Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Ruane and Ó Domhnaill for the amendments. I hope it was helpful to have time outside of the Chamber to discuss some of the concerns.

I propose to address amendments Nos. 7 to 16, inclusive, together. With regard to amendments Nos. 7 to 10, inclusive, 11 to 13, inclusive, and 15, I am opposed in principle to compelling Rásaíocht Con Éireann to make regulations. The provisions set out here are enabling provisions, not all of which may be required to be made at this time. By necessity this is an exhaustive list of the principles and policies for which Rásaíocht Con Éireann may wish to regulate. It was never intended that Rásaíocht Con Éireann would necessarily make regulations in respect of all of these provisions in the immediate future, but rather that these provisions would future-proof the legislation so that, should it become necessary or desirable to regulate those matters in future, Rásaíocht Con Éireann would have the power to do so. Different policy considerations may arise with regard to whether such legislation is necessary or desirable in the future. In particular, regulations would also have to be examined to determine their compatibility with other domestic and European law. The discretionary nature of the regulation-making power is essential to ensure there is no conflict with other legislation. For these reasons it would clearly not be appropriate to impose an obligation on Rásaíocht Con Éireann to make regulations in respect of all of the matters set out in the Bill.

With particular reference to the proposed section 29(1)(e), which makes provision for the health and welfare of racing greyhounds that have been retired by the owner, we discussed the issue of retirement provisions with the Office of Parliamentary Counsel. The advice received was that the term "retirement" was subjective and that it would not be possible therefore to regulate or enforce this provision. The point was made that the difference between a retired greyhound and a greyhound that is not racing at present is unclear. This matter can best be dealt with through the addition of specific guidelines on retirement in the board's existing code of practice for the welfare of greyhounds.

Amendment No. 10aobliges the owner, breeder and trainer of a greyhound to provide details of the keeper of a greyhound to the board. The previous wording only obliged the owner to provide this information. The purpose of this amendment is to enhance traceability further. I am addressing the purpose of amendment No. 14 through an amendment of my own, No. 13a. I believe my amendment addresses Senator Ruane's concerns. The new wording makes it clear that the owner, breeder or trainer of a racing greyhound must comply with regulations made by the board for the protection of the health and welfare of the greyhound and requires that the owner, breeder or trainer inform the board of the measures being taken.

With regard to amendment No. 16, animal health and welfare is governed by the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013. This Act imposes criminal penalties for breaches of animal welfare requirements. The purpose of section 29 of this Bill is to provide for Rásaíocht Con Éireann to regulate welfare in accordance with its own system of administrative sanctions in the limited and specific circumstances in which it may be appropriate to do so, having regard to the extensive powers already granted to the Minister and his authorised officers under the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013. Such regulations will accordingly require careful consideration. When examining the draft legislation it is very easy to lose sight of the bigger picture while involved in the detail of the Bill. It is important to recall that the rules established under the 2013 Act apply to greyhounds as well as other animals. Thus the prohibition on causing unnecessary suffering to an animal applies to greyhounds, as does the requirement not to be neglectful or to disregard recklessly the health or welfare of a greyhound. As I have stated, the 2013 Act imposes criminal penalties for breaches of animal welfare requirements.Transforming the provisions of the Bill into criminal provisions would conflict with the 2013 Act and remove the ability of the board to impose administrative sanctions in an efficient and timely manner in accordance with its own legislation.