Dr. Andrew Kelly:

Deputy Ó Cuív asked about funding streams. It has been mentioned that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine made €1 million available for projects to deal with some of these issues. The ISPCA has joined with Cork City Council to put in a proposal for a mobile education unit that would reach out to all communities with equines in the Cork area and possibly reaching up into other parts of Munster as well. That would be funded for two years, with the aim of the ISPCA taking on the baton after the two years. The full cost of the proposal for that two years would be around €140,000. The funding is an issue. We would also like to recruit a dedicated full-time education officer who would recruit a team of volunteer education officers around the country to deliver those kinds of educational programmes. We are also looking at developing our site in Mallow to have a permanent education centre there where we could bring in people for education purposes and where they could have hands-on work with the horses and learn how to care for them appropriately.

We recognise the affinity that some members of the Traveller community, for example, have with their horses and we want to work with the community to provide them with the resources they need. Some of the cruelty we see is through a lack of understanding, lack of availability of resources and lack of access to veterinary care. If we can provide those things, the horses and dogs that we work with become more valuable to them. That is what we would like to do in the future.

Deputy Martin Ferris asked whether the cruelty we see is more related to the horses that have been abandoned. Certainly, those that have been abandoned will suffer and they will starve to death if there is no food available. They may injure themselves if they are in a poor environment, but we also see cruelty in cases of horses that are, at least on paper, being cared for. It is not confined to members of the Traveller community but rather it occurs across all sectors of the equine community. In particular, we see problems in some halting sites, but by no means in all sites. However, we need to work with those communities in order to change that situation.

Deputy Martin Ferris also asked about our views on penalties for animal welfare offences. I mentioned in my presentation that the ISPCA has initiated 45 prosecutions since the Animal Health and Welfare Act came into force. I will provide details on three of those cases which have been finalised in court. The first case was for tail docking of puppies which is now illegal under the Act. A father and son pleaded guilty. The son pleaded guilty to allowing his father to do the docking and the father pleaded guilty to doing the docking. They appeared in court and they were not convicted, despite the facts not being disputed and despite the fact that they pleaded guilty. The judge elected to invoke the Probation of Offenders Act and that is a matter for the court. They were invited to make a donation to the ISPCA.

We might like to see higher penalties in those circumstances. The second case involved a dog that had been abandoned when a person moved out of the house and left the dog with a bucket of water that it could not reach. That individual was ordered to pay costs of €400 to the ISPCA. The third case was a one of causing unnecessary suffering to a dog that died of parvovirus and a fine of €100 was imposed in that case. Important in that case, the judge also issued an order limiting the number of dogs that could be kept on that halting site to one per adult. This allows us to deal with that particular issue in a different way in the future.

Under the Protection of Animals Act, one of the cases that came to court last year was a case where we found several dead horses and several suffering horses in very poor condition. Despite not disputing the facts of the case, the judge elected not to convict and, in fact, actually said that if the ISPCA inspected the property in six months and everything was up to scratch, he would not convict. However, in that six-month period, the chap involved sourced another 40 horses and the situation is essentially a ticking time bomb.

The Animal Health and Welfare Act is a very good piece of legislation. It provides for penalties and fines of up to €5,000 and-or up to six months' imprisonment for cases in summary and on indictment, up to €250,000 and up to five years' imprisonment. The penalties are there but it is a matter for the courts. Our job is to bring the cases to court. Sadly, it is a damning indictment of other agencies that it is a charity that has brought these cases to court. In so far as I am aware, no other agency has yet brought a prosecution under the Animal Health and Welfare Act. We are working with the Garda Síochána and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in this regard.

Deputy Martin Ferris also asked about harness racing. As Mr. McGrath said, if the health and welfare of the horses is protected and the harness racing is regulated, then it is good because it takes it off the roads. In the case of sulky racing, we see some horrendous injuries to horses on a regular basis around the country. They have collided with cars and been dumped at the side of the road. We would like to see sulky racing taken off the road but the local authorities and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine then have a responsibility to provide off-road facilities where it can be regulated and the health and welfare of the animals can be protected. We have called for this in the past.

Deputy Penrose asked the percentage of horses we come across that are not micro-chipped. Similar to Mr. McGrath, 85% to 90% of the horses we deal with are not micro-chipped. In the case of the small proportion that are micro-chipped, we find that the owner denies all knowledge and says the animal has been sold on. Deputy Penrose asked about ex gratiapayments. Last year the ISPCA received €210,000 from the Department for which we are very grateful. This amounts to approximately 7% of our annual expenditure.

Deputy Heydon asked about penalties for failure to micro-chip animals. If an animal is not micro-chipped, it is very difficult to impose a penalty because the owner is not known. On a small number of occasions, we may come across a horse that has been micro-chipped and may be able to trace the owner. However, as I indicated, there are significant penalties to be imposed but the courts seem not to impose high penalties for these kinds of offences.

Senator Mary Ann O'Brien asked if the legislation is sufficiently robust to deal with these issues. I have cited the penalties imposed in a number of cases. The legislation is in place and it is good but perhaps guidelines for the judges might be useful. We would like to see higher penalties in some of these cases.

Deputy Naughten asked about the disadvantaged area scheme. I am not aware that there was a marked change in the number of horses being abandoned at that point in time but that might have been masked by other things. The donkeys may be more noticeable if they are dumped when the disadvantaged area scheme is scrapped if this happens in the future.

I am very pleased that committee members have all made positive comments on the need for traceability. I hope we will see a review of the statutory instrument to make sure there is full traceability for horses.