Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome to this evening's meeting Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin, CEO of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board; and Dr. Lynn Hillyer, who is its chief veterinary officer. Before we begin, I bring it to their attention that when they are giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. This means witnesses will have a full defence in any defamation action arising from anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair’s direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard. I remind them of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse commentary should be made against an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses who give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts and may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to the publication by witnesses outside the proceedings held by the committee of any matters arising from the proceedings.

I invite Mr. O'Loughlin to make his opening statement.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

On behalf of the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board, IHRB, I thank the Chair and members of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine for the invitation

to appear today. I am joined by my colleagues. Dr. Lynn Hillyer, chief veterinary officer; and, in the Public Gallery, Mr. Niall Cronin, head of communications and strategy. The IHRB is an all-island body established in 2018 as the independent regulatory body for horse racing in Ireland. The horse racing industry supports more than 30,000 jobs and contributes €2.46 billion to the economy. Under the Horse Racing Ireland Act 2016, the IHRB is solely and independently responsible for making and enforcing the rules of racing, licensing all participants and regulating horse racing, including anti-doping and handicapping. The IHRB is also responsible for the representation of Irish horse racing internationally in respect of its functions under the Act and is a member of the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities. The IHRB exists to safeguard the reputation of Irish horse racing through robust and transparent regulatory practices, implemented with uncompromising integrity by a focused and professional team. Over recent years, we have made significant advances in critical areas, including the strengthening of the organisation’s board and governance and closer collaboration with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Horse Racing Ireland and other important stakeholders. This includes entering into memorandums of understanding with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and with the Veterinary Council of Ireland in respect of certain functions and activities. The IHRB abides by the requirements for a non-commercial State body in the code of practice for the governance of State bodies. We operate under a recently revised and strengthened service level agreement with Horse Racing Ireland and meet at least quarterly with HRI to ensure transparency and oversight of the horse racing integrity services budget. It is the ambition of the board and management to position the IHRB as a world-class regulator for horse racing, with a focus on excellence in the delivery of our core functions.

Following extensive internal and external consultations with stakeholders across and outside the horse-racing industry, the IHRB has developed a renewed strategy for the coming years to assure public trust in Irish horse racing, applying the highest professional standards within a robust governance framework and rigorous probity regime, as we continue to improve our efficiency and effectiveness.

The committee is aware that, in late June, an issue emerged that related to financial governance within the organisation. Although there did not appear to be any question of misappropriation or personal gain, it was immediately brought to the attention of the IHRB's audit and risk committee, and to the chairman and board of the IHRB. Additionally, the details were disclosed to the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Horse Racing Ireland and were brought to the attention of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The board of the IHRB, with the support of HRI, commissioned an external review, to be conducted by an independent firm, Mazars. This review, which is ongoing, involves a thorough examination of six years' worth of financial and other records and interviews with relevant individuals. At its conclusion, which we anticipate should be within weeks, the findings will be published and the recommendations will be acted upon.

Equine anti-doping remains a top priority for the horse racing sector, and the IHRB has no tolerance for any rule breaches in this regard, as indicated by the sanctions handed down for such offences. An independent review of the IHRB equine anti-doping programme carried out last year concluded that we "at least match international best practice ... and have made significant advances in recent years". The review made recommendations that it stated were capable of enhancing the robustness of the programme's processes, capabilities and capacities but noted that the implementation of some or all of these recommendations will require the provision of more funding and resources. Recommendations that could be implemented without significant cost implications have been or are being implemented. However, there are some high-priority recommendations that require additional funding. Plans are in place to implement these remaining recommendations when resources allow.

Our anti-doping strategy continues to evolve and operates on a sophisticated risk-and-intelligence basis, backed by rigorous processes of investigation and follow-through in the event of an adverse analytical finding. The appointment of 12 authorised officers allows the IHRB to gain access to any thoroughbred in any location at any time. This enables us to take the right sample from the right horse, in the right place and at the right time, to maximise the likelihood of detecting prohibited substances if they are present, deter those who might be tempted to cheat through doping and disrupt inappropriate activities. It was through such action that the largest doping case in Irish racing history was successfully detected and prosecuted this year. We have provided a table that illustrates the scope of the IHRB's equine anti-doping programme.

The IHRB carries out its functions through a team of 25 experienced staff in the Curragh and over 100 highly trained, professional racing officials at race meetings across the island who ensure that the safety and integrity of the sport are maintained. The IHRB also relies on over 140 volunteer race-day stewards and committee members, who lend their professional expertise to ensure Irish horse racing adheres to the rules and is properly governed at all levels.

Recent years have brought unprecedented challenges in the administration and regulation of horse racing. IHRB staff and volunteers have risen to these challenges. I thank them for their dedication, commitment and professionalism, which enable us to be an adaptable, responsive and high-performing organisation, serving the horse racing community and safeguarding the €2.5 billion thoroughbred industry, which supports over 30,000 jobs nationwide.

I thank members for their attention. I and my colleagues will now answer any questions they may have.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. O'Loughlin. The last evening we were here, we had legal advice that prevented us from having a detailed questions-and-answers session. That was beyond our control. We had to be mindful of the advice.

I am disappointed that the report on the financial governance of the organisation is not finished. This has attracted a lot of media attention. A CEO retired. According to the transcript of the PAC meeting the IHRB representatives attended, the CEO got "58% more than the amount payable if the scheme conditions had been applied as stated to the CEO". It is very difficult for us to understand how this could happen in an industry that receives very significant public funds. That there was no contract in place is an issue. It defies logic that a person with no contract in place could have been the chief executive of a State-run organisation. I just cannot get my head around that. In Mr. O’Loughlin's opening statement, he referred to personal gain and said there does not appear to be any question of misappropriation or personal gain. I accept the first point, but surely a CEO getting significantly more than was deemed appropriate implies personal gain. I presume he benefited from the "58% more than the amount payable if the scheme conditions had been applied as stated". In my view, that was most definitely personal gain. I do not know how you could determine it in any other way. I presume, because the report is not finished, that Mr. O'Loughlin is going to tell us he cannot get into the details about the case. The time-lapse in the investigation into the governance of the IHRB is completely and utterly unacceptable. There are serious questions to be asked about how what happened arose. The time lag is definitely doing no good to anyone or the reputation of the IHRB. I am not happy that the investigation is not concluded. I fully accept that Mr. O'Loughlin is new in his post, but given there were issues of such serious public concern, the report should be long finished and the recommendations should be on the table.

On doping, I am worried by the following statement by Mr. O'Loughlin:

... there are some high-priority recommendations that require additional funding. Plans are in place to implement these remaining recommendations when resources allow.

Ultimately, ensuring the integrity of the sport is paramount. Mr. O'Loughlin rightly said the sport is very valuable to the economy and comprises a very valuable business, with very many making a living out of it. He said that there are 30,000 jobs and that €2.5 billion is added to the economy. Therefore, the statement that there are some high-priority recommendations that require additional funding does not rest easily with me. As with everything else, there are advances being made in the technology of those who want to cheat the system, and we have to keep pace with these to ensure defrauders cannot benefit. None of us wants to see anyone who is doping horses gaining financially from it, and we want to stamp it out completely, but I am worried about the statement that there are high-priority recommendations that require additional funding. My first question was on the report and the delay in producing it. Is Mr. O'Loughlin prepared to answer my questions on the departing CEO and on waiting for resources to implement high-priority recommendations? I would like a full explanation, please.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The Mazars review is taking longer than I, too, believed it would. It is a very thorough review and, as a result, it is time-consuming. We have provided Mazars with almost six years' worth of our financial, banking and relevant personnel records and so on. I do not want to conflate the issue of concern that came to our knowledge in June of this year with the retirement of the former CEO. The former CEO's retirement package was outlined clearly in the annual report and financial statements for 2021, and there is controversy around the payment he received in addition to what was referred to in the scheme rules in place at the time.

We acknowledged this controversy was there. The additional moneys he received were paid by the Turf Club and Irish National Hunt Steeplechase. These moneys were not State moneys. There was no misapplication of State money. There is very little I can say about what will be in the Mazars review because, as the Cathaoirleach has said, it has not yet concluded. We have provided Mazars with many hundreds of documents and answered every query it has had. We have given it access to all of the relevant personnel and it has interviewed the people it wants to talk to. As we have committed previously, once the review is complete and we receive the findings and recommendations we will publish them and implement the recommendations.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What was the additional money paid through?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

It was paid through the payroll system in the IHRB. The funds to pay for it were provided by the two clubs. By putting it through the payroll system, everybody could be satisfied that it was taxed appropriately as payroll. We had a review done by external auditors who are satisfied it was taxed appropriately.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I raised a question about doping and extra resources.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The review of our equine anti-doping programme by Dr. Craig Suann, who is acknowledged as an expert, was carried out on the recommendation of this committee. He reported back after his review that we at least match international best practice. This is always a good starting point. Dr. Suann made 18 recommendations in total. The majority of these we have implemented. Some of them are implemented on an ongoing basis to change a practice or an approach. We have implemented these. Some of the high-priority ones require additional funding because they require additional testing. There is a cost associated with every sample that gets sent to the laboratory for analysis. There is a manpower cost associated with taking the samples. We have outlined the sample numbers and the sample taking we think is necessary to fully meet the recommendation. We have costed it and presented them to HRI and the Department. We can only operate within the budget that we have. We are working with HRI. If additional resources become available we will be able to implement some, or part at least, of those recommendations that are outstanding. As more resources become available to us through the budgeting process, we will be able to fund the remaining outstanding recommendations. We have to operate within the budget we are given.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What costs are we speaking about?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

As I said, there is a cost associated with each sample. If we were to fully meet the recommendations as outlined, the additional cost is in the region of €1.2 million.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Given the reputation of the industry, I would not consider this a large amount of money.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

It is not a large amount of money. As I have said, we have submitted a proposal and costings to HRI and it has gone to the Department. I appreciate there are many other calls on the resources of the Department also. We continue to make the case for what we need. We have a plan in place to swing into action as the resources become available.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

He is still an employee of the IHRB and he is still on leave.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We have an interim financial controller who is working with us at present. We have an existing finance team but we also have an additional person who is working on an interim basis as our CFO.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Yes.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The individual who is working with us at present is working very well. He is not full-time with us. He has an additional role that he also has to maintain. We have found him to be extremely helpful and extremely useful.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

It was not advertised. He has been seconded to us on a part-time basis. He is part-time with us and part-time in an existing role. He is an employee of HRI.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The IHRB was established and started operating on 1 January 2018. In the interests of thoroughness and so that no surprises could emerge down the line, we felt it was appropriate to look back at all of our banking transactions to the date we were established and started operating.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Yes.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Mazars had access to anybody it wanted to speak to. We provided it with contact details of all of the individuals it wanted to speak to.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Including former employees.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We have had some staff turnover but all organisations have staff turnover. We are in an environment and economy with full employment. I am very comforted by the fact that when people leave the IHRB and we advertise the positions, we get between five and eight highly qualified people who are keen to come and work with us. With regard to any position that becomes available in the IHRB, we are seen as a high-quality employer and we are getting good applicants to take the positions. A bit of turnover in staff, as Senator Daly knows, is a good thing because we get new ideas, new approaches and fresh energy into the organisation.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We do.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We initiated it this year.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We have a new HR manager who has brought with them new processes and procedures. As I said in my opening statement, we continue to refine and make ourselves more effective and improve our governance and systems. I cannot speak to why we did not have something in the past. I can only say we brought it in because we thought we could get some useful information and perspectives on our organisation as a place to work.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I would not describe it as a high turnover. We have had people leave but we also have people who have been with us for years if not decades. We have some very long-standing employees and we have employees who have come in more recently. It is no more than any other organisation.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Our policy in general terms is to make sure that all winners are sampled in order to protect them. The majority of those sampled are winners but we also have a very strong policy of selecting non-routine or non-winning animals. They are sampled either pre-race with a blood or hair sample or post race with a urine sample.

We mix up what we have available to us in order, as Mr. O'Loughlin said, to cover the horses in the way we think is strategic, sampling-wise.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It would be included as two or three different samples. A sample of blood, hair and urine would count as three samples.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They could.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It does get complex. The Senator is absolutely right. There are a few metrics, and we have looked at how best to present them so that we are being very open about what we do. There is the absolute number of samples, and even that gets a bit complicated because we do things like split hair samples. One hair sample from one horse can actually generate three or even more samples to be analysed.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

That would be recorded as one sample at the moment. We can produce more analysis numbers than we have samples. Let us start at the beginning. There is the number of horses sampled, the number of samples taken, and the number of analyses done with those samples. Like my colleagues, I am very keen to put as much into these reports as we possibly can, but as the Senator has said, we have to keep it so that it is understandable. It is a complex area.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

No, because as the Senator has said-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We could very easily do that, but I do not have the information in front of me now.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I would need to look at the detail to answer that properly. The other thing-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I would say there are a lot more horses. Let me rephrase that. Fewer horses will be resampled more than once. The hair is a very good example. If we see that a horse has had a hair sample taken, and it is very obvious when it has a hair sample taken, our policy is not to resample that horse within a month unless there is very good reason to do so. Obviously, more hair would be taken than would be needed and it gives a very long window of coverage. If a horse is repeatedly winning, let us say it is having a winning streak, and it is winning once, twice or three times in succession, then it would be sampled sequentially. That would be the right thing to do because we need to protect that winning status. It would depend. We can do that analysis, but it is not presented here.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They are samples.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I do not think it is far greater, but I would like to have the numbers to give the Senator a proper answer to that question.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

The simple answer is "Yes". We have very much considered and discussed that with Dr. Suann. I do not know whether he would be the right person to come back and do a follow-up, as it were. We would welcome any further examination of how we do our business and how we go about our business, particularly in this area. The benefit of having Dr. Suann back would be that he could directly measure our progress against the recommendations. There were 18 recommendations made, and we have made progress and achieved 14 of those 18 recommendations. As Mr. O'Loughlin said, we have put detailed plans in place to finish what we can achieve in terms of the increased sampling numbers. As I have said previously here, it is not just about the numbers. It is never just about the numbers; it is about the quality of the sampling and the analysis. All of that would be there for Dr. Suann to scrutinise again.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We do both. I like to use the analogy of a roadside breath test. We do the equivalent of a roadside breathalyser test to screen the horse. That gives us an indication of whether a further full regulatory sample is indicated. If it is, we take it, ideally pre-race. If it cannot be taken pre-race because of what we are measuring, it has to be taken post race. That is where the absolute number of samples taken is different compared with the analysis that is done. There is more analysis done per sample, if that makes sense.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes, it is allowed to run.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

The screening test that we do is not a full regulatory test that is accredited by the laboratories. We have to be able to stand over every test that we do. We cannot stand over the roadside test, as it were, whereas we can stand over the regulatory test that is done back at the lab. We have now tested upwards of 600 or 700 horses in this way.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Pre-race.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Two years ago now.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

No. We have not had sample exceed the international threshold for CO2.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

A mixture. The roadside breath test, as it were, purely measures CO2 for evidence of so-called milkshaking, whereas the full regulatory samples go in for the whole gamut of analysis we can do. Actually, we do some quite specific analysis on those bloods as well.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

No.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Well over that.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes, I would say so, off the top of my head. We are trying to make sure we get to every racetrack and type of meeting. We plan to attend big meetings, small meetings, large fields and small fields. The important bit is that what we do is analyse the results we get from those screening results and we use that to further direct where we go next. If we see a pattern of results from a certain yard, trainer or even a type of horse, we will then home in on that type of horse to do further sampling. We do not just put the results in a drawer. We use them to inform our further strategy on how we take tests going forward. It could be anything from a pre-race sample through to going out to the yard and taking out-of-competition samples.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I would always like more. That is linked to our plans and ambitions to implement the Suann recommendations. To take more samples, we need more veterinary officers.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We have enough regulatory veterinary officers to do what we do at the moment, but-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes. There has to be, because blood samples can only legally be taken by a veterinary surgeon.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They are not all full-time. I do not have a team of full-time officers. I have a mixture of full-time and part-time officers, but they are IHRB veterinary officers who are employed by us. We could not have a racecourse veterinary surgeon-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

In common with all other regulatory authorities, with the exception of Hong Kong, we have veterinary officers who are also able to have their own practices.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Including me, there are four.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

There are a further three or four veterinary officers who do part-time work, depending on need. We have peaks and troughs of demand within our year.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They are not associated with the racetrack at all. They are contracted independently.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Absolutely not.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Sometimes it goes the other way. Where, in an emergency, a racecourse veterinary surgeon has been detained or been otherwise unable to attend, our veterinary officers have stepped in to allow the race meeting to go ahead because we are all qualified clinical veterinary surgeons. It goes the other way but we would never allow a racetrack vet to take regulatory samples. That would not be appropriate.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Dr. Hillyer said there is a focus on winners. Where favourites run poorly, are they also a focus for testing?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes. Where any horse performs either better than expected or worse, the stewards would send it for sampling.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If a favourite runs abysmally at long odds, he would be tested.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Exactly.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

That is correct for the blood samples but, to be clear, the urine samples are taken by our veterinary assistants. Taking a urine sample is a non-invasive procedure and that is carried out by a veterinary assistant. Non-vets may also take hair samples.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We could.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Provided it was an IHRB-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We would not do that unless there was an emergency. We always want to have the wherewithal to take a blood sample so there is always a veterinary officer rostered for every single race meeting across the island.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

In my seven years with the board, I can think of only one occasion. It was during the Covid pandemic and we had veterinary officers ill and not able to turn up. To maintain our integrity processes, we relied on urine samples and hair samples rather than blood samples. That is one occasion in seven years and it was an emergency.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

The panel of substances, by which I mean both the range of substances we test for and the depth or sensitivity of that testing, is always moving forwards. One of the reasons we set our standards so high in terms of our contracted laboratory is to make sure that laboratory stays ahead of the curve. The most tangible example I can give the Senator at the moment relates to the detection of gene doping. Since we last met here, the detection of gene doping has become a reality. Tests have been developed and research has been done. LGC is at the forefront of that research and is implementing it. Exactly as the Senator has said, we have to stay ahead of that curve. There are new substances coming in. Some are rumours and some are real but we have to follow up on all of them. That is why that laboratory, being one of only six IFHA-certified laboratories in the world, is so important. It has its area of expertise and talks to its colleagues in the other five laboratories. Those laboratories share their methods and make sure they are all working together to detect these doping agents.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

As I have said, the standard is the important thing for us. We are in the middle of the procurement process for the next stage of contract and, if an Irish laboratory were certified by the IFHA and able to participate in that process, that would be fantastic but it is the standards that drive us and the six certified laboratories are outside Ireland.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I call Deputy Kerrane, I note there are 11 adverse findings. Will Dr. Hillyer break those down by where they were found? Were they found at race days, in point-to-point racing or during out-of-competition testing? What tests found them?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

An adverse analytical finding on race day either refers to a so-called "prohibited at all times" substance, something that should not be there at all, or to a medication that is present in concentrations that we know to affect horses. If it were a race day, both types of substance would be called as an adverse finding. In out-of-competition testing, only substances that are prohibited at all times, something that should not be there at all, result in a positive or adverse finding. An anabolic steroid is a good example.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Where did these findings occur? Were they at race days, in point-to-point racing or during out-of-competition testing?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It is a mixture. Some this year were found at race days and some at point-to-point competitions. We have not-----

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What exactly was the breakdown of those 11 findings? What tests showed up these substances? Were they urine tests, blood tests or hair tests? Were they carried out before the race or post race?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

In 2022, there were five adverse analytical findings in total on race days, there were four in the out-of-competition and stable inspection category, and there were two in point-to-point.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It had to be blood testing for point-to-point because it is the only thing the IHRB does at point-to-point events.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

That is generally the case, yes.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How were the five findings on race days found? They were all post-race tests.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They were all post-race tests.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Were they urine, blood or hair tests?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I do not have that information to hand but, from my knowledge, I believe they were fairly evenly split. I think it was three urine and two blood.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have there been prosecutions or suspensions in respect of all 11 findings?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming in and for the opening statement. I have just a couple of questions because a lot has been raised and spoken about already. I will come back to the review that is under way. That relates to financial governance, which is very important within any organisation. The witnesses say the report is expected to be concluded within weeks but the term "within weeks" is hard for us to define. Are we talking about it being concluded before Christmas or will it be in the new year?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I am reluctant to give any hostages to fortune because we are very much in hands of Mazars, which is carrying out the review. It is entirely independent of us. We brought Mazars in and gave it access to all of our records and people, as needed. From speaking to the company, I get the impression it is coming very close to the end of the process. When it has concluded all of its interviews, it will draft a report and have it reviewed by its own lawyers to make sure it is legally sound before we see it at all. That process will take a couple of weeks. At the very end of November, it is really difficult for me to say whether it will be before Christmas or afterwards because there is realistically only two and half weeks of productive work between now and the Christmas break. I would like to see it before the end of the year. I am very anxious to see it before the end of the year so that we can go into the new year with findings and recommendations we can act on. However, there is nothing I can do to make it come any faster.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Was Mazars given a deadline to complete its work?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We had an outline timeline. We could not give a deadline because, if we reached the deadline and the report was not completed, we would obviously have continued the review. We had hoped it would be completed before now but it has not been.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Questions have been raised on the six years' worth of financial records. It is clear this forms part of the review. Interviews with relevant individuals are just as important. I appreciate that Mr. O'Loughlin might not know the answer to this but, given that he has said interviews have been ongoing, does he know if everyone has engaged in that process? I refer to the individual interviews with relevant persons mentioned in the opening statement.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I am not aware of anybody declining to be interviewed.

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That report will obviously be shared with the committee, although probably not before it is published. Perhaps the IHRB could come in again at that point because it is a big issue. Governance is very important in any organisation.

My second and last question relates to the high priority recommendations that will require additional funding to be implemented and seen through. Will Mr. O'Loughlin tell us what a couple of those high priority recommendations are? There are 18 recommendations in the report.

I appreciate that Mr. O'Loughlin has said the majority have been or are being implemented, but how many of those 18 remain outstanding?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The largest one that remains outstanding is the one that calls for an increase in total sampling and testing numbers. As I said to the Chair, we cannot increase those without an additional budget because of the cost of doing that. Some IT expenditure is also required to integrate systems and to give us better data at the point of stable inspections and on the racecourses in order that we can improve further our test distribution plan. We have put that IT work into our budget for next year but our budget has not been approved yet so we cannot go out and commission the work but we are hopeful that piece of capital investment will be approved and we can get the IT work done. We are in discussions with HRI, which is our funder, to see if there is any portion of the necessary uplift in test numbers that we can accommodate within the funds that are available to it to give to us. Does that answer the question?

Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It does. I thank Mr. O'Loughlin.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do the 11 adverse findings relate to 11 separate trainers or handlers or are some of them multiple offences within the same training establishment?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They were individual horses. We had a link last year with one trainer having a number of findings out of competition in regard to clenbuterol, but otherwise they were separate.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did the out-of-competition findings all relate to one establishment?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It was one substance, clenbuterol. Yes.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Were adverse findings made against seven different establishments involved in point-to-point races and horse racing?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are the suspensions or fines that ensued set out in tabular form? Who decides what suspension or fine is merited?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It is the decision of the referrals committee or the panel which hears the case as to what sanction is imposed. We make a recommendation or put our view forward in terms of what sanction. There is a structure within the rules as to what sanctions apply. Beyond that, above a certain minimum, it is at the discretion or the decision of the referrals committee.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the referrals committee make a decision based on the IHRB's recommendations?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We put our recommendation forward and it makes the decision.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the IHRB put forward its view on the severity of the offence?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We make an assessment based on the substance, the circumstances, and any mitigation factors. My colleagues put that forward from the legal side.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry. I did not catch that.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

My colleagues on the legal side put that forward. I tend to provide the scientific background only.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Each case is dealt with individually and the level of substance would obviously have an impact.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Very much so. A good example of that is in relation to medications. We control medications by the application of a screening limit. Basically, if it is above the limit it means that the substance is having an effect on the horse and below the limit it is not. In cases where the substance has been found in the horse at significant multiples above that limit, that means that it is having an effect on the horse, and in our view that is a more serious offence than if it is not having an effect on the horse.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When horses run outside the country in various parts of the world if they are given a substance that is allowed there but not here, when they come back they are technically out of competition. Is there a timeframe within which the horse would not be tested or are there guidelines in that regard?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

The good news on that is that with the international collaboration and harmonisation, through the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities, there are very few differences between what is allowed and what is not. The Chair is right that there are exceptions. Something called GastroGard or omeprazole is one very good example that is allowed in some jurisdictions and not allowed here. We take the view that in order to protect the safety, health and welfare of our horses, these medications are allowed in training. It is only on race days that they would not be allowed. A withdrawal period is applied to them. I cannot think of an example where there has been an issue with a difference in how a substance is approached that has affected some of our horses here.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Dr. Hillyer.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was present when the witnesses were before the committee on the previous occasion. The committee was giving recommendations on doping to the IHRB and outlining what we would like to see done. How many recommendations have been implemented or how is the implementation process proceeding?

The witnesses talked about horses being moved elsewhere and that they would not know where they are. Have all the issues relating to traceability been resolved?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The last time the committee made recommendations and observations about anti-doping, the key recommendation at the time was to get an international expert of renown in to review our systems. Dr. Craig Suann was brought in. He carried out a very thorough review that was published in April 2022. He made 18 recommendations. The vast majority of them have been implemented, but there are still two or three waiting to be implemented.

It is not in our gift to implement traceability on our own, but we continue to work with our colleagues in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Horse Racing Ireland and Weatherbys, who provide the technology and stud book database. We are all collaborating to do what we can to bring in a traceability system. We are certainly providing all of the support, information and input that we can to help drive on that project, but it is not us alone that will deliver on traceability.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Based on the example given to the committee at the time my understanding is that if I own a bullock or heifer, it is traceable where it is at all times. My understanding is that between the IHRB, the Department and HRI, traceability was to be introduced fairly quickly. Is Mr. O'Loughlin saying that has not been done yet?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

It is not done. Work is ongoing but it is not finished yet.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How long is a piece of string? How long ago is it since the IHRB was in before the committee previously?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

It is two years this month since the committee made that recommendation and published that report. I acknowledge that, but it is not in our gift. I cannot tell the Deputy how long the piece of string is because we are not cutting the string.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

But the IHRB is part of the string.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

We are not cutting the string.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would it not be in the interests of everybody, including the IHRB, for it to be pushed forward? It would also be in the interests of transparency given some of the accusations that came out in emails received by the committee at that the time. Would it not be in the interest of all the different partners to put that in fairly rapidly?

The other question I have is for Dr. Hillyer. At the previous meeting, questions were raised about horses getting certain boosters before races. Was anything ever done to resolve that?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I would welcome a traceability system with open arms that was as good as the traceability system for cattle in this country. The cattle system is fantastic.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When the IHRB is trying to get into yards at the moment, does it have a difficulty whereby someone could say that the horse has been moved somewhere else?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

With our authorisation under the Veterinary Medicinal Products, Medicated Feed and Fertilisers Regulation Act, if somebody says that to us, we are able to now go and find the horse. If somebody says to us that a horse we expect to be there is not there and is off down the road, we go down the road and we find it. The difficulty is that when we attend a yard we do not know what to expect. We know we are going to find horses in training, but there could be have another 40 or 50 horses that are not recorded. When we go to a yard, we identify and document every horse. We generate a lot of data that we are really looking forward to putting into a traceability system. It is being built, as Mr. O'Loughlin says. Weatherbys are working really hard on this to develop it. A traceability subgroup meets and it is due to meet again tomorrow. I am not making any excuses, but it is a complex system because we are trying to pull in data from a number of different places and at known points in a horse's life.

In answer to the Deputy's question as to whether it will be useful, it will be invaluable. We need a nose-to-tail history. Going back to the length of string, we need to know where the horse is at any point along its life and if the information is not there, there needs to be a reason for that. One of the main reasons for that is there has to be a person responsible for that horse at every stage of its life in order to protect its health and welfare. We need to hold a person to account for its safety, its health and its welfare. Linking the horse, its movement, and the person responsible will be the important bit and that is complex. It is complex, and I am aware there have been some hoops.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Of all the horses in Ireland that need to be tested, what percentage are tested every year?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

If we take a number of roughly 35,000 runners, we would be tested upwards of 5,500 per year.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So people have a one-in-seven chance of being nabbed.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Roughly speaking, and obviously there are peaks and troughs.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Why would you not be going everywhere? Is there not a way at races to make sure horses can be tested?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

The recommendations from Dr. Suann is to increase our testing pressure and our testing numbers and we are very keen to do that.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is the recommended number?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

There is not actually a number to which we can subscribe.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What does Dr. Suann recommend?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

He just says to increase the numbers. He does not give a specific number. We have put in recommendations to increase. We have asked for the budget to increase the numbers next year in two ways. One is to increase our number of stable inspections so that we have more boots on the ground and more eyes looking at what is going on and then we can make informed decisions about what to test and the absolute sample numbers. As Mr. O'Loughlin said earlier, we are trying to be sensible about this. It is easy to ask for more resources, but we are trying to put in a stepwise approach to that whereby we put the personnel in place to be able to expand as and when the resource becomes available for the sampling.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the IHRB target horses that are winning or is that how it is done?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We target both. We sample all winners across the country and we also then target non-winning horses.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ireland has a good name as regards racing. It is a good industry, and that is why we need to keep its reputation as good as possible. It is great to see Irish horses going over to the UK and winning. I am not expert on them but they sort of take over when they go over to the likes of Cheltenham. This is great to see but we need to make sure it is kept 100% right. Did the IHRB ever ask Dr. Suann what he means by more or whether he meant 35,000 or 11,000?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I have put in what I think is more and I have submitted what is a reasonably increase to allow us to get the coverage we need. I have said before that it is not just about the numbers we take; it is how we use the information that comes from those samples. For example, one of Dr. Suann's recommendations was to have an individual sampling history of every horse and that protective element that Mr. O'Loughlin talked about. That is really important. It is as important as increasing numbers. We need to do many different things together to make the most of the resource we have. Having the right people who are trained, know what they are doing, are enthusiastic about what they are doing and want to do the job well, is as important as increasing numbers, so I am very focused on that with my team as well.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Has everything relating to governance been resolved?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I would never say everything is resolved. When we were in before the committee for the short meeting in July, I outlined that an issue had arisen which required us to conduct a review. Our board commissioned Mazars to carry out a review of our financial governance and financial records. We have provided six years' worth of financial records, banking transactions, and so on, and also relevant personnel records to Mazars. It has gone through hundreds if not thousands of documents. We have not yet got the report. It is only when we get the report back from Mazars that it will have set out its findings and whatever recommendations it is making. It is only at that stage that I will be able to come in and say that we believe this issue has been sorted out, as the Deputy put it. We are not quite there.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is Mr. O'Loughlin's gut feeling?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I do not like to go on gut feelings when it comes to matters of financial governance.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I certainly do not like to put gut feelings on record. The review is underway. I believe it is almost complete.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is Mr. O'Loughlin confident that everything will be alright?

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I am confident that regardless of what emerges through this review, we will put everything right. Therefore, I am confident that once we have the report and the recommendations, we will either find that everything is already all right - and I have no reason to believe it is not - or to the extent that shortcomings are identified in our controls, processes, or procedures, we will put those right.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Between revenue and capital expenditure, this year it will be in the region of €11.7 million.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

The lab cost element is our single largest expense line after payroll so we would probably be looking at about €1.6 million on lab costs this year.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Yes.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Just to pick up on the point of a couple of vet assistants being present, we operate two approaches. We have inspections where we do not have a veterinary officer there because we have extremely competent experienced and highly trained authorised officers who are not veterinary officers. We have other inspections where the veterinary officers are present, so there is a mixture of approaches. Approximately five or six years ago, we switched from having inspections where a veterinary surgeon was always present because we believed we needed to achieve more coverage. That is that part of it. Regarding cost, having a veterinary officer turn out is more expensive than having a veterinary assistant. A professional veterinary surgeon is more expensive. The cost for the people involved ranges from approximately €600 for manpower, and then with added expenses, closer to €800 per visit. It it nearly double that if a veterinary officer is included.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

By the time all the testing has been put-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I would say it, would I not, but I think we are in the fortunate position where it is the veterinary department which is responsible for the post-licensing safety inspection programme. Therefore, we do not just do out-of-competition testing, we lead the inspections of the yards. It is an audit, if you like, of the premises, the people and the horses. That was set up six or seven years ago and was operating before that. However, it is unusual. In many other jurisdictions, it would be a security function or a stipendiary steward function. That is why we will have inspections where no samples are taken because they are just that; they are inspections. Then we have the out-of-competition testing with the inspection. Again, one of the sensible ways we have of doing this is that we allow the teams on the ground the wherewithal to assess a yard when they go in, to make sure they are only testing where they feel they should be testing. Unless they are going in to test from the beginning, they have the wherewithal to turn an inspection into an out-of-competition testing visit. This large degree of flexibility in the high level part of it.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Very much so.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

All of them are unannounced.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

All are unannounced.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

They are entirely unannounced and we go to some lengths to make sure they are because-----

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

No. Not necessarily.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Very much so. It is about half and half. If our inspections are------

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

There are times when people want to assess welfare, in particular, or the clinical condition of horses. We run various checks and balances on the health and welfare of our horses. This includes making sure there are veterinary checks at home. It is important that we have the wherewithal to put a vet onto a yard to assess a horse. Let us say a horse finished lame last time at a race meeting. That horse will be picked up and examined on a specific, targeted stable inspection visit next time round. We have to have the expertise, knowledge and professional vets involved for that type of thing. We do not want to deploy them unnecessarily to do what I would call a very good horsemanship-type role, which is where veterinary assistants come in. Veterinary assistants are experts in their fields in horsemanship but that is different from a veterinary surgeon.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Very much so.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I do not want to give-----

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Mileage and travel expenses.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

Those are the expenses. They are the people, for their pay and expenses for the day. Where samples are taken, it is the lab costs.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I would imagine the cost of the people involved probably matches the cost of the labs.

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

I do not want to give a figure that could be inaccurate. Our veterinary officers and assistants also do racecourse duty. They just receive their salary. I will look at a breakdown of how each individual spends their time and what goes towards-----

Mr. Darragh O'Loughlin:

On race day, one or two veterinary surgeons are at the racecourse for the duration of the race meeting, along with two veterinary assistants, sometimes three.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

The Senator is correct that they are doing anti-doping work but they also look after the health, safety and welfare of those horses. They identify and inspect them. They do a lot of work in between races to check horses coming on and off the track. They wear two hats on the track. We could try to estimate the percentage of time. That is needed to answer that question accurately.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

On anti-doping specifically.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It is even better.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We increased our use of hair in recent years. As soon as we became confident that hair was accredited, passed all the tests and jumped through all the hoops it needed to be a reliable matrix, we rapidly increased our use of hair since 2020. To answer the question of whether hair is the best or not, it is not. The Senator is correct. Hair is very good at detecting substances for a long period of time. I was smiling when the Senator spoke about human testing because he is dead right. It is very useful in humans. It is even better in horses because they have more of it. A typical section of mane is about six inches, which gives evidence of exposure for about six months. If you go to the tail, you can get more. It is a fantastic thing for us to work with. We cannot switch to it completely, however, because there are drugs that can only be detected in urine or blood. We must make sure we have coverage of all three, carefully, with a lot of assessment and strategy to make sure we take hair samples when we know we want coverage of the previous six months. A competition is exactly when you would take hair samples. Pre-race, blood samples are perfect for looking for so-called biological things such as peptides and proteins - drugs that do not hang around for very long. They literally are in and out in a matter of hours. Hair would be no good for that because it would not pick them up. You need to use different matrices together. I pushed hard to increase our hair use because I recognise it can be efficient. It is a very sensible way of using resources for all the reasons the Senator said. We cannot do it at the expense of the other type of testing. We have to do a balance of the three types.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes. We have had trainers express a concern that we will disadvantage the horse in some way or make the horse nervous. We approach this very carefully. For a start, it is only, as we said earlier, a trained and experienced veterinary officer who takes that blood sample. When we started pre-race testing, it was only me who took those samples because I wanted to stand over the safety and efficacy. That is exactly what happened when we started. I tested thousands.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I would do that happily. I have tested thousands of horses pre-race in this jurisdiction and others. In all that time, there was one horse that would have been dangerous to sample pre-race. We did not sample it. We have made that commitment to trainers here. If there was any danger to the horse or personnel, we would not sample it. We would walk away.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

If a horse cannot be sampled pre-race, it is sampled post-race. Hair, blood and urine would be sampled because we want the coverage we were not able to get pre-race. I cannot think of a horse we have not been able to sample pre-race here.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

We would not let the horse get upset.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

It would do it at the time. If it was going to get upset, it would do it as you were taking the sample and we would stop. We have made that commitment to trainers.

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

I can only speak from my experience. I have been a veterinary officer for 25 years and there was one in that time from which I had to walk away. It is not a question of going too far before you walk away. You know a horse that is going to be dangerous, difficult or intractable and you just do not do it. It is as simple as that. We see them on training yards and on race day. It is a difficult time for a trainer and the horse. Everything has to be just right pre-race. We are not going to go in and mess that up. We do not do that.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does lab testing go out for procurement?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Yes.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How often?

Dr. Lynn Hillyer:

Every four years. We are in the middle of procurement for the next cycle.

Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for the extensive and comprehensive answers. We await a copy of that report on governance. I hope it will be done as speedily as possible. I am not happy with the delay but we have gone over that; I will not go over it again. The next public meeting of the committee will be on Wednesday, 6 December at 5.30 p.m., when the agenda will be the examination of the impact of rising veterinary costs on dog ownership and abandoned dogs and engagement with the new chairperson designate of the Agri-Food Regulator, Mr. Joe Healy.