opening statement.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank members for their attendance. One of the unusual elements of the budget is that the House and, in particular, this committee must approve an increase in the HGRF because of the way it has been set up. Essentially, the ceiling must be increased each year by the Oireachtas in order that the money can be drawn down. That is why we are discussing this motion and not a series of other issues relating to budgetary decisions requiring Oireachtas approval. With regard to how the fund has developed, members will be aware that a number of years ago, it reached its ceiling and we need to increase the fund and sanction that increase to continue to finance the horse racing and greyhound industries. That is what I am asking the committee to do.

I would like to put in context the decisions we have made on the HGRF in the budget. This is not about simply subsidising a sector. The State is making an investment in two industries, which give back many multiples of what we put in financially, never mind all the other benefits they generate for Ireland in terms of reputation, sporting prowess and excellence. The horse and greyhound industries are worth approximately €1.5 billion a year to the country. They employ 28,500 people and even though many others will, politically, have a go at the horse racing industry, in particular, because wealthy and successful people are linked to the sport, the vast majority of people involved are not super wealthy. They are ordinary people who provide services and products to the industry, work in stable yards, get up at 5 a.m. to train horses, and breed horses. More than 85% of Irish thoroughbred horses are bred on farms with fewer than two mares.

It is important to put in context why this industry is so important to Ireland and why, if we do not continue to support it financially as a State, it will be at risk of losing its competitive edge, in particular to Britain or France. France is investing more than €700 million of state money in horse racing. We propose this year to put €44 million into ours. At the same time, Ireland continues to export 40% of all thoroughbreds exported from Europe each year and to breed the best. The top six horses in the recent Melbourne Cup were Irish-bred. Six of the top ten two-year olds in the world are Irish-bred. We need to make a decision because the HGRF has been cut by 28% over the past five years. We are spending less on the fund now than when it was introduced in 2001 with an allocation of almost €59 million. We are now spending €55 million, having cut it again this year by another 2.5%. In 2008, the fund received more than €76 million and now we are at €55 million which is split between horse racing and greyhound racing on an 80:20 basis. The notion that we could knock another €10 million off this amount, which one party sought in its pre-budget submission, and expect the industry to remain at No. 1 in the world in breeding and training is not realistic.

In my view, we have to make some savings. As a country, we have made considerable savings in this fund over the last five years, when budgets have put us under pressure. If we continue to take a substantial amount of money out of this sector, we will reduce significantly the prize money that is available in Irish racing at a time when prize money in France and Britain is increasing significantly. That would risk relegating the Irish racing industry to the status of a second-rate nation. Racing is the only sport in which Ireland has consistently led the way internationally over the last 50 years. I refer to the breeding and training standards we have set, for example. We continue to produce jockeys of a high standard in Ireland. Many other sectors are supported by the racing industry.

If there is one message I want to send today, it is that people should not see horse and greyhound racing - particularly horse racing - simply as sports that people attend and bet on, etc. They comprise an industry that employs almost 30,000 people in every county in Ireland. It employs people in many rural areas that do not have alternative sources of income, for example, in parts of counties like Tipperary, Kildare and Cork. Even though the industry has downsized significantly since the end of the boom, it continues to contribute to local economies by injecting an economic stimulus into them. I hope this committee will endorse expenditure of €55 million on these industries. In my view, that represents fantastic value for money because of what we get back. It seems to me that expenditure of €55 million to maintain a €1.5 billion industry is a good investment. It is not a subsidy for a privileged sector, as some people like to portray it. That is why we have made the decisions we made in the budget. We chose not to cut the budgets of certain sectors. Vulnerable and smaller farmers in disadvantaged and mountainous areas will not face a cut as a result of this budget. The funding given to Bord Bia is not being cut in this budget because I am asking the board to do more. Likewise, we have limited the cut being imposed on the horse and greyhound industry in this budget. It is appropriate that there was some cut. We have limited the cut in a way that will allow us to maintain the prize money offered by the industry and will give us a fighting chance, at least, of maintaining the kind of extraordinary position Ireland holds in this international industry and continuing to set the standards.

I appeal to people not to view horseracing as a sector we should be slashing. There are many vulnerable sectors that need to be protected at the moment. If we take a short-term view and slash the funding given to the horseracing industry, we will be at risk of losing the international position we have held in this regard for 50 years. My view is that if we lose that position, we will never get it back again, especially in light of the resources that are available in countries like France, Britain, the United States and Australia - and countries in the Middle East to a certain extent - with which we are competing. The industry is also developing in China. If we allow this to slip, bearing in mind the size and spending power of Ireland, we might never again be able to recover the kind of extraordinary position we have earned over the last 50 years as a consequence of the work of the phenomenal people who have set the industry's breeding and training standards.

There is evidence to suggest that the new money that is coming into the international racing industry is not coming into Ireland in the same way that it did in the past. The people in question are buying Irish horses, but they are not choosing to train them here in some instances. That suggests we need to think about how we can ensure the top horses in the world, which are bought by the wealthiest people in the world, continue to be trained and developed in Ireland. During the last phase of the international money to which I refer, which came predominantly from the Arab world, a number of individuals chose to invest significantly in studs and training yards in Ireland, thereby adding to the industry and employing thousands of people. At the moment, new money is coming into racing from countries like Qatar. They are buying Irish-bred horses, but are they training them here? Are they investing in breeding and training yards in Ireland or are they going to France or Britain? We need to ask ourselves such questions.

The decisions I made were based on trying to allow this industry to maintain its position in a competitive international market. I want to ensure Ireland stays on top of the world with regard to the breeding, training and horse-riding standards we set. I made the largest cut I could make while being honest about giving the industry the oxygen it needs to survive through this country's difficult period of recession. All of this is being done in the context of the 28% reduction in this fund over the last four or five years. On that basis, the decisions we have taken are more than defendable. They have been made in the context of the fundamental reform of the racing industry. I asked Indecon to produce a report and make specific recommendations about how we can ensure public money is not wasted or duplicated when it is spent on the horseracing industry. We are implementing that Indecon report now.

I have made it clear to those involved in the industry that if they expect me to try to maintain strong funding levels, I expect them to buy into the reform process that is under way to maximise value for money. The Government is trying to find alternative sources of funding to finance this industry. This job was started by the last Government, to its credit. The horse and greyhound fund used to be funded almost entirely from revenue from the betting tax. Before this Government came into office, it was decided to reduce dramatically the percentage of betting tax that applies to betting linked to this industry. Like the last Government, we are looking to open a new funding stream for the Department of Finance in this sector. To that end, we intend to introduce a betting levy for online and remote betting, which is a growing sector for obvious reasons. Many people now use their iPhones to bet rather than going to bookmakers' shops. We will introduce that new revenue stream next year. I expect it to lead to a significant closing of the gap between the current level of betting revenue and the funding given to the horse and greyhound fund. At present, it covers approximately 50% of the cost of the fund. We will close the gap to ensure the revenue stream to the Department of Finance increases. We hope that in time, it will match the output in terms of the public money we are providing for this sector.

Many things are happening here. The reforms recommended in the Indecon report are being implemented. The new revenue stream that will come into the Department of Finance will help to cover the cost of this fund. As I have said, this process was started by the last Government. We will finish that job. Most importantly, I do not want this Government to preside over Irish horseracing's loss of competitive edge on the international stage. I really feel passionately about this, especially in light of our extraordinary history in this sector and the extraordinary people who continue to work in it. The extraordinary investment we attract from abroad into the sector is good for the Irish economy at a time when good news stories are needed. If the committee would like some proof of the good news stories and challenges that are being encountered in this area, I will conclude by listing some of the indicators with regard to how this sector is doing. On the negative side, the average number of horses in training decreased by nearly 13% between 2011 and 2012. Over the same period, the level of on-course bookmakers' betting decreased by 9.25%, the total number of racehorse owners decreased by 8.3% although there are still well over 4,000 owners in Ireland, total prize money decreased by 3.5% and race sponsorship decreased by 3%.

I will set out how the industry is performing in response to these recessionary pressures. Bloodstock sales have increased by approximately 19% this year. Public bloodstock sales were worth €81 million last year - that does not include private deals - but that figure has increased to well over €90 million this year. This is reinforcing Ireland's reputation as a quality breeder of bloodstock.

In bloodstock sales alone, we are getting back almost what we are putting into sponsoring the whole industry. Tote betting is up 11.3%, Irish foal and horse sales are up 6.5% to €156 million, total attendances at race meets are up 3.3% despite all the pressures and the number of new owners coming into the sector is marginally up. This is a sector under pressure but one that is responding to that pressure. We need to continue to ensure it has the infrastructure to be able to maintain that position and, from that point of view, I hope the committee will support the increase in the horse and greyhound fund ceiling this year.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, it is fair to say Fianna Fáil has always supported this industry, even when other people were severely criticising it and saying we were only doing it for the great and the good. The reality is, as the Minister rightly points out, there is huge employment in this industry and it is very important to us as a nation. We have some natural advantages when it comes to this industry and there are not many industries where we could say we have as much natural advantage. However, it is not so long ago that certain parties represented in Dáil Éireann were severely critical of the policy in place in regard to tax relief on stallion coverings, at a time when we had some 40% of world stallion coverings. I remember how that tax relief was totally misrepresented and how people tried to say the whole horse industry was tax exempt when it was not. This tax break was a very limited part, and a part that drew world attention and brought people to this country. I am pleased the Minister is so supportive of what is a major employer in rural Ireland. At the time, we again and again pointed out that if we were getting the kind of numbers out of multinationals per investment that we were getting out of this industry, people would be writing it up in lights and calling it a fantastic achievement.

The question I have for the Minister is slightly different. Unusually, we brought in legislation in 2001 which, although the Department of Finance does not like this, effectively introduced hypothecation, which meant the tax revenue that came in was directly streamed into the industry. I believe that was a good idea. It meant the more the industry succeeded, the more money it got, and one got into a virtuous circle. It failed because the revenue from betting tax dropped due to the migration of people, not from betting to not betting, but from betting in betting shops to betting online. All anyone need do is use their phone to realise why people would not bother going to a betting shop when they can do it all online on their phones.

Has the Minister a commitment from the Minister for Finance that, when the new Bill is enacted next year, please God, there will be hypothecation in what will then be the betting (Amendment) Act 2013? In other words, will all of the proceeds from the betting tax go back into the horse industry? This would have two big advantages for the Minister. First, it would stop him having to take money every year out of his budget that could be spent on cattle, sheep, pigs and all the other things we would like to spend money on. Second, it would ensure the revenue stream for the horse industry in this country.

When we get offline betting, will we get hypothecation and will the money go into the horse and greyhound industry or not? Let us not forget the importance of the greyhound industry. It might be the Cinderella of the two industries but it is very pervasive and important around the country. In any case, if we are not going to get hypothecation, the Minister might as well scrap the whole idea of a levy where half of the levy goes into the fund and the other half goes to general taxation. My view is that half-hypothecation is not sustainable in the long term and the Minister might as well throw all the tax into the Exchequer. However, I believe that would be wrong.

The idea of hypothecation was very simple, as I have tried to explain. With most budget items, people can see straight away why we spend the money. However, I think it fair to say that, in times of recession, many people do not see the horse industry as an industry and they have a resistance to spending money on what they consider a sport. If it appears as a budget line, with no matching funds, there will be ever greater resistance and people will say "Sure we can take €20 or €30 million off it. It is only the horse guys. They have these fantastic studs. Look at the hedges round them. In most places, you cannot get in the gates, they are so valuable". The idea of the hypothecated fund was that it clearly showed the connection between the money in and the money out. The Minister could say quite simply that we are funding this out of the industry itself and what is coming in on one side, we are putting back into the industry because of the employment and so on. Therefore, the link between the income and the expenditure would be reconnected in people's minds.

My fear is that if the Department of Finance does what it has always wanted to do in this case, and the money is put into general taxation and gets lost in the maw of the €30 billion plus of taxation, and then, on a separate sheet of paper, €55 million appears for the horse and greyhound industry at a time when we are cutting carer's allowance and so on, it will be said this is a crazy thing to do, forgetting, of course, that if that industry did not exist, the betting industry would not exist here either.

We will obviously approve the motion today. However, I put down a clear marker that if the betting tax proposal does not go back to full hypothecation, that is, if the money collected from the betting tax does not go straight into the industry, we will not be supporting the Bill. I have to make that absolutely clear. This half-hypothecation is a cod - it is a nonsense at this stage.

Martin Heydon (Kildare South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister's comments and I would be extremely supportive. He touches on the fact that almost 30,000 people are employed directly by the horse and greyhound industry in this country and it has an economic output of €1.4 billion. I know this well as more than 4,000 of those people are directly employed in Kildare, where I am from. The impact on rural communities where there are few alternative streams of income is very evident. The statistic of 85% of breeders having two mares in the farmyard stands out. It is easy to have the imagery of the big studs but it is the small, indigenous provider that is keeping this industry going and has kept it a world leader for so long.

It is worth noting that Ireland is the fourth largest producer of thoroughbreds in the world, producing 40% of EU output and 11% of the world's total. Irish horses are exported to over 35 countries around the world, with a total value of over €150 million last year. The industry is a very important source of high value foreign direct investment and over two thirds of the production of thoroughbreds is exported every year. Ireland has many natural advantages, such as climate, soil type and, most important, our people. We have the expertise. I have a habit of repeating the phrase that to get out of this recession, we do not need to reinvent the wheel, we just need to concentrate on the things we are good at and get back to basics. The horse racing and breeding industry is one of the industries we need to support.

There is a risk, however. It can almost sound a cliché when we continuously say we are world leaders and have been for so long. We could begin to take this for granted.

It is phenomenal that the industry here has survived for as long as it has given the number of countries, with much greater spending power than us, who would like to take us down a peg or two. Future funding of the industry was mentioned. I, too, am frustrated at the length of time it is taking for the Betting (Amendment) Bill 2012 to be dealt with. I accept that delay is being caused by the Department of Finance rather than the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. It is important that legislation is enacted soon. The more money accruing to the Exchequer from betting, the easier it will be to make the case for adequate funding of the industry. It must be remembered that the industry never wanted to be directly funded by the Exchequer. It did not seek this change. The industry wants to stand on its own two feet. It is simplistic of Deputy Ó Cuív to suggest that the decrease in betting tax since 2001 is the result of online betting. I believe the reduction from 2% to 1% in betting tax in 2007 had a marked impact in this regard. This is evident from the tax receipts figures mentioned. At a time when all other taxes are increasing I am amazed this tax escaped increase.

On future funding of the industry, I have previously stated to the Minister that we cannot have a situation whereby every November-December the industry is living in fear of what the budget will mean for it. It is not possible for a business of any size to plan on that basis. We need to move to a multi-annual framework. While secure funding is needed, certainty is also needed. The industry needs to have certainty in terms of funding so that it can plan for up to three to five years ahead. There are many projects in this area which require long-term strategic planning, including the redevelopment of the Curragh industry, at which our Irish thoroughbreds are showcased. Such events cannot be planned on the basis of how much funding might be given on a year to year basis. It is important the industry has certainty, in terms of funding, this year.

On the other side, efficiencies in terms of how the industry is run need to be achieved. There is much great work being done in this regard, on which I congratulate the Minister. I am aware that much more is planned for 2013. I support this motion regarding funding for a crucial industry in this country.

Mary Ann O'Brien (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and thank him for meeting with us. Like previous speakers, I support the motion. I have been steeped in this industry since I was young. I am proud of our reputation and excellence in the sport. However, we need to be realistic. The Minister mentioned the staggering amount of money which France is investing in its industry and we are all aware of the great performance of Great Britain in national hunt and flat racing. Our racecourses are a disgrace, in particular our two top flat racecourses at the Curragh and Leopardstown. In the Celtic tiger era there were plans to construct a world class racecourse at Abbotstown, which would have attracted in foreign trainers.

I agree with the Minister that we are breeding good horses. However, while people are buying them they no longer leave them here for training. While I support this motion before us today a lot more needs to be done for the future and sustainability of this industry. I agree with what was said by the previous two speakers. We have a major artery - the betting industry - that is bleeding. It is not yesterday or the day before that people began betting online, this commenced up to eight years ago. Many of us have had Paddy Power online accounts for years. I would welcome a speedy enactment of the Betting (Amendment) Bill 2012 in 2013.

I agree with Deputy Ó Cuív on the need to ensure we capture taxable income so as to allow the industry to support itself. We should not underestimate the foreign direct investment which this industry has brought to Ireland. Racing is believed to attract rich people. That is true. However, the trainers are not the rich people. They are ordinary hardworking people. What is wonderful about the industry is that it attracts people such as Neil Diamond, Burt Bacharach, Sheikh Mohammed or Sheikh Hamdan. There is now interest in the industry here from Qatar and China. Enterprise Ireland works hard to attract companies like Google and Yahoo here. We have all the natural resources required, in terms of our land, people and talent in this area, to achieve a great horse racing industry here. Let us not underestimate the foreign direct investment that can ensue from the industry in the future.

The reality is that people are no longer going racing. Our racecourses are in a sorry state. When in New Zealand and Australia during the past two years, I went racing. Their racecourses are beautiful while ours are sad. I was told that the sale of television rights in respect of those courses to the SIS virtual betting channel has helped them survive. While everybody here is betting online we do not know where that money is going. It is certainly not going to our Exchequer.

Pat O'Neill (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his presentation. Coming from the Carlow-Kilkenny area I know the benefit of the horse racing and greyhound industries. The majority of horse breeding enterprises here are people with a couple of acres of land and a few mares. Some people keep ponies for use by their children and farmers often breed them for point to points. We all know how popular they are. There are also other people who are involved in bigger set ups, such as, for example, Jim Bolger and the Mullins family in Kilkenny and Carlow, which are similar to small to medium businesses in terms of the number of people employed therein. When a factory opens in a particular area and 30 or 40 people get employment there, people are aware of it. However, much of what goes on in this industry is unseen. As stated, much of what happens in this area happens at 5 a.m. or 6 a.m. Jim Bolger could have up to 30 or 40 people riding out horses every morning, as could Willie Mullins. The horse racing industry is huge in terms of the amount of employment it provides.

It is important the greyhound industry is not forgotten. There are people in every parish in Ireland who breed horses or greyhounds. The greyhound industry here is also important, with many greyhounds bred here going to England to race in the Derby and so on. As mentioned, it is important we ensure our excellence in this area is continued. If not, somebody else will move in and push us aside. The new money is in the Far East and China. We are all aware that some studs are tying in with China on horse breeding programmes and so on. It is important funding for the industry is ensured to allow us remain at the top of our game and tie into this new money. China, which is a vast country with a huge population, is hugely interested in the greyhound and horse industry. We must ensure our industry is properly funded to allow it take advantage of the demand from China for top quality horses and greyhounds.

While funding of €45 million appears a large amount, funding in this area has been cut by 28% in the past few years. Despite this, the industry has survived. We must ensure this funding remains in place to allow the industry continue its excellence in horse breeding, be it by a farmer for point to point or at Coolmore for racing in the Melbourne Cup or Derby races and so on. We must continue to support this industry.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will try to respond to some of the questions raised. On the point made by Deputy Ó Cuív, while I accept that Fianna Fáil has in the past been supportive of the racing industry that has not been the case in more recent times. That is the reason it was important this Government stopped the rot. Between 2008 and 2011, this fund was reduced by €19 million. In its budget proposals this year, Fianna Fáil states very clearly that notwithstanding the significant contribution both boards make to the economy the scale of the subvention is unsustainable and therefore it proposes a €10 million reduction in 2013.

I accept that previous Governments have been greatly supportive of this sector but there is a tendency now perhaps for those in opposition to forget about the importance of the sector. It is a very difficult job for any opposition party to try to put an alternative budget together. I encourage the Deputy to make the case to his colleagues. Both big parties in this State have contributed to helping this industry to get where it is, and it is important to remind ourselves of that.

I agree with the Deputy; I would love to have an industry that was self-funding. The racing industry raises much of its money in that it spends much more than the €44 million it will get next year. In addition, owners in Ireland pay a much higher percentage of prize money than do owners in most other countries given that 30% of the prize money in this country is contributed by owners or those who enter horses. I would like to have a situation in which we have the capacity for multi-annual funding that Deputy Hayden asked for so that we need not have this discussion each year whereby we increase a fund in the abstract and get Oireachtas approval in order to fund the industry. We are putting together legislation at present to try to achieve this. If we had not had the kind of crisis we have had over the past five or six years there would not be the collapse in funding that has occurred. This is easier said than done, however. My Department is not the only one involved in this discussion. Neither is it true to say that betting levies were ever ring-fenced for the horse and greyhound fund, because that was never the case in the Department of Finance. It just so happened that betting revenue more or less equalled the horse and greyhound fund. The Department of Finance, in either this or the last Government's time, would never concede that betting revenues were ring-fenced for this fund. Instead they were matched off against each other in terms of income versus expenditure. This year some €28 million in betting revenue will come in. We believe we can raise somewhere between €10 million and €15 million - an increasing sum - in online revenue and for that reason I believe we can get the betting revenue over the €40 million mark, which is a major step in the direction of cancelling one out against the other in terms of expenditure and income. There are some people who would contest that, because not all betting revenue is from horse and greyhound racing, with a large amount going on the English Premiership and many other sporting events, from golf to the GAA and so on. It will be a difficult job to get the Department of Finance to agree to ring-fence anything, just as it will not ring-fence motor tax for road maintenance. It wants to have flexibility to determine how money is spent. I do not believe we will necessarily ring-fence money specifically for racing in the upcoming Betting (Amendment) Bill, but it certainly makes it much easier to set up some kind of multi-annual financing model for the racing industry if we significantly increase betting revenue.

It is also important to say that decisions were made in the past 15 years to reduce the betting tax from 20% to 10%, 5%, 2% and 1%. That was fine while Ireland was booming. As more people laid bets and as the tax came down there was more activity, and therefore there was enough buoyancy to ensure that even when taxation was reduced the amount of money coming in remained more or less the same. However, when economic collapse happens and taxation has been reduced from 20% to 1%, that buoyancy no longer applies. The actual revenue coming from betting dropped from more than €70 million to €28 million, which is the current situation. This Government will concentrate on getting the online tax working properly, at 1%, before it begins to talk about increasing that tax, which is a discussion for another day. First and foremost, we need legislation to be approved by the European Commission in terms of State aid rules. Then we can extend the betting tax online and introduce a licensing system for any bookie who takes online bets or operates a betting exchange. We will do that next year and I am as impatient as the Deputy to get it done. Unfortunately, however, I do not pull all the strings in this case. There is complexity in terms of getting Commission approval. We are asking the Department of Finance to take this step but it has many other priorities that are being pushed very hard, particularly in the build-up to the budget. We published this legislation last summer, however, and now we need to bring it before the Dáil as soon as possible in the new year so that we can get this new revenue stream into the Department of Finance. That will make it much easier for us to argue for a consistent multi-annual budget for the horse and greyhound industries, which is what everybody wants.

I thank speakers for their comments.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reason the betting tax was introduced was to try to stop the haemorrhage of people moving from betting in betting shops to betting online. If there is a 20% betting tax today but no tax on betting online, all those who bet in shops will feel ill. It is wrong to say it was merely about a reduction in tax; having to compete with outlets that charged no tax would have wiped out every betting shop in the country.

I do not accept the argument that there has been a significant decrease in the amount people are betting, although that warrants another discussion in terms of those people who have problems with gambling. Migration is the biggest problem in the business. When one considers the expansion of online betting companies, it is clear somebody is betting with them. There is a significant migration.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let us be clear. We have done the numbers on this. The revenue from a 1% tax on remote and online betting would be €11 million. If one adds the two figures together, the total is about €40 million.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is the tax now-----

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That has come down from a figure of well over €70 million at one point. It is true that in recent years the shift online has been a significant factor but when the initial decisions were made to cut from 20% to 10% to 5%, remote and online betting was not such an issue. I suspect we are on the same page in regard to where we would like to go, first in terms of getting the system working and then in terms of looking at the future rate. I have made no secret of the fact that I believe the betting tax should be increased, but that is not my decision. I do not make decisions on taxation. I will make my case and the Government will make a decision. Let us have a system that can capture even that 1% of online and remote betting revenue, which would bring in a considerable amount of money. I am told it may come to more than €15 million because of the volume of this type of betting. Let us get that up and running and working and have a licensing system for taking online bets from Irish punters. It does not matter whether one is based in Zanzibar or Dublin; if one takes a bet online from an Irish punter, one must be licensed to do so and one must pay for that licence or else run the risk of being shut down. Let us also be clear about what we are doing in the legislation. The actual collection of the 1% of turnover is a separate matter. In my view, most people who bet online will bet with reputable bookmakers and betting exchanges they know and trust, to which they can give their credit card details. Primarily, one is talking about the big names - Betfair, Paddy Power, Ladbroke's or whoever. I believe this will work and I am anxious that we should move on and finalise the legislation in order to get that new revenue stream.