Martin Browne (Tipperary, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I commend Deputy Carthy on tabling the amendment and I hope the Government will accept it.

The horse and greyhound industry plays a significant role in my county of Tipperary. Whether it is the small operator with a couple of dogs or horses or the larger operators, the contribution they make to my home county cannot be understated and must be supported. These sectors provide great employment.

When we are asked to approve the expenditure of such an amount of taxpayers' money, we must be sure there is full transparency, not just from the organisations that distribute it, but also from the Department in terms of how the fund is delivered and overseen. It needs to be guaranteed to deliver the social, economic and animal welfare benefits it is supposed to.

It is with these matters in mind that we have submitted the amendment to which Deputy Carthy has referred. I will speak on this shortly. Last year, when a similar amendment was rejected by the Minister, I asked him why he was so opposed to it. That is the purpose of making these contributions today.

Last year I questioned how effective the fund is in supporting the smaller operators in both of these sectors. I pointed out that this was not just my view but also the view expressed to me by those operating in the sectors. I expressed the perception that the money given through the fund does not make its way to the small operators in the manner many believe it should. That question stands.

Figures from last year show that the lion’s share of the horse racing prize fund was shared among a small number of the owners and trainers who could not be described as anything but elite. In the greyhound sector, there is discontent at how private tracks are more or less expected to make their own way in life, and that the level of engagement with them by GRI is minimal and funding is piecemeal. This, of course, affects the smaller operators, who say they do not see the benefits of substantial State funding.

I cannot go any further before discussing the importance of adequate oversight and transparency on the Department’s side when deciding on the fund without taking animal welfare into account. Confidence in the sector hinges upon satisfaction with welfare standards in both horse racing and greyhound racing. The majority of those involved treat their animals with the highest level of welfare standards in mind. Is the Minister confident the manner in which the fund is used is as effective as possible in assisting this? Is he satisfied the board is engaging with stakeholders to the extent those operators would deem adequate on greyhound rehoming for example? When deciding upon the level of funding, what account did the Minister take of the slow pace with which CCTV is installed in stables at racecourses? We need to ensure the level of detail the Minster applies to these matters and a range of others is as firm as the industries and the public in general demand.

My final point relates to the arbitrary way the fund is divided, and the approach the Department has taken in deciding that Horse Racing Ireland gets €72.8 million and Greyhound Racing Ireland €18.2 million. As I said, the 80:20 split seems arbitrary, and I question if the needs of one sector versus the other is taken into account. We in Sinn Féin support the sectors and we want the sectors and the public to have confidence. That is why we are proposing a full review of the Exchequer funding to the fund with a view to examining its social and economic impact and its effectiveness in supporting the development of both sectors and the rural communities to which they contribute. We are also proposing that this be done to examine whether the use of the fund to subsidise prize funds represents best value for money and its effectiveness in ensuring the highest levels of animal welfare standards. This can be done by the Minister reporting to the Dáil within six months of these regulations being adopted.

I earlier asked if the Minister rejects our amendment to outline why he is so opposed to it.

See this speech in context