David Norris (Independent)

I am glad the question of tattooing, identification and microchipping has been introduced at this point because I was reserving my power for a later amendment. I welcome the opportunity to say a few words on this issue because I fully support the Minister on the microchipping of dogs. He mentioned the case of a greyhound bitch. I saw her at the newly developing headquarters of the Dublin Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals at Mount Venus and it was utterly shocking. This was an elderly greyhound bitch with ten pups and she was in very poor condition. There was marking by tattoo which had been completely obscured deliberately such that it was impossible to read the identification mark. If there was microchipping, it would be a very different matter.

I fully concur with the advice given by the lobby groups and the professionals that microchipping is significant. The risks of cancer are negligible; they have never been demonstrated adequately and I do not believe there are such risks. On the question of the value of a dog and harming it, if it were true, it is highly unlikely that the owners of stallions at stud, very valuable racehorses, for some of which there is a covering fee of €150,000 per performance, would permit microchipping. Any objection to this is a tissue of nonsense. I, therefore, strongly support the Minister. If any votes are called on a series of amendments dealing with this issue, I will return to the House to strongly support the Minister. I will vote in favour of the Bill in the event that a division is called. I cannot imagine that happening after a series of positive amendments and the welcome given to them from all sides of the House, sometimes in tones that were clearly partisan and designed to have a political impact.