Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms McCann for her presentation. The representatives of Greyhound Racing Integrity Ireland are strong advocates of imposing strict penalties and sanctions. Can McCann outline a range of sanctions that she feels would be appropriate? Section 14 of the Bill is somewhat deficient in terms of sanctions, so Ms McCann could help the committee by outlining them.

Does she advocate the strict liability principle if, for example, a banned substance is found in the course of an investigation or test? There could be a pre-race investigation or a test arising as a result of a race. Whether a test if pre-race or post-race, a strict liability principle would presume that a positive result is an offence. The onus would then shift to the owner or breeder, whoever is involved, to negative that and set out the reason a particular substance was found. Is that what Ms McCann advocates and, if not, what system does she advocate as being the most appropriate?

Ms McCann mentioned absolute integrity in racing, which is very important for this committee as it considers the Greyhound Industry Bill 2017. We all subscribe to the idea of absolute integrity and Ms McCann will not find anyone opposing that view in her presentation. How can such a system be established, however? It could become a legal quagmire unless a "do and don't" list is set out. In the normal course of events things are black and white, but sometimes something may innocently appear. If a dog is fed something which contains a contaminated substance, for example, then under the strict liability principle one is there. As the saying goes: "Once you're explaining, you're losing." One is losing because one will have to explain that.

Could Ms McCann outline the type of sanction regime she thinks should be in place in order to ensure that the integrity of the dog racing industry is sacrosanct? She made an important point that the British authorities seem to be very alert to things when all is not kosher. Does Ms McCann have evidence that this has had a significantly negative impact in terms of the industry going forward?

I thought that a lot of money had been spent on a laboratory in Limerick which was the be-all and end-all. In fact, the Morris report placed a lot of emphasis on that, as Ms McCann's presentation mentioned. I am glad she did. If significant funding went into that laboratory as a first step, why is Ms McCann saying it may well be important to refer some cases - for example, if a dog does a super, abnormal time and the result does not stand up - to an independent laboratory outside this jurisdiction? Is that what Ms McCann is advocating? Why is she saying that in regard to record-breakers?

Could she expand on the idea of bitches being tested before retiring to become broods? Is there any level of offence that warrants a full-time ban? For example, some steroids are well known as being massive stimulants, so does their use warrant a full-time ban or a graded ban? I appreciate that the sanction must be proportionate.

Ms McCann referred to red flags appearing next to a dog's name on a race card, but for how long would such a flag appear? If my dog has a problem and is red flagged for one race, will the red flag be carried on to the next race? Does it cover a season or two years? Will it be for six months, a year or two?

Sports Ireland may impose a two-year or four-year ban on athletes. The European sports arbitration body can either uphold such bans, or not, on appeal. I would like Ms McCann to indicate what she has in mind, including time limits for bans and the nature of offences involved. Is a gradation system involved and is there any offence for which a permanent ban would be warranted?

I absolutely concur with Ms McCann when she said: "Fines must be large enough to act as a deterrent. Owners and trainers with multiple offences should be banned." Why, however, is she referring to multiple offences?

In terms of multiple offences, anything more than two is multiple. If three or four offences attract the maximum of the €5,000 fine that is fair enough. All penalties should act as a deterrent to make sure infringements do not happen. It is very useful for the witnesses to come in. I am interested in the reference to the independent laboratory. It has been indicated that we must travel outside the jurisdiction. Is that for specific areas or in general? I thank the witnesses for the presentation.