Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 12, line 14, to delete “8 ordinary members” and substitute “6 ordinary members”.

I thank my colleague, Senator Norris, for seconding the amendments. the first of which, amendment No. 1, relates to the composition of the Irish Greyhound Board. It brings us back to the discussion we had on Committee Stage. A board of six members would be of sufficient size, given that its performance has not been good. It has not performed well in the financial stewardship of the industry. However, I am willing to withdraw the amendment if the Minister of State is willing to accept amendment No. 4 which is similar to an amendment proposed by my colleague, Senator Paul Daly, which was accepted in the early stages of debate on Committee Stage. It proposed that two members of the board be representatives of the Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation.

One of the big bones of contention within the greyhound sector up until now has been the fact that ordinary owners and breeders have not been heard or listened to. As key stakeholders, they have had no input into the running of the sector. They have many concerns which we have discussed about the drugs issue, animal welfare, artificial insemination and many other issues which are covered in various amendments. Having these key stakeholders represented on the board is absolutely essential. It is my understanding the current forum structure, although welcome and a step in the right direction, does not give the Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation statutory powers. It is a little like the health forums; it is a bit of a talking shop. It has no statutory powers to represent the views of those in the grassroots. Input at board level is required.

The Minister simply selects an owner and a breeder at will. That has been the position up until now, not just under Fine Gael but also under previous Ministers of other parties. I fundamentally disagree with the making of political appointments to State boards and preferred candidates being selected based on the colour of their political skin. That is wrong. The membership of the Irish Greyhound Board should be decided at arm's length from the Minister and the only way to do this is to allow the federation to propose two members to represent it. They could be chosen at its annual general meeting or under whatever structure on which it might decide. There would be a gender balance in the names proposed in that there would be one woman and one man who would be representative of the federation. The names would be forwarded to the Minister and, if acceptable to him or her, accepted as the democratically elected representatives of the federation. The significance of the amendment and having two people representing the owners and breeders on the board cannot be overstated. It is important to have stakeholder buy-in at every level.

Amendment No. 14 also concerns the composition of the board. Under the current structure, where a board member's term expires, there is no necessity for that member to vacate his or her position and be replaced. It is a very grey area in the legislation. The term of a board member may have expired, but he or she can continue for an indefinite period. That is wrong. There should be definite periods of board membership. I am proposing that a member of the board "shall, with immediate effect, vacate their Board position which will be immediately filled by the appointment of another person so that no vacancy arises”. That is important, as otherwise there would be a person sitting on the board for longer than the time period prescribed in the legislation and who could remain on it indefinitely. Whether that is the intention of the legislation, it will be its effect. Therefore, the matter needs to be cornered off at this juncture.

We are trying to improve the accountability, transparency and governance of the organisation. There have been questions about all of these issues in the past, particularly the stewardship of the organisation, as highlighted by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. A proposal made to the committee was that any member should serve no more than two consecutive terms for no longer than a total of six years. Under the Minister's proposals, a member could serve two consecutive terms of four years each, or for a total of eight years. Without a definite duration, someone could end up with continued membership of the board for much longer, which would be wrong. That is the basis of the amendment.

They are the amendments in my name. I believe the rest of those in the grouping are Government amendments.