Paudie Coffey (Fine Gael)

The Minister of State said in his response that it could be argued that the working group was sitting for five years but, with due respect and in fairness to all involved, not every breeding establishment would have been privy to what was or was not said in the working group. That was a steering group set up to inform the Minister and his Department on drafting the legislation, and it made some excellent recommendations. It is not reasonable to say that breeders might have been aware of this legislation and its impact for over five years.

The thrust of this amendment is to try to bring reason, to get buy-in from people in order that they would accept the need for regulation, and to give them ample time to address whatever shortcomings they may have. The Minister has acknowledged as much by allowing for a period of three months. Senator Hannigan made a valid point, with which I agree, that many of these breeding establishments might have been traditional farms or otherwise and then went on to develop into a rural business. Many of those businesses would have year-on-year accounts, capital expenditure and day-to-day expenditure. To get the necessary people to buy in to this legislation and to win the trust of these stakeholders, the most important people to have involved, to ensure we do not drive this activity underground and have people hiding from registration because they might not have the adequate facilities, why not give them the opportunity at the outset to put their house in order and give them a 12 month lead-in time to do so? They could be given six months or eight months — we are open to consideration on that — but, from a planning perspective, we believe three months is too short. In the event that a well-established breeder's premises was not up to the required standard, as Senator Twomey said, and if information on the technical sizes for kennels for the dogs, breeding bitches and pups was not available to breeders, they would not have prior knowledge of the requirements with which they would have to comply.

This is a reasonable amendment. Will the Minister of State consider again accepting it? If he does not do so at this Stage, he might consider it at a later Stage to ensure there is more buy-in into this legislation. We do not want to be exclusive or give a message that could drive underground people who will not comply because they have not been given a reasonable time to meet the required standards. I appeal to the Minister of State in the interests of inclusiveness, which is what legislation should be all about, to extend the period provided. If he does not want to accept the Fine Gael amendment, he might table an amendment to extend the timeframe to give people a reasonable chance to comply with the regulations given the effect they will have on these establishments. That is what good legislation should be about, namely, getting people to buy into it, to accept what the law seeks to do and to comply with it. Extending the period provided would help in that process. I genuinely request the Minister of State to consider doing that.