John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)

The Minister of State indicated that the main reason he could not accept the amendments was that he did not want two different standards of regulation in place. The Bill proposes that the greyhound and hunting sectors be subject to two different inspection, registration and fees regimes. From what I and all those with whom I have spoken can see, the current regime serves its purpose.

We do not have large numbers of complaints about inhumane treatment of greyhounds, certainly not in my part of the world. While an issue arises regarding the humane euthanisation of greyhounds at the end of their lives, the Bill does not propose any changes in that regard. Instead, it clouds the issue by providing that an area that is currently governed by one Act will in future be governed by two Acts. The Minister of State's comments in this regard contradicted the current position.

Senator Bradford stated the House should discuss issues other than this at this time of economic crisis. Everything comes back to the economy and the economic issues discussed daily in the House. The greyhound industry is a vital part of the economy in rural areas and urban centres which have greyhound stadiums. It is estimated the industry is worth €560 million annually to the economy.

Having listened to all the contributions made on Second Stage and Committee Stage, I note Green Party Senators have not yet spoken on Committee Stage. I believe a small number of Green Party members promised their support for the renewed programme for Government and introduction of the National Asset Management Agency in return for the enactment of legislation on animal rights in a number of areas. A former Green Party councillor whose name I cannot remember stated on "Five Seven Live" or Matt Cooper's radio programme on the evening before the Green Party conference to discuss the renewed programme for Government that the party would vote for the programme and NAMA on the basis that animal rights legislation would be introduced. This Bill reflects that.

I do not believe the Minister of State believes in his heart and soul the statement he read into the record a few minutes ago. He, like me and many other Senators, comes from a rural area and knows the value of the greyhound industry and the rural way of life. Like Senator Ormonde, I believe he can see the merit of the argument made by Senator Coffey in the amendments and the need to avoid duplicating the current system, as is proposed in the Bill. We seek only that the Minister of State indicate that he is prepared, prior to Report Stage, to consider some of the amendments tabled on Committee Stage.

When he spoke in the House on this group of amendments the Minister did not appear to realise that as a result of his proposals, the provisions of the 1958 Act will be duplicated. That this would be the effect of the legislation did not appear to have entered his head until it was suggested by a number of Opposition Senators. Perhaps some sense of reality will dawn and a thriving rural industry will be kept alive unhindered by this type of Trojan horse legislation, to use Senator Bradford's description of the Bill.