Shane McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am pleased to bring the Welfare of Greyhounds Bill 2010 before the Dáil and look forward to an informed and constructive debate during the passage of the Bill through this House. The greyhound racing industry is a very important industry in this country responsible for sustaining 11,000 full-time and part-time jobs directly and indirectly, mainly in rural communities. It provides an estimated €500 million into local economies around the tracks which are spread throughout the country. The greyhound breeding industry is also successful, with many greyhounds now running in the UK being Irish bred. Greyhound racing attracts a significant number of continental European visitors to Ireland.

As Members are aware, the Bill arises from the debates last year concerning theDog Breeding Establishments Act 2010which sought to ensure proper standards of animal welfare in dog breeding establishments. During those debates the point was made that it was more appropriate to introduce separate legislation to regulate welfare in the greyhound industry. It was acknowledged that the greyhound industry already had a system of self regulation in place which included certain provisions on welfare.

Following the enactment of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010 it was agreed to introduce separate legislation to regulate the greyhound industry in order to provide a regime for greyhound welfare. The policy objective is to optimise the level of animal welfare in the greyhound industry. While the objective is similar to that of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act, the approach taken differs due to the distinct nature of, and controls applying to, the keeping of greyhounds.

Bord na gCon and the Irish Coursing Club agreed with the need for legalisation to regulate all aspects of welfare throughout the greyhound industry and thus protect this country's reputation in respect of care of greyhounds. Preparation of the Bill has involved wide-ranging consultation with a variety of interested parties, including Departments, Bord na gCon, the Irish Coursing Club, voluntary bodies and animal welfare groups, especially those concerned with dogs. I thank all of those who participated in the consultation process and for their constructive input. I am confident that we have struck an adequate balance accommodating various points of view.

The Irish Coursing Club identifies and registers greyhounds individually in the stud book so as to ensure the integrity of the racing system. Furthermore, the industry already has a system of self regulation in place which can be readily adapted for welfare purposes, which the Bill uses as a starting point. For the purposes of the Bill, greyhounds are defined as all greyhounds entered in the Irish greyhound stud book and they will be covered by the welfare provisions of this Bill. The welfare requirements specified in the Bill on animal keepers to safeguard animals in their care are in addition to the general provisions relating to cruelty in the Protection of Animals Acts 1911 and 1965. Greyhounds that are not registered in the stud book cannot be covered by the scope of the Bill but will continue to be covered by general animal welfare legislation as well as the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010 where relevant.

While the provisions the Bill apply to all greyhounds in the stud book I nevertheless see merit in establishing a register of greyhound breeding establishments. Those are premises at which not less than four greyhound bitches are kept, each of which is more than 15 months old and has been or is being used for breeding. I should make clear however that the scope of the Bill extends to all greyhounds in the racing and coursing industry and not only those found on a premises that is registered as a greyhound breeding establishment under the Bill.

The Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010 on the other hand provides for a hitherto unregulated industry puppy farming with no existing system either on the registration of individual dogs for stud book purposes or the registration of premises on which they are kept. The welfare provisions of the Act apply to dogs on premises registered under the Act.

Deputies will be aware that there is a variety of opinion on any issue involving animal welfare and, in particular, on the welfare of dogs. However in the case of greyhounds there are fewer problems involved than in the business known as puppy farming. While puppy farmers and greyhound breeders are both engaged in breeding activity as a commercial activity, greyhound breeders strive to breed high quality greyhounds to win races and therefore in greyhound breeding, quality is of paramount importance rather than quantity.

In today's debate, I intend to summarise the provisions of the Bill, my overall approach and the details of how the system will work. I will also outline the points of both similarity and difference with the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010. While my Department has responsibility for animal welfare, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is responsible for dog control and the dog control service is operated through the local authorities. I am confident that the provisions for the welfare of greyhounds in the Bill and the extensive powers given to welfare officers will result in a very high standard of welfare for greyhounds. Stewards of the Irish Coursing Club already visit all greyhound breeding premises to register and identify all new litters to ensure the integrity of racing. This Bill provides a legislative basis whereby they can become authorised as welfare officers within the terms of the Bill which will give them powers to inspect all aspect of welfare on such visits and to issue welfare notices where improvements are required.

Local authorities may appoint welfare officers. Therefore I envisage close liaison between personnel from Irish Coursing Club and local authorities. The Bill will form the basis of a co-operative relationship between local authorities, Bord na gCon and the Irish Coursing Club. The legislation requires that reports of inspections or details of welfare notices be notified to the Irish Coursing Club, Bord na gCon and to the relevant local authority.

The Bill grants a wide range of powers to welfare officers and allows them to specify various items in welfare notices. However the provisions will not present any difficulty to individuals who take due cognisance of welfare requirements and who have proper premises and operate their business in co-operation with their local veterinary practice. A crucial aspect of this Bill is that a greyhound bitch will not be allowed to breed until she is 15 months of age, compared to a stipulation of six months in the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010, and also a limit will be placed on the number of litters that a bitch can produce.

The Bill provides that a period of up to three months will be provided from the commencement of the Act for greyhound breeding establishments to be registered. It will be lawful for an existing dog breeding establishment to continue to operate for this period. That will enable a smooth transition to full registration of greyhound breeding establishments.

In line with best practice in any regulatory regime, there is an appropriate scale of regulatory actions which can be taken to ensure compliance. I have provided for some offences for which fines and custodial sentences are possible upon summary conviction and other lesser offences, mainly concerning records or registration, for which only fines or, in some less important cases, fixed payment notices apply.

A provision is necessary to require owners of establishments to co-operate, within reason. There is general need for such a provision and it is particularly important in cases where an establishment operates from the private home of the owner. The draft Bill makes provision, in circumstances where consent of the occupier to enter a dwelling is not forthcoming, for the authorised person to apply to the District Court for a warrant to enter.

I will now outline the main provisions of the Bill. Part 1, preliminary and general, sections 1 to 5, contains the usual provisions of a general nature dealing with such matters as the Short Title and commencement, definitions, service of notifications, notices and documents, expenses of the Minister and the making of regulations. The key definition is that of a "greyhound breeding establishment" which means a premises used, in whole or in part, for breeding greyhounds at which not less than four greyhound bitches are kept, each of which in the fist instance, is more than 15 months old and, in the second instance, has been or is being used for breeding purposes, but does not include a premises at which not less than six bitches, other than greyhound bitches, each of which is more than six months old and is capable of being used for breeding purposes, are also kept.

Under the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010, a registered breeding establishment is defined as a premises with not less than six breeding females. In the Bill however a lower number, four, is used. As greyhounds are more specialist animals than dogs in general it was felt that a lower number of bitches was appropriate to require registration as a breeding establishment under the Bill.

Furthermore, the age limit of 15 months specified in this Bill for a greyhound bitch to be bred is much higher than the six months stipulated in the Dog Breeding Establishments Act. That is dealt with later in the legislation. The provisions have been the subject of intensive, constructive debate and have the support of the Bord na gCon and the Irish Coursing Club.

Part 2, sections 6 to 10, deal with welfare generally. Section 6 requires the publication of codes of practice for welfare with the consent of the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. I have also required that such codes be published in draft format on the Internet to allow for feedback prior to finalisation and publication on the Internet.

Section 7 provides for the welfare standards of greyhounds in terms of accommodation, food and drink, exercise, health and safety. It is important to note that this section applies to all greyhounds irrespective of whether they are on the premises of a registered breeding establishment. This is an important difference between this Bill and the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2010, which applies to dogs on registered premises only. As I have mentioned previously, this bill is building on an existing and effective regulatory system and will underpin the welfare of all registered greyhounds.

Section 8 provides for regulations regarding welfare and related matters. These build upon the general duty of care and codes of practice and will allow greater detail to be specified. Section 9 provides for the identification of greyhounds. I have allowed for both the traditional tattooing method and for microchipping. Greyhounds are individually identified by tattooing for registration in the stud book maintained by the ICC, as this is vital for the integrity of industry. As tattooing has a long-standing tradition, it is not necessary to require breeders to change their methodology at this stage. The important thing is that every greyhound pup is uniquely identified. The method is of less importance. In contrast, the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2010 deals with a sector in which individual pups in the dog breeding establishments concerned have hitherto not been required to be identified by any method. In that situation, microchipping was considered an appropriate method of identification.

Section 10 contains a requirement to notify the sale or transfer of greyhounds, which is important to allow for traceability and responsibility by owners. Both the person selling the greyhound and the new owner are required to notify the ICC of the change of ownership. The owner is also required to notify the ICC of the death of a greyhound. The registered owner is at all times responsible for the greyhound's welfare.

Section 11 prescribes that a greyhound bitch cannot be mated under 15 months of age. This is considerably higher than the minimum breeding age of six months specified in the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010. This section also restricts the number of litters that a greyhound bitch can produce to six, as there are welfare concerns with greyhounds carrying excessive numbers of litters. However, a further two litters may be permitted under veterinary certification. The ICC will not be permitted to register litters born to greyhounds in contravention of these requirements and consequently such greyhounds will not be permitted to race or be used in coursing events.

Section 12 provides for the establishment and maintenance of a register of greyhound breeding establishments. These are premises with four or more greyhound bitches over 15 months of age that have been or are being used for breeding. This is lower than the number of breeding bitches specified in the Dog Breeding Establishments Act, which stipulates that premises with six or more breeding bitches must be registered. The ICC may refuse to register a premises for a variety of reasons: if the application is not in order, the applicant is in breach of the Act or the club is of the opinion that the premises is not suitable for operation as a greyhound breeding establishment. Each registered greyhound breeding establishment will receive a registration certificate which must be prominently displayed. There will be a grace period of three months following commencement of the Bill to allow existing establishments to register.

As I pointed out earlier, the existence of the ICC's stud book means that there is already a record of all greyhounds in the industry. This legislation applies to all greyhounds registered in the studbook, irrespective of whether they are kept in registered greyhound breeding establishments. The maintenance of a register of greyhound breeding establishments facilitates greater control and allows resources to be directed at larger premises or in a manner the enforcement authorities see as most appropriate.

Section 13 states that if the ICC intends to refuse registration of a premises or make the registration subject to conditions, the applicant must be informed in writing by the ICC. The applicant has 14 days to make representations to the ICC on the matter. Section 14 further provides for procedures whereby a decision of the ICC to refuse registration of a breeding establishment or to attach special conditions to the registration of a breeding establishment may be appealed to the District Court. The District Court can order that the establishment be registered, set conditions for registration or affirm the refusal.

Section 15 provides for removal of greyhound breeding establishments from the register. This can be done by applying for an order of the District Court. The section sets out conditions which the District Court may impose. Reasons for removing an establishment from the register include conviction of the operator of on offence involving cruelty to animals, or an offence under this Act, the Control of Dogs Act 1986 or the Protection of Animals Acts 1911 and 1965; or the breaching of a welfare notice. A person who contravenes an order under this section shall be guilty of an offence. Section 16 makes it an offence to operate an unregistered greyhound breeding establishment except during the lead-in period of three months or where an application for registration as a registered breeding establishment is being considered by the ICC.

Section 17 provides for the appointment of welfare officers by local authorities, Bord na gCon and the ICC. This section also provides for reappointment and termination of the appointment of such officers. It also allows that, in certain instances, only some of the powers of the officer may be exercised.

Section 18 sets out the functions of welfare officers, including the power at reasonable times to enter and inspect premises where the officer has reasonable grounds for believing that greyhounds are kept. A welfare officer cannot enter a dwelling without the consent of the occupier or, failing consent, without a warrant issued by the District Court. The welfare officer can inspect and take copies of records kept on the premises and can require the owner, operator or employees to answer relevant questions. Owners must allow welfare officers to inspect greyhounds and provide information about the greyhounds' identities. The welfare officer can also take samples of feed or drink, search a vehicle or container and remove equipment or documents. This section also provides that the welfare officer may be accompanied by a member of the Garda Síochána.

Section 19 deals with the issuing of search warrants. A welfare officer or member of the Garda Síochána may apply to the District Court for a warrant to carry out an inspection on a premises in which the welfare officer has reasonable grounds for believing that an offence has been committed under the Act or where entry has been refused.

Section 20 deals with the issuing of welfare notices. A welfare notice can be issued where a welfare officer is of the opinion that there is a contravention of the Act or where a premises or vehicle poses or is likely to pose a threat to a greyhound's health or welfare. Welfare notices must state the grounds on which the officer forms the opinion. The notice may be served on persons in charge of greyhounds themselves, persons in charge of establishments or premises where greyhounds are being traded, bred, trained raced or coursed, or persons in charge of vehicles transporting greyhounds. Such notices may require a wide range of actions in the interests of the welfare of greyhounds. Examples include requiring veterinary advice or treatment or the provision of food or drink of specified quantity and at specified intervals. The notice can specify the numbers of greyhounds that may be kept in a particular accommodation. It can also require, upon the advice of a veterinarian, the cessation of breeding or that a greyhound be disposed of or destroyed in a specified manner. A person who does not comply within a reasonable time has committed an offence.

Section 21 deals with appeals against welfare notices. A person on whom a welfare notice has been served may appeal within seven days to the District Court. The judge may affirm the notice, revoke the notice or revoke the notice and order the person concerned to comply with certain directions. Section 22 provides that where a welfare officer has inspected a premises or served a welfare notice, he or she must within seven days send a report of the inspection or a copy of the welfare notice to Bord na gCon, the ICC and the relevant local authority.

Section 23 provides, following veterinary examination, for immediate veterinary treatment or humane destruction of a greyhound which is in pain, distress or an acute state of neglect. Obviously it is regrettable but necessary to provide for this, but I hope it is a power that most welfare officers will never be called upon to implement. The cost of doing so can be recovered from the owner of the greyhound as a simple contract debt in court.

Section 24 makes it an offence to forge registration documentation or knowingly provide forged documentation or altered registration material with intent to defraud or deceive. Section 25, which concerns obstruction, makes it an offence to obstruct a garda or welfare officer or fail or refuse to comply with a requirement under section 18, which deals with the functions of a welfare officer, or section 19, which refers to the issuing of a search warrant.

Section 26 concerns penalties and proceedings. Class A fines, currently defined as not exceeding €5,000, can be applied on summary conviction for offences concerning notification of transfer of ownership under section 10(6), providing false or misleading information in an application for registration under section 12(17), failure to display registration under section 12(18) or failure to surrender a registration certificate when required to do so under section 15(7). This section also provides for class A fines and up to six months' imprisonment on summary conviction for more major offences, including offences relating to welfare, breaching restrictions on breeding, operating an unregistered premises, failure to comply with a welfare notice, forgery or obstruction of welfare officers. Cases can be taken by Bord na gCon, the Irish Coursing Club, the local authority or the Garda Síochána. Fines shall be paid to the relevant body taking the case.

I had representations from those involved in enforcement, some of whom felt that all fines should belong to their organisation even where the case was taken by another organisation. However, I felt this was inappropriate. This section, as drafted, will be the best way to ensure an active and robust approach to regulation.

Section 27 provides that a fixed-payment-notice fine can be issued for between €250 and €1,000, which falls due within 28 days. These can be issued where a welfare officer or a member of the Garda Síochána has reasonable grounds for believing there has been an offence concerning notification of transfer of ownership, provision of false or misleading information in an application for registration, a failure to display a registration certificate or failure to surrender a registration certificate where required to do so. There will be no prosecution if payment is made within the 28 days.

Section 28 states the functions of the Irish Coursing Club may be performed by the secretary of the club.

Section 29 states the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010 does not apply to premises registered as a greyhound-breeding establishment under this Act.

I look forward to engaging on these provisions. I commend the Bill to the House.

Michael Moynihan (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Barry Cowen.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Michael Moynihan (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome this legislation and commend the former Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith, for his work in preparing it. The Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party also did much work on it with particular contributions from former Deputies John Cregan and Bobby Aylward. Various meetings were held with the former environment Minister, John Gormley, who was spearheading legislation in this area of animal welfare. To be frank and honest, he neither had an interest nor a clue in what was proposed. The nonsense surrounding his legislation beggared belief.

This legislation, however, has been drafted after consultations with all sectors involved in the greyhound industry. The industry's importance cannot be overstated, as it is vital to the rural economy providing employment which certainly cannot be scoffed at these days. Increasingly, policymakers in Ireland and in other jurisdictions scoff at rural-based industries as being somewhat backward. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is important to acknowledge the contribution these industries, particularly the greyhound industry, make to the rural economy.

Everyone involved in the greyhound industry is good at maintaining high standards of animal welfare. Generations of families involved in the industry would not have survived in it unless they had the best interests of the greyhound's welfare at heart. The notion some of them do not needs to be rebutted at every opportunity. Those involved in the industry and coursing clubs are genuine, decent and honourable people, providing employment and entertainment and maintaining animal welfare standards second to none. Those involved in greyhound breeding take pride in the animals' rearing, training and racing.

The greyhound industry has provided much employment in rural areas. The State has always acknowledged this and encouraged the industry. In May, for example, there were discussions about the possibility of exporting greyhound racing to China. Across the world, Ireland is seen as one of the great providers and having high animal welfare standards in its greyhound industry.

Sometimes this is not acknowledged at home, however. Last year, there was a huge debate in rural areas concerning the introduction of puppy farming legislation. The nonsense coming from certain quarters – what rural communities would call the Dublin 4 mindset – beggared belief. I hope this does not happen with this legislation.

It is estimated that each greyhound track provides up to €500,000 to its local area each year, a huge amount of money for many small rural locations with tracks. These tracks also provide entertainment in rural areas. While attendance at the tracks has dropped a little because of the drop in disposable income, we must continue to encourage the industry.

Under this legislation the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will take control of greyhound welfare. The Minister of State outlined the powers conferred on animal welfare officers by the legislation but stated it was unlikely they would be used because of the high welfare standards already adhered to in the industry. We must acknowledge the industry's great strengths in this regard which have been in place over generations.

The Welfare of Greyhounds Bill 2011 is a follow-on to the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010. Prior to this, the industry was governed by the Greyhound Industry Act 1958. We must acknowledge the voluntary contributions people made in Bord na gCon and the Irish Coursing Club. Many of them have been attacked from certain quarters. It is up to those who acknowledge these people's contribution to stand up for them and point out that their sports are completely legitimate. For far too long certain negative sides of the industry have been highlighted in the media. During the Celtic tiger, the media scoffed at the traditional structures and systems in rural areas, seeing them more as backwoods.

The Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, outlined the provisions in the Bill. He also outlined the consultation that took place in order to ensure there was buy-in from all sectors in respect of the legislation. As a result of this process, it has not merely been a case of the Department stipulating what should happen but rather those in the various sectors have been involved and had an input. In the context of ensuring the Bill is passed by the House, we must consider the aspects of the industry which have proven to be of major benefit to rural communities. The Minister of State has been to the fore in arguing against those who would have scoffed at this industry and also at certain of the sports which are pursued in rural communities.

I had a discussion with a number of individuals last evening in respect of both the greyhound and tourism industries. Rural communities, in particular, have issued brochures which highlight the attractions on offer in their localities for people coming here from abroad or for citizens of this country who wish - perhaps for the first time in a long period - to holiday at home.

Some great benefit nights have been held around greyhound race meetings and huge amounts of money have been raised for voluntary and community organisations. When people attend such events they acknowledge the charity or whatever they are supporting, in the first instance. However, they also acknowledge that what is occurring is both a sport and a source of entertainment. Those who are not so well informed tend to focus on the less than 1% of negative aspects relating to the industry and to the traditions that have been built around it. We must ensure we at all times portray the 99.9% of positive aspects relating to the industry. We should not shrink from our responsibility in this regard. People should not be afraid to proclaim that this is a wonderful industry in which some excellent individuals are involved.

Generations of people have given their services to the greyhound industry. There are those who will state that certain families have made money out of the industry. I do not believe anyone has become a multimillionaire as a result of his or her involvement with it. However, successive generations have given a commitment to the industry and certain individuals may have struck it lucky with one or two dogs.

In the context of tourism, we should be trying to sell not only this industry but also many of the other rural pursuits in which people engage. Many of these pursuits have been neglected but they can give rise to huge added value for farms etc. Indeed, the greyhound industry has brought about massive added value for successive generations. We must focus on the positive aspects relating to rural communities. These aspects have been neglected as a result of the country enjoying too much prosperity. We must return to fundamental principles and promote those traditional industries which have stood the test of time. These industries do not relate to information technology, nor do they involve bringing in huge multinational companies etc. However, as the Minister of State indicated, they are responsible for sustaining 11,000 jobs. That is something at which people should not scoff.

Last year the House passed the Dog Breeding Establishments Act, which relates to puppy farming. When we were in the process of debating that legislation, I visited the puppy farms in my locality and discovered that they are operating to the highest standards. These facilities would not be able to survive if they did not operate in such a way, particularly as they export the animals they raise to the UK and elsewhere. Those who run them are aware that animal welfare must be at the top of their list of priorities. They would not be able to survive if the position were otherwise. It is important that, in this debate and in the context of any public pronouncements which may be made, we acknowledge that the owners and operators of puppy farms are experts at what they do.

I wish to refer to the aspect of this debate which relates to farmers being the custodians of the land, the environment etc. and criticisms regarding practices that have been lost over time. By and large, those in agriculture have acted as custodians and have passed on a great deal. We must move away from the negative and acknowledge what has been achieved. The coursing clubs, Bord na gCon and others have brought about massive developments in their industry since the first Act relating to it was introduced in the 1950s.

Last year, people were concerned that the greyhound industry would be lumped in with dog breeding establishments and that aspersions would be cast upon it, and on the excellent work that has been done within it, as a result. I am glad that, as a result of the great work done by various Members of the Houses, this legislation has been brought forward and that the greyhound industry is being dealt with on a separate basis. It is extremely important to acknowledge the strengths of the industry.

It is vital that we should reassess our values and reconsider the position with regard to many of the things that have been lost or neglected. The industries to which I have been referring are indigenous and the jobs relating to them will not go elsewhere as a result of changes in corporation tax or whatever. These industries are located in the heart of rural communities and they provide employment for families and a wide variety of other individuals. It is important, therefore, that we should reassess and, indeed, champion them. There are exciting possibilities for the greyhound industry, particularly, as I stated earlier, in the context of discussions regarding the exporting of animals to China and elsewhere. We should research the possibilities that exist for this and other industries.

I wholeheartedly welcome the Bill and the provisions it contains. I commend the previous Minister and the current Minister of State on the work they have done. I am delighted the legislation has come this far. It is extremely important that every opportunity be taken to highlight both the strengths of the greyhound industry and the fact that almost everyone involved therein operates to the highest standards in respect of the welfare of animals. We should not accept arguments to the effect that the latter is not the case. People involved in the greyhound industry would not be able to continue to operate if the welfare of the animals they rear, train and race was not their first priority.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Like Deputy Moynihan, I welcome the Bill. I pay tribute to and commend those in my party and others on the manner in which they sought to separate this Bill from the Dog Breeding Establishments Act sponsored by the former Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Mr. John Gormley. As a result of their actions, the former Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the current Minister of State were able to draft and bring forward this Bill to regulate the greyhound industry.

I do not wish to cast aspersions on the Dog Breeding Establishments Act, the purpose of which is to regulate an industry that had come under much public scrutiny. It is only right and proper that the necessary measures relating to animal welfare and other issues were given statutory effect in that Act. Those who, in the context of the Act, portrayed themselves to be maintaining the right sort of standards have been proven to be correct. This is despite the fact that everything has been delayed until the introduction of the Bill before the House.

The Bill underpins the significant welfare programmes that exist within the industry and that are maintained by Bord na gCon - the Irish Greyhound Board - and the Irish Coursing Club. Greyhound welfare is the business of everybody involved in the industry, whether it is the guy who rears a couple of pups or those who regulate or work in the industry. If we do not have welfare at the heart of everything that is done in the industry, nobody will come to watch the racing and participate in the industry and no tourists will come to the venues. This will have an impact on betting and a significant impact on the public purse as a result. The new legal standards contained in the Bill will ensure that our leading role in this industry worldwide will be maintained and protected and will that we have the legal structure in place to pursue those who do not adhere to the standards we aspire to maintain. While there are few of these, it is necessary to have the legal standing in place to ensure those who do not maintain the required standards are weeded out and held to account.

As mentioned by the Minister and by my colleague, the Government support of €5.5 million and the bookmakers' fund provide the funding and the basis from which the industry operates. For this level of support, some 10,000 jobs are delivered, mainly in rural areas. If these jobs are lost, they will be lost forever and those workers will never be able to transfer to other industries as they do not have the capacity to surpass the significant skill gap. The former Minister, Deputy Brendan Smith, published this Bill in 2010 with the purpose of regulating the level of welfare in the greyhound industry and to complement the Dog Breeding Establishments Act. The approach taken differs in some areas to that Act and has regard to the distinctive nature and controls applying to the keeping of registered greyhounds.

The greyhound industry already has a system of self regulation in place whereas the Dog Breeding Establishments Act provided for a whole new system of regulation around puppy farming, which had been unregulated until then. While it was agreed that the greyhound industry had a higher level of welfare overall, it was agreed the voluntary system within the industry needed to be put on a legislative basis. Last year, Fine Gael and Sinn Féin voted against the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009, as they wanted to have the greyhound industry removed entirely from the Bill. Following the passage of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010, it was agreed between the then Taoiseach and the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, to introduce separate legislation to regulate greyhounds within the context of the Greyhound Industry Act 1958.

Today, Fine Gael is bringing in the very measures it opposed in Opposition only a few months ago. The Minister referred to the extensive consultations that took place with all interested parties during the period of the previous Government, such as the IGB, ICC and representatives from the welfare sector. However, before the election Fine Gael constantly criticised what it said was a complete lack of consultation. I am prepared to forgive and forget. Fine Gael is welcome to the masses.

Some key areas of the Bill will enhance the welfare of greyhounds through the regulation of breeding establishments. The Bill in all its parts looks at the welfare of greyhounds, the establishment of breeding establishments and the provision of welfare officers appointed from local authorities.

The Irish Coursing Club identifies and registers greyhounds individually in the stud book so as to ensure the integrity of the racing system. The industry already has a system of self-regulation in place which can be readily adapted for welfare purposes, which this Bill uses as a starting point. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Bill applying to greyhounds in the stud book, there is merit in the establishment of a register of greyhound breeding establishments. These are premises at which not less than four greyhound bitches are kept, each of which is more than 15 months old. The scope of the Bill extends to all greyhounds in the racing and coursing industry, not only those found on a premises that is registered as a greyhound breeding establishment under the Bill. We are confident the provisions for the welfare of greyhounds in this Bill and the extensive powers given to welfare officers will result in a high standard of welfare for greyhounds. The Bill provides a period of up to three months from the commencement of the Act for greyhound breeding establishments to be registered.

We welcome the Bill, the methodology behind it and the manner in which it cements a self regulating industry which was under the jurisdiction of the ICC and IGB heretofore. Extensive extra legal powers are now given to ensure we can root out those who do not apply the accepted standards to which we have grown accustomed.

I would like to move on to the whole area of the greyhound history. Deputy Moynihan pointed out the fantastic input the industry has, not only in rural life by way of being a hobby or augmenting the incomes of small farms but as an industry with a huge impact in the area of employment. There are approximately 10,000 people employed directly and indirectly in the industry. The wage bill generated is estimated to be €207 million and the tax contribution from this employment is estimated at €21 million. Employment in the industry is spread across the country. The regional dispersion is reflected in the spread of 17 tracks in the country and the ownership of greyhounds in every county. The race meetings generate significant levels of expenditure and economic activity every week in rural towns, while greyhound owners make a significant contribution to economic activity through the purchase of various goods and services to maintain ownership. The industry generates activity and employment in rural areas which would not happen in the absence of this important and indigenous industry. Between 2002 and 2010, some 18,200 race meetings were held in the Republic, attended by 10.25 million people.

Funding of the industry has suffered during the downturn. The contribution from the horse and greyhound fund has declined significantly over the past three years. The contribution peaked at €15.3 million in 2008, but in 2010 had fallen by 22% to just under €12 million. Despite the significant decline of €1.7 million in funding, prize money grant structures were maintained in 2009. It was only in 2010 that the prize money grant structure reflected the decline in funding which commenced in 2009. There was a further decline of €1.7 million in funding from the horse and greyhound fund in 2010. The prize money grant per race represents very good value given the economic contribution of the sector and the level of economic activity involved in getting greyhounds born, reared, trained and ready to race. In 2009, 21,300 greyhound races were held in Ireland. The average prize money grant was just €355 per race. This small level of contribution per race represents good value for money, given the economic and financial contribution that owners competing in that race provide to the economy in getting their greyhound ready for the race. The total cost to greyhound owners each year of keeping the greyhound pipeline in operation is approximately €244 million. This is a significant amount of expenditure and much of it is injected into local economies, supporting thousands of jobs.

The Irish Greyhound Board delivered a comprehensive and impressive financial performance in recent years, despite the changed economic climate. Costs have been cut and greater efficiencies achieved and the industry has been strongly supported. It has managed to deliver higher profits, more capital development and higher prize money between 2007 and 2010 than in the preceding four-year period, despite the difficult economic environment. In order to sustain and grow the industry in future, proper, sustainable funding mechanisms must be put in place. Some of this funding will come from betting channels. Without adequate and sustainable funding, the industry will struggle to sustain itself, its current contribution to the economy will suffer and its enormous potential will not be realised. The industry makes a significant, economic impact across Ireland and the potential is considerable.

Ireland is regarded as a world class player in dog breeding and there must be significant potential to exploit this further. Greyhounds can become an even more significant export industry than has been the case, although already quite significant, and the Irish industry model can be transferred to other countries. That aspect is being investigated and developed. It is something I support. The domestic tourism potential is also greater than envisaged at present.

With regard to the exportation of our outstanding model, which is sought and admired by many others worldwide, the greyhound welfare aspect of the industry is its lifeblood. Without the right welfare system in place and adherence thereto, the industry would not be the thriving one that it is and can be. This being the case, who is to say we cannot seek to have our mechanisms, standards and procedures in place in countries to which we seek to export our model? It is only with these in place that we would export the model and that the industry would become self-sustaining and generate greater profits than have been generated heretofore, even against the current economic backdrop.

I ask the Minister of State to support all the efforts being made to seek to export our model, which is the envy of many others. Were our model sold to the right countries and interested parties, it would represent a huge net gain to this country's coffers and economic viability. The potential is considerable and I hope we do not hide behind scaremongering correspondence such as the e-mails I have received. I know the industry and grew up with it and realise its potential. I grew up realising its impact on rural communities and its great social benefit. It has the potential to be exported and nobody should stand in the way of the Department, the Irish Coursing Club and the Irish Greyhound Board in exploring this to the utmost. It would be a shame if the Minister of State were blocked by someone casting groundless aspersions.

I ask the Minister of State not to let us down in this regard. I ask him to return to the House to outline progress in this area. I commend him on bringing forward the Bill as devised by the previous Government. I ask all Members to support it and to take note of what is said in the House.

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies McLellan and Stanley.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a truism that a society can be judged on how badly or well it protects and supports its weakest and most vulnerable. This applies to the welfare of animals as much as to the welfare of citizens. I am sorry the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, is not a Minister for humanities because we need a welfare Bill for humans in addition to one for a greyhounds and other animals.

Sinn Féin welcomes this Bill and will support the Government in ensuring it is passed. While I was not a member of the previous Administration, I believe the discussion today shows Sinn Féin was wise and correct when it called for a separation of the Welfare of Greyhounds Bill from the general dog breeding establishments and animal welfare legislation. This course of action has been proven to be wise.

Deputy Cowen referred to the very good work being done in the greyhound racing and coursing industry. It is a good industry and I have no doubt that 90% of the people involved treat their animals well and have animal welfare high on their list of priorities. Equally, however, I have no doubt that a percentage of those involved are treating their animals very poorly. Humans being human, a percentage certainly regard the industry as an opportunity to make money, at whatever cost. This legislation gets the balance right between making it easy for those involved in the industry to do the right thing and making it costly if they are caught doing the wrong thing. It is good legislation and Sinn Féin will support it.

This week a dog breeder in Lisburn was found guilty of putting dead puppies through a mincer to feed his ferrets. Given that the establishment in question was an illegal breeding establishment, this legislation on its own would not have prevented the incident, but the story shows the lengths to which some will go and the extent to which they disregard animal welfare if their only motivation is profit.

Ireland has a poor record on greyhound welfare. I am not referring solely to the greyhounds used in the sports industry. At the peak of the industry, approximately 25,000 greyhounds were born in Ireland every year. This is a huge number by comparison with the number of births in other countries. Typically, only 80 greyhounds were adopted into Irish homes per year and between 430 and 450 were adopted into European homes at the end of their racing lives. The worrying point is that 14,000 greyhounds disappear annually from the Irish radar. This is and should be a cause of serious concern. Not all the greyhounds to which I refer were used for racing; many were bred outside the industry, allegedly as pets, and were often used for illegal racing.

The greyhound racing industry is often regarded as difficult to regulate because it is a tough, competitive business in which it is hard to make a profit. Greyhound bitches are often made breed time and again in the chase to find a champion. One can understand why breeders would do this but not every greyhound born will be a champion and not every pup born will make its breeder, trainer or owner a lot of money. I welcome the clause in the Bill that will ensure greyhounds can only produce six litters or, in exceptional circumstances, two in addition where a veterinary inspector certifies that the pregnancy and birth do not present a risk to the health or welfare of the bitch. Such controls are needed.

I welcome the fact that under this legislation, greyhounds cannot be bred until the age of 15 months. This is a necessary provision. The success, or otherwise, of the legislation will depend on the extent to which adherence is monitored. The suitability of accommodation, food, drink, exercise and bedding materials in greyhound breeding establishments will have to be monitored. Monitoring should be done in a way that encourages people to do the right thing and that strictly penalises those who are not doing the right thing by the greyhounds.

Sandra McLellan (Cork East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Welfare of Greyhounds Bill. I acknowledge the contribution made by the vast majority of those involved in greyhound racing and coursing to the sporting and cultural landscape in Ireland, and in rural Ireland in particular, and to the welfare of dogs. They provide employment, sport and recreation for thousands of people and they have great dedication to their sport. The vast majority have fantastic commitment to the welfare of their animals. The familiar scene of local greyhound trainers out with their dogs in the very early hours of the morning is one repeated in villages, towns and cities throughout the island.

With my arts spokesperson hat on, I recall feature films such as "Man About Dog" and "The Mighty Celt" portraying the unique relationship between Irish greyhound enthusiasts and their dogs. We have, without doubt, a strong and proud tradition of breeding and training greyhounds for competition in Ireland. However, internationally we have seen cases taken against those who have committed immense cruelty to greyhounds. In one instance in 2007, a builder's merchant was charged at Durham Magistrates' Court in England with killing thousands of healthy greyhounds that were too slow to race.

Animal rights campaigners claim Spanish hunters hang, drown and poison 50,000 greyhounds every year. I am not aware of any comparable cases in Ireland, but there is no doubt that because of the competitive nature of the greyhound business some greyhounds, predominantly slower and older dogs, are particularly vulnerable to maltreatment and neglect.

I welcome many of the provisions contained in the Bill, including the requirement for the formal registration of breeding establishments, the increase in the minimum breeding age, and, in particular, the restrictions on the number of times a female greyhound can be bred.

We must not forget that the greyhound industry is just that, an industry. It is aimed at producing pedigree dogs in a very competitive environment where the working life of a top-class greyhound is very short. As legislators, we have a responsibility to protect the welfare of these animals. The Bill provides for this, but only if it is implemented and enforced. I welcome the extension of powers for welfare officers from Bord na gCon, the Irish Coursing Club and local authorities which will enable them to issue welfare notices and, where necessary, to seize greyhounds.

An important issue concerning the welfare of greyhounds which I feel is missed, and perhaps it is beyond the scope of this Bill, is that of the welfare of retired greyhounds. While I understand the certain degree of protection provided for under the general provisions relating to cruelty in the Protection of Animals Acts 1911 and 1965, it is important to stress that greyhound handlers must accept responsibility for the welfare of animals after their days of competition are over. We must acknowledge and commend the work of the Retired Greyhound Trust which focuses on the adoption and re-homing of greyhounds when they finish racing. In 2011, it launched a campaign, which is ongoing, to promote greyhounds as pets. I know quite a few people who have greyhounds as pets and they are a lovely animal to have as a pet, particularly for those with children.

Notwithstanding the current financial constraints, the Government must support projects and initiatives like this if the welfare of greyhounds is to be really protected. Likewise, the Government must ensure that the spirit and detail of the Bill are implemented. This is something that will not necessarily cost in monetary terms but it will require a step-change in the relationship of the relevant authorities with greyhound breeders and handlers. A thorough education campaign will be necessary to ensure that breeders, handlers and the authorities themselves are aware of the latest standards and regulations.

I commend the Bill. If there is follow-through on its provisions it has the potential to be successful.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I support the Bill, as does my party. Sinn Féin believes it is unacceptable that animals may be kept in poor conditions not conducive to their welfare, and it is unfortunate that due to the actions of a very small minority Ireland has a poor reputation with regard to the welfare of greyhounds.

In recent months, I have received multiple representations from constituents in Laois-Offaly regarding the issue of exporting greyhounds to China. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food refused to sign off on this proposal and the Minister stated Bord na gCon has dropped it. However, there is still a lack of clarity on whether greyhounds will be able to be exported to China via a third state. Regardless, it is unfortunate that the Bill will have no impact on this particular issue.

While the public has quite rightly been vocal about the possible export of greyhounds to China, we must be aware that some in Ireland are no strangers to inflicting cruelty on these creatures. As has been stated, most owners look after their dogs extremely well. I recall a BBC report from a few years ago which detailed the prosecution of several people after animal welfare officers found dozens of greyhounds being transported in terrible conditions between this State and Spain. In this case, 36 animals were discovered in cramped conditions without sufficient food or water for their 38 hour journey to Barcelona. According to the report, the 36 dogs were placed in 20 cages and travelled for 18 hours by ferry and then 20 by road, stopping for a water break only once. Four of the dogs were taken out on a stop in France to be exercised while the rest remained caged for the 750 mile journey in 40° heat. The cage sizes meant the majority of dogs could not stand at their natural height and as they shared a cage they could not sit or lie at the same time. It is beyond me that anyone would consider it acceptable to treat an animal in this manner. I hope the legislation will go some way towards addressing this type of appalling treatment of animals.

I commend the valuable work of the greyhound rescue associations operating nationwide. These organisations work on a voluntary basis to provide shelter for dogs that have been discarded by some owners like yesterday's rubbish. I applaud their recent initiative to promote greyhounds as pets. It will capture the public imagination and it signals that greyhounds are not different from other dogs such as labradors and spaniels and do not deserve to be treated cruelly.

The Bill makes provision to ensure dog breeding establishments which do not meet minimum requirements will be forced to close, with the result that new and remaining establishments will provide a better environment for dogs. I hope there will not be a delay in ending the practice of allowing people engaged in cruelty to continue their business. Furthermore, I hope local authorities will not be inhibited from carrying out their duties as a result of the cost of enforcement and reductions in their budgets. I ask the Minister of State to pay sufficient attention to the work done by local authorities in policing cruelty to animals and monitoring stray dogs. Local authority staff, including housing staff such as tenant liaison officers, have prevented cruelty to dogs, horses and other animals. I ask the Minister to work with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on this matter. I urge him to issue the commencement order and ensure the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2010 is signed as soon as this legislation has completed all Stages.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My Technical Group colleague, Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan, has asked me to apologise on her behalf as she is unfortunately unable to contribute to the debate. Like me, she welcomes all initiatives that promote animal welfare and looks forward to the day when coursing, fur farming, fox hunting and all such activities are banned. All these so-called sports have, at their core, deliberate and wilful cruelty to animals, including death. Deputy O'Sullivan also makes the point that while she would welcome the Bill if it genuinely tackled the issue of greyhound welfare, she is slightly concerned that Bord na gCon has expressed support for the legislation. This is especially the case given, as Deputy Stanley noted, the role Bord na gCon played in the proposal to export greyhounds to China. It is appalling that Ireland could be involved in such an activity. I hope the plans to export greyhounds to China will be stalled indefinitely.

There is no doubt that attention must be paid to the welfare of greyhounds. While it would also make economic sense for the greyhound industry to give priority to welfare issues, sadly the reality suggests otherwise. When the lobby was under way to exclude greyhounds from the dog breeding establishments legislation, it was argued that the Greyhound Industry Act 1958 was sufficient to protect, regulate and monitor the welfare of greyhounds. We must examine this argument more closely. Since the 1958 Act was introduced, a large number of greyhounds have suffered appalling treatment in this country. The argument that the legislation in question protects greyhounds belies the reality.

I propose to cite some examples of cases involving cruelty. There is not a county which has not come to the fore as a result of a scandal involving the mistreatment of greyhounds. In many cases, greyhounds are kept in poor conditions, confined to sheds or barns without light and proper heating and do not receive proper care and attention. Many have been found lying malnourished on concrete, having been denied adequate care. The welfare of animals, specifically greyhounds which do not make the grade, is secondary to the commercial side of the greyhound industry.

Statistics showing that 10,000 dogs were put down last year are an indictment of society. A large number of the 27 dogs put down daily are greyhounds which breeders do not want because they do not make the grade. It is indicative of the inadequacy of regulation that so many of the greyhounds in Britain are bred in Ireland. The media regularly reports on cases of mistreatment of animals and the misuse of greyhounds. In 2010, for instance, the media highlighted a case in which greyhounds, being a relatively tame breed of dog, were used as bait in County Tipperary during the training phase for fighting dogs to give them a taste for blood and practice in fighting. We have also learned of instances in virtually every county of mutilated and abandoned dogs being found wandering the streets with weights tied around their necks, having had their ears cut off to avoid identification.

While wanton cruelty is one aspect of the multi-million euro greyhound industry, another aspect of the business is the use of drugs. A significant number of greyhounds have tested positive for ecstasy, cocaine and viagra, which causes deep trauma for the dogs in question. Abandoned dogs and the use of drugs are aspects of the greyhound business which provide a different picture of the glowing accounts one hears from spokespersons of the industry.

The number of greyhounds being bred in Ireland gives an idea of what the business involves. On average, 35,000 greyhound pups are born in 4,500 litters every year. Of the 35,000 greyhounds born in 2007, only 23,000 were earmarked and tattooed 16 weeks later and only 20,000 of these were given identity cards, making them, if one likes, eligible for racing. What happened to the greyhounds which did not appear on any books or in a race? Clearly, a large number of the 20,000 dogs with identity cards did not make the grade and were discarded on the basis that they did not have commercial value. There have been shocking and repeated cases of vicious mutilations being carried out, the most popular method being the removal of dogs' ears to avoid identification before being abandoned. This practice has been carried out using battery acid, blow torches and other means as people try to avoid the identification of the dog. In other cases, dogs have had their throats cut or have been dumped in rivers having had weights tied to them. These activities have taken place in every county, albeit in some counties more than others, despite the protection of the 1958 Act. That such cases have occurred serves as a warning and demonstrates a clear deficit in the legislation. It also vindicates the position that legislation alone is insufficient to deal with animal welfare and shows that enforcement needs to be examined.

The Bill states that greyhound keepers and those involved in handling greyhounds shall not cause or permit unnecessary suffering or injury to a greyhound. This is a welcome provision, on which all Deputies should be able to agree. The shortcoming in the legislation is that it relies largely on self-regulation, with the greyhound industry responsible for registering and monitoring the new register for breeding establishments and so forth. It is also under the supervision of the Irish Coursing Club and the local authorities. A huge number of organisations have a role so there is potential for a lack of clarity about who really has the overall responsibility. It is unclear in the legislation.

I welcome the fact that the local authorities have a role in this, but that must be weighed against the massive reduction in resources with which local authorities are operating. There is a contradiction in piling more responsibility onto the authorities at the same time as their resources are being cut. Given that the recruitment ban does not allow them to replace the staff they have lost, how are they expected to take on this responsibility in the serious way that is necessary? I do not see how they can. My experience with how local authorities deal with stray dogs and so forth is that they are already stretched to the limit and can just about maintain the status quo, not to mention take on another serious function in terms of regulating the greyhound industry or playing a more serious role in that regard. That is something the Minister must examine. I do not support the embargo on recruitment in the public sector. It is costly and does not work. It has to be reconsidered. If the Minister is serious about giving the local authorities a role in this area, that must be resourced and that will impact on the recruitment embargo.

Much of the cruelty greyhounds experience does not occur in the kennels. The problem mainly arises from over-breeding, which is linked to racing, and the inevitable disposal of the unwanted greyhounds. There are also problems with the tracks, such as the drugs, the injuries and collisions in the racing and what happens to those animals, the unsafe running surfaces and so forth. Bord na gCon is a semi-State company and it has been charged with carrying out inspections for the past 50 years or so. It already has the legal power to deal with many of the issues that cause welfare to be jeopardised but it has not used it. That is a real problem.

I come from the semi-State sector and usually I would defend it. However, it has been in the limelight recently as a result of the disgraceful amounts being paid to its top executives. It is just not good enough that Bord na gCon should be in existence for 50 years and have these responsibilities, yet the litany of abuses I have outlined and which are well documented have taken place on its watch. This is a crucial issue the Minister must address. The legislation is fine, although there is a lack of clarity about who will take overall responsibility, but nobody believes it will be a panacea. If the objectives of improving the animals' welfare are to be achieved, it must be backed up with resources, particularly at local authority level. A good example of where that took place was when the limelight was focused on the Smithfield horse market. Since that occurred there has been far tighter enforcement at that market. We have seen the results with fewer horses being traded and more proactive responses.

Overall, measures such as restricting the litters, trying to professionalise the registration and so forth are welcome but there must be more in the context of animal welfare issues in general. There is a view among many in society who care deeply about these issues that perhaps this Government is trying to row back on some commitments given previously on improving our standards with regard to fur farming, the threat to reverse the ban on stag hunting and so forth. As other Deputies have said, this is an issue many people feel strongly about; they want animal welfare to be addressed in a serious way.

It is often said, understandably, that the country is in tatters. Internationally, Ireland is like Greece, despite what the Government says. We are in a precarious situation where many of our citizens are suffering horrendous problems. Some might ask why people are even wasting their time talking about animal welfare issues when such vast problems are affecting humans. The reality is that the two are not contradictory. All those issues should be addressed, and dealing with animal welfare issues is long overdue. In some ways they are legacy issues which should have been addressed previously. Whether we are economically successful or going through a recession or depression, it is no justification for tolerating cruelty and wilful neglect of animals or anybody else.

A civilised society is judged by the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens. I believe there is a correlation between the way this Government is targeting the most vulnerable citizens and how there is a certain rowing back on some animal welfare issues. This side of the House will not allow that to happen.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome this Bill and compliment the Minister on taking a reasonable and sensible approach. I also thank him for visiting my constituency some time ago to see the greyhound track and the facilities provided there.

Lest we get carried away with condemnation and so forth, it is a very valuable industry as well as an important way of life, certainly in south Tipperary, west Waterford and east Cork. It was mainly families who were involved in the breeding and training of greyhounds and bringing them to race at tracks. There is also a social aspect to that. It is a huge industry that provides more than 11,000 jobs. We cannot take that lightly as 11,000 is no mean figure. In addition, €500 million has been invested in stadia throughout the country. Hopefully, the Minister will be able to find €1 million or so for the track in Clonmel. It is very important.

Shane McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Say that again.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not know whether the Minister is laughing in jest or in support but the south east is entitled to have a representation made. At least the Minister travelled there and saw it.

Under the previous Administration I was very involved in many animated discussions about the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill and the welfare of greyhounds. I was born and reared on a farm and the welfare of animals was intrinsic to all of us. That applied to the welfare of every animal from the cat, to the cow, sheep and lambs. This Bill provides for 15 months before breeding but I have always maintained that an animal, be it a cow, sheep or horse, breeds when their natural life cycle allows them to do so, after which it becomes a breeding animal. Some animals might never breed and might not be kept for breeding.

A great deal of hysteria crept into this issue on the last occasion. Fundamentally, the former Minister, former Deputy John Gormley, did not understand what he was dealing with. Worse than that, when he attended the meeting of the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party, of which I was a member, he pretended to be listening to rural Deputies and to understand. I would not expect a city Minister to understand everything but he pretended to have an understanding. However, when he left the meeting he tore up what had been said. I am not saying he made any commitments because he did not, but he listened intently and pretended to be understanding.

The then Taoiseach chaired many of those meetings and has a huge understanding of and involvement with dog breeding - his brother Deputy Barry Cowen has spoken in this debate - and I was aghast at the folly of what he allowed to be said by the Green Party. I had to take a great deal of heat from it at times. One would think its members were the only people interested in animal welfare. This is anathema to the vast majority of dog breeders in South Tipperary and elsewhere. These activists do not want horse racing or live cattle exports. I do not condone fur farming. I was driven to despair and to resign the whip of my own party.

There is a huge industry around all these dog sports, created by ordinary men and women who are citizens of the country. The Department gave funding to Bord na gCon for a greyhound stadium but for the most part the industry is created by people working in their own spare time and with their own investment. Greyhounds need decent housing and must be carried in proper vehicles. There is an industry around the provision of those. There are veterinary and breeding costs. I believe stud fees are in the region of €3,000 per stud. The industry is going through a traumatic time and I compliment all those involved on keeping the show on the road in such difficult times.

I do not condone the neglect of any animal. I accept that there were difficulties with exports to places such as China. That trade was stopped, and rightly so. However, breeders need an export market for dogs, whether for breeding or otherwise. At the end of life dogs must be looked after and properly cared for. This time last year, in the middle of an economic crisis, we tore ourselves apart for weeks on end. I know we were approaching the silly season but we seemed to be in it for 12 months.

The policy objective of the Bill is to improve the level of welfare in the greyhound industry. While the objective is similar to that of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010, the approach taken differs due to the distinct nature of and controls applying to the keeping of greyhounds. The greyhound industry already has a system of self-regulation, which this Bill uses as a starting point. I welcome that. The greyhound industry already registers and identifies all animals so as to ensure the integrity of the racing system. However, this can be readily adapted for welfare purposes. Therefore, the scope of the Bill extends to all greyhounds in the racing and coursing industry and not only to those found on the premises of an establishment registered under the Bill. Greyhounds are defined as all animals entered in the Irish Greyhound Stud Book. The Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010, on the other hand, provides for the unregulated industry of puppy farming, which we totally condemn as any right-minded person would. Puppy farming has no existing system, so that Act started with the registration of premises and applied welfare standards to animals on such premises only.

I thank the Minister and urge him to continue consultations. The previous Minister spoke about consultation but did not consult. He engaged in tokenism and made a joke of consultation. The industry was furious because he did not consult the people he should have consulted. He consulted his own Green Party activists, who tried to claim they were the only people with an interest in animal welfare. That could not be further from the truth. They think they are the guardians of everything connected with the environment and with this issue.

The Bill contains codes of practice for the industry as well as setting out specific welfare standards and the powers to make regulations regarding welfare. It also provides for regulations for the identification of greyhounds and requirements to notify sale or transfer of greyhounds, which is important to allow for traceability and responsibility to attach to owners. There must be traceability and implants or some similar system to ensure it. I thank local authority dog wardens and An Garda Síochána for the work they have done. Previous Deputies spoke about the number of dogs found in horrible conditions and the deaths of so many animals. Very few of these were greyhounds. Farmers' first nurture after their families is of their stock. Sometimes they treat their stock better than their families. I do not mean that in a bad way, but their stock is a priority.

Part 3 of the Bill is concerned with breeding. This restricts the number of times a female greyhound can be bred as there are welfare concerns with greyhounds carrying excessive numbers of litters. This is standard practice and anyone involved in breeding would understand and obey such a restriction. The minimum breeding age will be 15 months. This is considerably higher than the minimum breeding age of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010. I have concerns about this measure. The age of 15 months is quite old. I accept that there must be regulation, but I ask the Minister to examine this minimum. The Irish Coursing Club will not be permitted to register litters born to greyhounds under 15 months of age, who will as a consequence not be permitted to race or be used in coursing events. This might be too strict. We have had arguments as to whether the minimum breeding age should be three or six months but 15 months seems high.

Part 3 also provides that establishments with four or more bitches over 15 months of age that have been or are being used for breeding will be registered as a greyhound breeding establishment. I have no problem with that. It is very important. There will be a grace period following the commencement of the Act to allow existing establishments to register. This is a welcome measure. We cannot take a shotgun approach. People need a lead-in time. This Part further provides for procedures where the ICC may refuse or withdraw the registration of a breeding establishment and allows for such decisions to be appealed to the District Court. This is fair. There must be powers, rules and guidelines and they must be enforced. There must also be a right of appeal under any judicial system where people feel regulations are being enforced too vehemently.

Part 4 concerns enforcement and allows for the appointment of welfare officers by local authorities. Dog wardens and animal welfare and veterinary officers are stretched. A similar issue arose in Dublin when an institution in Meath was providing, at a nominal charge, for the removal of horses that were killed or injured. When a veterinary officer was called the gardaí had numbers in their phones to call a certain hunting establishment which removed the dead animal as fast as possible. With the stroke of a pen, the Minister decided to ban this service and it is now undertaken by the local authority, at considerable cost to the local authority. Sometimes we use a sledgehammer to crack a chestnut. We get carried away in trying to enforce laws. Local authorities and the vets associated with them have done a good jobs with dogs, horses and all animals.

Horses have become a huge issue. The market has dried up and there are problems with horses in many areas. I come from a proud horse breeding county. Queen Elizabeth came to Coolmore Stud. We are recognised all over the world for our state-of-the-art industry. We are also recognised throughout Europe for the annual coursing meeting in Clonmel. Coursing is a huge industry and is worth €6 million or €7 million to South Tipperary. The Clonmel event is known throughout Europe. I have been there many times. There is none of the savagery that is often spoken about. Last year, some animal rights activists, who think they are the only people concerned with animal welfare, released the hares from where they were being well looked after and had plenty of space in fenced-in fields. They released them onto the motorway to be trudged over by vehicles and cause accidents. I heard an animal welfare activist being interviewed on the radio and saying this was okay. They felt it better to release the hares to be slaughtered on the motorway than be taken humanely, coursed by muzzled dogs, protected and brought back to their homes. We need balance.

I receive continual e-mails, which I no longer open, from these people who think they have a monopoly of concern for animal welfare. I was born and raised on a farm where there were sheep, cattle and every kind of animal. I am still involved with animals and animal welfare is a priority for me, as for most landowners and stock owners.

I compliment the breeders and owners in Clonmel for sticking with coursing, for giving so much of their time and energy to the industry and for providing an outlet. A large number of voluntary clubs and associations hold dog-racing evenings as fundraisers. Schools, hospices and other causes can no longer get money from the Government. They do valuable fund-raising with nights at the dogs and they sponsor cars and so on.

I also compliment the owners and the voluntary board of Clonmel greyhound track on the effort they are making. They have a state-of-the-art track following significant investment. The track used to suffer from flooding but it was raised using OPW money. However, the owners badly need a decent building for the race nights, for the spectators who travel from a wide area and for themselves. Many jobs will also be created. The owners are a little embarrassed by the stadium because it is out of date, cold and it is not a properly functioning building. They have worked hard but they have had many disappointments and setbacks over the years. I am fully supportive of their application for Government funding because they have raised a great deal of money themselves voluntarily. I am hopeful they will get their due support. They are looking for their own small share from Bord na gCon, similar to other dog tracks and they are not looking for a handout.

Local officers can issue welfare notices. Such notices may require a wide range of actions in the interests of the welfare of greyhounds. These powers are circumscribed by the right of appeal and the need for a search warrant in certain instances. I compliment the dog wardens, the veterinary people and the Garda because when action needs to be taken, it is taken and prosecutions follow. The powers allowed include those for the destruction of greyhounds that are in pain, distress or an acute state of neglect. We all support that 100%. There are related enforcement matters concerning forgery and obstruction. This section also specifies proceedings, penalties and the possibility of fixed payment notices.

I look forward to working with the Minister on this and to the enactment of the legislation. I hope he maintains consultation and shares with the people in the industry who are committed and want to put their time, energy and money where there mouths are. They are also committed to animal welfare.

Joe Carey (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. This Bill became necessary because of the enactment of the Dog Breeding Establishment Act 2010. This legislation was rushed through the House on 8 July 2010 by the previous Government. All Stages of the Bill were taken in one afternoon having spent four months in the Seanad. It was bulldozed through the Dáil prior to the summer recess to keep the Green Party and, in particular, its former leader, the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, John Gormley, happy. He left for his summer break with little thought for the damaging impact that Bill would have on the greyhound industry.

The Act's provisions cater for the proper regulation of puppy farming in this country. However, if applied to the breeding of greyhounds, these measures bordered on the ridiculous and they would cause damage to the greyhound industry. Unprecedented concern was expressed to me and to many other Members by people involved in greyhound racing and breeding and throughout the greyhound industry. I am a greyhound owner and breeder and I could not understand what the former Minister was trying to do. Following the enactment of the Dog Breeding Establishment Bill, it became necessary to prioritise this Bill, otherwise the 2010 Act would be applied to greyhound breeding establishments.

I acknowledge and welcome the involvement of greyhound industry interests, including the IGB, ICC and the main welfare bodies, in the drafting of this legislation. The industry is of critical importance to this country. It employs 11,000 people through direct and indirect jobs and it is estimated that it is worth €500 million to the economy each year. Over the past two decades the IGB has overseen a complete transformation in the standard of greyhound stadia throughout the country. This transformation has resulted in Ireland becoming a Mecca for greyhound racing enthusiasts.

Greyhound tracks offer a complete night out with high quality sport and entertainment in comfortable, clean surroundings and they are noted, in particular, for first class dining facilities. There are 17 tracks in the State licensed by Bord na gCon, with meetings held nightly. The industry is big business and is run in a highly professional way. There is a system of self-regulation, which registers and identifies all greyhounds in the Irish greyhound stud book to ensure the integrity of the sport. There is broad agreement on the Bill because extensive discussions were held with all stakeholders, including the Dog's Trust, IGB, ICC, Veterinary Ireland, City and County Managers' Association and representatives of the animal welfare sector. I welcome that level of consultation and, like Deputy Mattie McGrath, I encourage the Minister of State to maintain consultation because if everyone is included, consensus can be achieved. This is not a contentious Bill because of the involvement of all the parties to which I referred.

The principal purpose of this Bill is to enhance the welfare of greyhounds, particularly through the regulation of greyhound breeding establishments. It introduces a provision whereby the ICC will be required to establish a register of greyhound establishments in each county. The breeding of greyhounds will be restricted to bitches aged over 15 months with a maximum of six to eight litters per bitch.

This legislation will make it necessary to register breeding establishments with the ICC under the supervision of local authorities, with minimum standards in such establishments and it will require adequate tracking mechanisms and record keeping. Part 1 deals with preliminary issues and contains the Short Title and commencement as well as the definitions and provides for the service of notification, notices and documents, expenses and the making of regulations. Part 2 deals with welfare generally. This Part also provides for regulations for the identification of greyhound and the requirement to notify sale or transfer of greyhounds, which is important to allow for traceability and responsibility to attach to owners.

Part 3 deals with regulations on breeding. The sections set out the number of times a female greyhound can be bred. The minimum breeding age will be 15 months. This is welcome because it is considerably higher than the minimum breeding age provided for in the Dog Breeding Establishment Act 2010. Part 4 concerns enforcement and allows for the appointment of welfare officers by local authorities, the IGB and the ICC and gives these officers powers to inspect and to issue welfare notices. Part 5 contains miscellaneous provisions relating to the exercise of functions by the secretary of the ICC. It also specifies the non-application of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010, which is very much welcome.

The total cost to greyhound owners each year to keep greyhounds is approximately €244 million. This is significant expenditure and much of it is injected into the local economies and supports thousands of local jobs. The IGB has delivered an impressive financial performance in recent years, despite the changed economic climate. Costs have been cut and greater efficiencies achieved, and the industry has been strongly supported. It has managed to deliver higher profits, more capital development and higher prize money between 2007 and 2010 than in the preceding four-year period, despite the difficult economic environment.

To grow the greyhound industry into the future, proper sustainable funding mechanisms will have to be put in place. Some of this will have to come from all betting channels. I appeal to the Minister of State to do all in his powers to bring that situation about. Without adequate and sustainable funding, the industry will struggle to sustain itself, its current contribution to the economy will suffer and its enormous potential will not be realized. If we could put the greyhound industry on a sustainable footing by funding it through betting, it will be able to maintain itself into the future.

The greyhound industry makes a very significant economic impact across Ireland and the potential is considerable. Ireland is regarded as a world class player in dog breeding and there has been significant potential to exploit this much further. More than 8,000 Irish greyhounds are exported to the UK each year. An Irish bred greyhound, Taylor Sky, won the English Greyhound Derby recently. He broke three records in winning that title, which shows that Ireland is a world leader in the greyhound industry, and we need to build on that. The greyhound industry has an exciting future and can make an even more important contribution to national and regional economic activity and employment, provided proper support and structures are put in place. I look forward to working with the Minister of State and the Government in improving the industry.

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ar dtús báire, cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit agus gabhaim comhghairdeas leis. In congratulating the Minister of State on his appointment, I would also like to congratulate him and his officials on bringing this Bill before the House, for their extensive consultation and for the approach they took to dealing with it. I have known the Minister of State for a number of years. He is a common sense, practical man and has demonstrated his ability in bringing the Bill through the House. The Bill recognises the level of regulation and integrity of control in the greyhound industry.

Bord na gCon and the Irish Greyhound Board are committed to the highest standards of animal welfare. The Greyhound industry in not just an industry. It is a compendium of many parts. The greyhound racing bodies have made changes through the presence of veterinary surgeons at race meetings and sales, the employment of personnel to oversee greyhound welfare, the appointment of a welfare manager in addition to a welfare committee and the retired greyhound trust. All of this has been done in consultation rather than a "gun to the head" approach. The coursing club stud book records all greyhounds.

I am satisfied that the Government and the Minister of State are committed to animal welfare as reflected in the Bill's Title, the Welfare of Greyhounds Bill 2011. Those of us who support this Bill are supporting an industry and the welfare of animals. It cannot be all about one side of the equation. There must be a balanced approach. If one was to listen to the commentary of those opposed to this Bill, one would wonder what world one was living in. As someone who has had a family involvement in greyhounds over the years, I think it is important that we understand the massive economic activity that the greyhound industry generates in Ireland. A Department of Finance report in 2009 revealed that €13.9 million in income was received from the Exchequer, €4.45 million of which was paid out in VAT, PRSI and PAYE. That means €9.5 million was paid by an industry which employs 11,000 people and which contributes over €500 million to the economy.

We must examine the issue of making greyhound racing and horse racing sustainable in this country. We must look at the betting industry here. Perhaps there are sacred cows and vested interests who we are afraid to take on, but maybe it is time we took a different approach to that.

I would like to plug my own area in Cork. I hope that the Minister of State will engage with the greyhound owners and breeders in Cork, under the chairmanship of Mort Cronin and Kathleen Lynch, who are looking for new traps at the greyhound track there. We are in difficult economic times, but they are great people who do great work. I would like to pay tribute to Noel Holland, who retired as the manager of the greyhound track in Cork. He is a gentleman, a great advocate of greyhound racing, and a man who was very central to the industry but who also had animal welfare at heart.

This Bill is important. It aims to enhance the welfare of greyhounds, but it must allow the greyhound industry to expand and develop, and to be done in partnership with the Government and the other stakeholders. In his remarks, Deputy Cowen skirted over the controversy of last year. I believe we had a Minister back then who was not aware and who did not understand the significance of the greyhound industry to our country. I welcome, as a consequence of that, the fact that we have a separate welfare Bill before us today. Those who criticise should look at what the Irish Greyhound Board and Bord na gCon have done in the area of self regulation. It is well regulated and the people involved are second to none. I welcome the provision for the creation of a new register of greyhound breeding establishments. I do not oppose it all. I welcome the fact that we will restrict the amount of times a dog can be bred, as well as the introduction of a minimum breeding age. The Minister of State has consulted widely. There has been broad consensus in some approaches and negotiation in others, but it is about welfare and an industry that can assist us in our economic challenge.

The industry must face its own challenges. The level of sponsorship, the cost of training, the running of tracks and the economic life of some of the tracks are very much under siege. As Deputy McGrath pointed out, when there are sporting groups, voluntary charitable organisations and local schools in need of a fund-raising event, the first thing they do is to go for a night at the dogs. Bord na gCon has risen to that challenge. The track in Cork is located down the road from where I live. It has become the place to go on a Friday or Saturday night, where people can eat, drink, bet, enjoy corporate entertainment, family entertainment and so on. It is an industry that supports so many. It has impeccable people. Deputy Cowen mentioned that there are 18,000 meetings in the year, with 10.25 million people attending. If we took a straw poll of those people, what would they tell us about the greyhound industry?

We had great success last month at the English Greyhound Derby and at the Irish Greyhound Laurels in Cork, and the summer derby in Shelbourne Park. These are spectacles in the Irish sporting calendar. It is an industry which is world class, which produces 11,000 full-time and part-time jobs, benefiting the local economies and the Exchequer to the tune of €500 million. The Farrell Grant Sparks 2009 report referred to the industry as a key driver of economic activity.

We have 17 greyhound tracks in the country. Let us consider the trainers, owners and breeders involved, and their impact on the local economy. That is the reason I think the Bill is important and the Irish Greyhound Board and Bord na gCon are to be complimented on the way in which they have allowed the industry to be professionalised and modernised. The industry has made changes to make it world class and fit for purpose. I am glad that an element in the Fianna Fáil Party stood up against the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Mr. John Gormley, albeit that they came to that point late the debate. When I was a Member of the Seanad, a number of the Fianna Fáil Senators were on their own, yet it was the Members on the Fine Gael benches who led the charge. In saying that, it is important that there is consensus on the importance of the greyhound industry. There is a need to recognise the importance of this Bill. The industry is well regulated and deserved to be supported.

The Bill before us needs to be debated properly. Those who oppose it have every right to do so because of concerns which in their eyes are legitimate. Some of the comments, expressing hysteria, sent to Members in e-mails are misguided and presented in some quarters as being gospel, when they are not.

I am very happy that the Minister has brought forward this Bill and I am happy to support it. It is good that the Bill has cross-party support. We need to have an informed debate on the protection and enhancement of a valuable industry that operated in urban as well as rural areas. This Bill goes a long way in addressing the fears of those who have legitimate, informed concerns. It is time to legislate. The Bill, with its checks and balances, will ensure that safeguards are put in place in the industry.

Ann Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to participate in this debate on the Welfare of Greyhounds Bill 2011. As a person who understands that both animals and humans must co-exist, I welcomed the enactment of the Dog Breeding Establishments Act 2010. The Minister has been quick out of the traps with this Bill.

Gandhi once said "the greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated"; that is akin to the saying that a society is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable. We, as a developed society, recognise the sentient qualities of animals.

The objectives of the Bill are designed to improve the level of welfare to a specific animal species. The Treaty of Amsterdam which came into force in May 1999, included a protocol on animal welfare designed "to ensure improved protection and respect for the welfare of animals as sentient beings". Animals like human have the capacity to experience pleasure and pain, happiness or suffering. A species that demonstrates that capacity has an unwavering right to have their welfare protected. Rather than take an overly sentimental view of the Bill, recognising that the greyhound holds an economic value, it is therefore incumbent on us to maintain their welfare.

The greyhound industry contributes an estimated €500 million to the local economy. This makes it very valuable indeed. The industry is based on the manipulation of a canine species for monetary gain. This would not happen in the natural world, therefore based on this manipulation by us comes the responsibility to protect the species involved, just as we would protect any worker in an industry. It will ensure a level of stability in the greyhound industry.

Apart from the United Kingdom, animal welfare is not a high priority in pan-European legislation, this Bill should therefore ensure a level of stability in the greyhound industry. The welfare of the dogs will be ahead of the European norm. However, I have a number of concerns which I hope the Minister will take on board.

I think one aspect that is missing is a penalty for those who abuse greyhound and in turn abuse the industry. A recurring theme in legislation is a reference to what the local authorities may do, for example "local authorities may appoint welfare officers". As we know, however, local authorities are not being funded from the Government to appoint anybody since the introduction of the ban on recruitment five or six years ago.

The penalty regime outlined in the Bill fails to sanction the offender. I believe that offenders should be removed from the industry. The vast majority of personnel in the industry would also probably choose to do this as well. Abusers must be eradicated from the industry and endure a penalty. I would like the Minister to consider this addenda to that section of the Bill, and to introduce a graduated penalty regime based on repeated offences and according to the seriousness of their conviction. It is disturbing to see those who repeatedly flout the law continue to get away with it. We have a significant problem with the welfare of horses. That places an added burden on the local authority.

I welcome the incentives in the Bill to copperfasten regulation on keeping greyhounds. I commend the Minister of State on bringing on this legislation so promptly. I hope he will consider some of my suggestions.

Nicky McFadden (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The greyhound racing and breeding industry sustains 11,000 full-time and part-time jobs directly and indirectly, many in rural communities. It contributes an estimated €500 million into local economies around the tracks, which are spread throughout the country. An independent review completed by Farrell Grant Sparks, FGS, in 2009 states that there is adequate direct and indirect evidence to support a strong argument that the greyhound industry constitutes a major source of employment, gives rise to considerable domestic and export earnings and is a key driver of substantial economic activity, especially in rural areas.

There are a total of 17 greyhound tracks licensed by Bord na gCon. Of these, Bord na gCon owns Shelbourne Park, Harold's Cross, Cork, Tralee, Waterford, Youghal, Limerick and Galway and also has a 51% share in the Mullingar track, which is my local track. I know the track well and going to the dog races is a great night out.

The greyhound breeding industry is very successful with over 75% of greyhounds now running in the UK being Irish bred. Bord na gCon is a commercial State body established under the Greyhound Industry Act 1958, chiefly to control greyhound racing and to improve and develop the greyhound industry.

Responsibility for Bord na gCon transferred to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in May 2010. Bord na gCon is responsible for leading and directing the activities of the company. Bord na gCon has repeatedly confirmed its commitment to the highest standards of animal welfare in the greyhound industry. Deputies will be pleased to note that Bord na gCon has demonstrated its commitment to greyhound welfare and in this regard a number of initiatives have been put in place to ensure consistent and appropriate welfare standards are met. These include the attendance of veterinary surgeons at racing and at sales trials, employment of personnel to oversee greyhound welfare and the employment of a welfare manager. Bord na gCon is also an active member of the International Greyhound Forum, an international group involved in the establishment of welfare standards and education. A guide to best practice for the care and welfare of greyhounds is available from the Bord na gCon website.

Bord na gCon established a welfare committee in July 2009 which seeks to identify ways in which the welfare of greyhounds can be improved. In addition, Bord na gCon also operates the retired greyhound trust which focuses on the adoption and re-homing of greyhounds when they finish racing. In 2011 it launched a campaign, which is ongoing, to promote greyhounds as pets. My father used to race greyhounds and they were always retired to homes and they are the best pets; I agree with Deputy McLellan on that point. Officials of Bord na gCon investigate any complaints received regarding greyhound welfare and follow up on any issues of concern that arise through their everyday interaction with trainers or owners either on the racetrack or elsewhere.

Any proposal involving Bord na gCon engaging with the greyhound industry in China would have to give due consideration to animal welfare matters. Ireland attaches a high priority to animal welfare and, alongside our EU partners, is working to promote better animal welfare internationally so I welcome the Minister of State's introduction of this legislation. It is well tailored to enhance the welfare of Irish greyhounds.

Shane McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Before I address the points raised, I am pleased to bring the Welfare of Greyhounds Bill 2011 before the Dáil. I look forward to an informed and constructive debate during the Bill's passage through the House. Contributions on Second Stage were very useful and I thank those Deputies who took the time to examine this issue in advance. The greyhound racing industry is important and makes a significant contribution to the economy and employment, particularly in rural areas where, in some cases, alternative employment may not be readily available.

Greyhound racing and coursing are popular across the country and bring together rural and urban enthusiasts. The greyhound breeding industry is also successful as an export industry, with many Irish-bred greyhounds now running in Britain. Racing also attracts overseas visitors to Ireland.

I thank everyone who took part in the debate. Deputy Clare Daly asked if this is an important Bill in current circumstances but there are 11,000 people depending on the industry. I am responsible for the industry and it is my job to ensure those jobs are protected and increased and this Bill will achieve that. Deputy McLellan pointed out that we all love our dogs and this is a matter close to our hearts. Deputy Daly mentioned other sports but we will not be doing anything to ban hunting, coursing or other pursuits. Through Bills like this one we will ensure this activity is done in a professional way and that the industry will grow. If less time had been spent in the last Dáil trying to do away with these jobs, we might be at a different point today.

Deputy Colreavy will see in section 10 that we are dealing with greyhounds that are registered through the coursing club. Areas outside of that will be dealt with afterwards but the fines are in place for the person who is the last owner of a greyhound. It is up to that person to deal with that dog in a proper fashion. Other Bills to deal with other animals are being examined by the Department to ensure people treat their animals well. Any ideas that Deputies can put forward will be considered.

Deputy Mattie McGrath mentioned Clonmel dog track and I will keep him up to date about what is happening. There was some controversy when I entered the Department surrounding the export of dogs to other countries. As long as I am Minister for State, that will not happen unless the same treatment regime for animals is in place in those countries. That is why our dairy and beef industries are so successful, because we are sure about what we are doing. I will not bow to any pressure on that score. If the last Government had listened to the questions I was asking, we would not have had this controversy; it would have been dealt with earlier. This was a black and white issue and that is how I will treat it.

Inspections and local authority funding were mentioned. Provision is made for local authorities to be refunded and inspections can be carried out by different bodies, and the gardaí and the courts can be involved.

This Bill deals with the greyhound industry, an industry that will be protected and grown. We all agree the industry has upped its standards but there will be special scrutiny under the Bill for those who own four or more greyhounds, where the bitch must be 15 months or older when in other cases it is six months. All those will help the industry. The Chinese Ministers who came on a visit to see our food industry were very impressed and I want the same for the greyhound industry. We must be clear what we are doing.

We have put pressure on people in the greyhound industry but they want that regulation in place because they know their industry offers much employment and enjoyment. The dog tracks offer a great night out for very little money. It is a few years ago but I went to Thurles and it was a very cheap night out with great facilities. Fianna Fáil made sure the facilities were good; not everything about the boom was bad, the roads and sporting facilities were improved. I intend to secure as much funding as possible to ensure the likes of Clonmel, Kilkenny and other dog tracks are upgraded to a uniform standard. It might take longer than originally anticipated but it is through the support of Members that it will happen. Sometimes it is hard to beat a bit of lobbying, even from members of one's own party, to ensure we get the best. The greyhound industry is good for the country and for jobs. I will be straight with anyone who tries to stand in my way. Issues will be either black or white. There will be more lobbying as aspects of the industry are examined and reversed. We will meet that head on, regardless of from where it comes.

I thank everyone who made a contribution. The penalties are considerable and that aspect of the Bill is well covered. As Deputy Ann Phelan rightly said, people may reoffend. The penalties are in place and it is up to the Irish Coursing Club and those in the business to ensure that people who are not compliant are not allowed to remain in business. That is the right way to do it.

I hope the Bill will go through speedily. I thank all who made a contribution. Furthermore, I hope the success we had in progressing the matter to date can be kept up when we return shortly to Committee Stage. I look forward to further discussion on the issue at that time.