Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will try and limit myself to nine minutes to give Deputy Hayden time. I welcome the opportunity to speak on the general scheme of the Horse Racing Ireland (Amendment) Bill and to thank the Minister for his and his officials' active engagement with the committee. The aim of the Bill is to strengthen governance and transparency within horse racing, to clarify the respective roles of both Horse Racing Ireland, HRI, as the promotional body, and the racing regulatory body, known as the Turf Club, to improve accountability and manage integrity functions.

Last year, the Minister, Deputy Coveney, referred the general scheme to the joint committee and requested that it consider undertaking pre-legislative scrutiny, which we acceded to. Over a period we held a series of meetings, starting on 1 July with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, bringing in all the stakeholders and ultimately bringing in officials from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on 8 October. We completed a comprehensive process of hearings and made a number of recommendations and observations on foot of that. One of the recommendations I would like to acknowledge, which is referenced in the Bill itself, is that the board of HRI be reduced from 13 to 12 ordinary members plus the chairman. We considered this and having heard, in particular, from the Irish Stable Staff Association that the industry services committee on the board would include the chairman of that committee and a member of the stable staff, who comprise the biggest cohort of people working in the industry. While we all see and hear about the princes, millionaires and everyone else who are involved, the people who do the most on the ground are the employees within the business, and without them the whole industry would not function. It was important to recognise that they would have a seat on that committee and ultimately a seat on the board. It is very important that we acknowledge that through an approach by all members of the committee and others, including Deputy Lawlor, who came in on some of the hearings, of engagement and partnership with the officials we achieved something that makes sense. For the sake of one extra person on the board, it was well worth it.

A couple of other things came up. Regarding the issue of regulatory functions and the Turf Club and the fears that it is being held accountable, it already is and there is already a binding arbitration process in place for any disputes. They are binding it if it goes that far. Thankfully that has not happened too often. Bear in mind that HRI provides €7.1 million of taxpayers' money to the Turf Club. It is not interfered with. There has been some dispute about this, but in reality, if a body is charged with the integrity functions and is receiving funding from the State, if in a hypothetical situation it were to get funding from another source to do the same thing, it does not seem to me to be unreasonable to expect it to account for why it needs the money. This has not happened, but it could happen: that is the provision.

On point to point races, there is no interference with the hunt clubs, except the administrative process of registration, and in reality, under the current legislation, the point to points get €1.5 million, but this is not referenced at any point in the Horse Racing Ireland Bill as it stands. There is no mandate on the HRI to provide it. It is something to bear in mind and we must put these things in context.

With regard to the foal levy, we have had a good bit of representation from a number of owners, who make the point that the biggest number of owners across this country own five mares or fewer. They have proposed a sales levy, on which I have yet to be convinced, but there is one point: the foal levy, as it is constructed, is based on various different levels, so one triggers into a higher levy based on the advertised fee. The tables are very transparent but the advertised fee is the guiding fee, as opposed to the invoice fee.

I do not know whether it is for the Bill itself, for a statutory instrument, or for the HRI to decide this when its new board is formed, but there is merit in saying, as is the case in many other sectors, that one should pay based on the invoiced amount rather than the advertised amount. That removes the ambiguity whereby some people are getting a deal and paying less because they have two or three mares with the same stud owner but they are not being acknowledged for that. Some of the fees seem to be set just marginally above a trigger point, which is a bit of a coincidence. I suppose that is the way it works.

I agree with what Deputy Lawlor said about the Irish Equine Centre. It is like many other semi-stand alone entities in that it needs to be funded properly. People will say when they go to it that there is a health and safety risk down there with the level of clutter and everything else in a building that is not fit for purpose. Provision has to be made for that and a better stream of funding must be secured. They do carry out other functions on behalf of other bodies, including BVD testing for bovines, and they get paid for it, but a proper structure of funding for the Irish equine sector, although it goes beyond the remit of this Bill, is very important.

On funding itself, we have referenced in our report, and it is referenced in the Bill, the whole idea of State funding and support. It is to be welcomed that this has increased over the last two budgets. However, in the long term it is interesting to see some of the figures on the robustness of this industry. The number of owners has dropped significantly, as has the number of people working in it, but attendance at racecourses has been maintained quite well, as has betting. In many aspects, betting has increased, but we are not capturing it. I know the Betting Tax (Amendment) Bill is taking a while to get through, but we have to look long-term at a stand alone funding model for the horse racing industry so that the State has to continue to invest in it. It is too important and there are two many people - 17,000 - working in it to leave it to struggle without that support. There is an alternative if we get it right. I am somewhat disappointed that the Gambling Control Bill will not be completed in the lifetime of this Dáil, because it is comprehensive legislation which deals with, among other matters, betting revenues and betting on- and off-course.

The Betting (Amendment) Act 2015 goes most of the way, particularly for the horse and greyhound sectors, but it is important that we get this finished. I ask the Minister to urge his colleagues to ensure that this important Bill is enacted as quickly as possible.

I would like to record and acknowledge the support that the committee received from both the Library & Research Service and the secretariat in preparing a report. This process should expedite Committee Stage and make it more efficient. Indeed, officials from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine briefed us, both formally and informally, and took our views on board as we progressed, so that by the second time they met us they were well aware of our thinking as a committee, and we were reflecting what the sector's stakeholders had articulated to us during our hearings.

I commend this comprehensive Bill. The Minister and his officials are to be commended on it. It is a vital sector, particularly for rural areas, and one that gives us a good reputation both at home and abroad. It is something that deserves this type of attention to detail.

See this speech in context