Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 8 July 2021

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine

Alleged Issues in the Horse Racing Industry: Discussion

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I echo Mr. Kavanagh's and Mr. Egan's thanks for the invitation to this meeting and for the opportunity to set the record straight. As a veterinary surgeon and a scientist, it grates me when the truth is not reported correctly. I am hoping that we can set some of the facts straight this morning, and to clarify and explain matters. That is what we are here to do.

Before I deal with some of the questions, which were detailed and extensive and which I look forward to working through, I echo the three points Mr. Egan made. Every sample that we take is analysed at LGC, with the exception of the B samples which are analysed at Laboratoire des Courses Hippiques, LCH, in France. Every finding is followed up unequivocally. That goes some way to answering whether there is a database or record of all the results. There is. It is sitting on our systems. Third, there has been much talk of our contracted laboratory being somehow substandard. That is not the case. We work with one of the best laboratories in the world. I have worked with it for some time. There is a history and a trust there, which is very important when one is working in partnership with experts. The laboratory won the contract for our work in 2018 through a public procurement process. It is leading in the world, but I will let Dr. Pearce speak to that.

On the questions, I will start with one that was directly for me to answer. With regard to the mucking out the stables headline, I do not write the headlines. I was asked to do the interview and, in the interests of transparency and talking about my favourite subject in the world, which is anti-doping, I accepted the invitation. To go back a little in time, I was brought into the new position of head of anti-doping and chief veterinary officer as has been set out and according to the recommendations of an independent anti-doping task force. I say "independent" because it comprised stakeholders who had many different views. It was not the Turf Club as it was then. In 2018, those recommendations were reinforced again by the industry. The industry has signed up to wanting this to be done.

I was appointed in 2016 and we immediately began to make changes. In no particular order, it was clear to me that the out-of-competition testing needed to increase in line with best international practice. We moved from 7% in 2016 to 18% in 2019. It is now approximately 28%. That is best international practice. These animals spend the majority of their time at home and it is very important that we have coverage in that area. The access that we have now, since 21 May, means that my team can go to test any thoroughbred on the island. That is unparalleled. I have a team out this morning doing exactly that, what it is meant to be doing. The mucking out headline was not something I would have chosen. I have great respect for what has gone before, but there is no doubt that we have moved things on. The main evidence of that was in 2018 when the IHRB was formed, as distinct from the Turf Club and the International Horse Sports Confederation, IHSC.

The results of all the tests we carry out are logged, catalogued and documented to within an inch of their lives. They have to be. That is our process. There is a continuous chain of custody from the moment the sample is taken on the horse side, and witnessed by the representative of the trainer or the person responsible, through to when it is received anonymously at the laboratory, analysed and reported. From the moment it is taken, it is a number. It is not a name, a horse or a person. It is a number, and it has to remain that way in order that any decisions that are made along the way in terms of further analysis or whatever might need to be done are made absolutely anonymously.

As regards reporting, yes, all results are reported. The vast majority of them are negative. The positives or the adverse analytical findings, to use the full term, are always reported. We have had instances where a drug can be detected in part. It is a so-called screening finding. It is part of the fingerprint, but it does not confirm to a full result. Those are also reported back.