Lynn Boylan (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

To insert the following after “October, 2022”: “; that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine shall:

- conduct a full review of the Exchequer funding to the Horse and Greyhound Racing Fund with a view to examining the social and economic impact of the Fund, including the efficacy of the Fund in supporting the development of both sectors, the broadest cohort of those involved in both sectors and rural communities; also examine whether the use of the Fund to subsidise prize funds represents best value for money, and the efficacy of the Fund in ensuring the highest levels of animal welfare standards; and

- report to Seanad Éireann within six months of these Regulations being adopted on the findings of the review”.

I will speak to our two amendments during my contribution. My ears should have been burning when the Minister was referring to me in the Dáil Chamber when I was not there. I am quite open about my views on greyhound racing. I have made no bones about it. It is like rugby. I do not particularly like rugby, but I will always advocate for greater safety measures to protect players of the sport. Likewise, I will come into the Seanad and argue, on behalf of the dogs in greyhound racing, to improve animal welfare issues. That is in the interest of anybody who actually is in favour of greyhound racing. If they want it to continue and to be successful, they should deal with the animal welfare issues that are outstanding. If the Minister wants to talk about running with the hare and double standards, he should be more concerned about his colleague's comments on refugees.

One of our two amendments seeks an economic impact report relating to the 80:20 split in funding. The Minister has stated previously that the funding allocation is determined on the basis of the business cases brought by both dog organisations. However, under the current legislation, one organisation could send in a comprehensive proposal for additional funding, while the other could send in a one-pager and they would both receive the funding because they are linked. There is nothing about the individual business plans that impacts on whether they get the money because they are both linked to each other. Even the organisations have stated they do not have a problem with the decoupling of the 80:20 split. Therefore, if people are being honest about not having an issue, I do not understand where the resistance is coming from. Surely, each organisation should be applying on the merit of its business plan.

I have raised the findings of the Preferred Results report of 2017, which stated the greyhound industry is no longer a racing-centric industry; rather, its primary focus is on breeding. The focus on breeding raises concerns on what happens to the dogs that do not make the cut, but I will get to the matter of traceability later. If we are giving money to the industry, has Rásaíocht Con Éireann set out how it intends to address the issue of overbreeding that was flagged in the Preferred Results report? Putting aside the ethics of overbreeding, it does not make any commercial sense for an organisation to produce so many dogs when the oversupply is going to Britain. I will get to what happens to the poor dogs that do not make the cut later. Between 82% to 85% of dogs racing in Britain are Irish bred. Yet the British greyhound board stated in its recently published strategic vision that its aim was to take steps to promote breeding and rearing of greyhounds in Britain and to encourage the owners and trainers to acquire the puppies from reputable British breeders and rearers with high welfare standards. Has Rásaíocht Con Éireann carried out a risk assessment of the impact a fall-off in sales of Irish greyhounds in Britain might have? What plans will be put in place to ensure the dogs that would have gone to Britain will be cared for in Ireland?

I refer to the traceability measures that have been taken since the RTÉ exposé of 2019. The Irish Coursing Club provides the software for both the Irish and British microchip systems, but only one is registered with Europetnet. Given 85% of Irish-bred dogs are registered under the British microchip system, Rásaíocht Con Éireann has significant purchasing power. Has the organisation insisted that the microchip system in Britain be linked with Europetnet? If that were the case, it would allow full traceability in the movement of dogs. Many British microchip systems are linked with Europetnet, so it has nothing to do with Brexit. Can we also insist that all retired greyhounds only be registered with Europetnet databases on retirement? That would allow a greater level of transparency.

As to the claims that 10% of the funding goes toward animal welfare and integrity, the 10% needs to be ring-fenced completely for animal welfare, because I think we are conflating different issues. When one looks at integrity, it also deals with the issue of the drugging of dogs. If the drugging of dogs is considered an animal welfare issue, why are dogs that are found to have cocaine in their system not seized on welfare grounds? If it is welfare funding and it is all linked, why are the dogs not being seized on those grounds?

It is deeply concerning that track deaths went up by 29% in 2021.In the committee, the Minister referred to figures that were recorded during Covid-19 and he tried to conflate Covid-19 issues. The reality is that compared with the last pre-Covid races, the figures show that track deaths have gone up by 29%. That must be of concern to anybody who is interested in greyhound racing. Why are greyhound deaths going up?

Britain has reduced their fatality rates, has veterinarians at all trials and has an outright ban in place on surgical artificial insemination, AI. We have tabled an amendment on this issue because the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine has called for a similar ban here, including in respect of greyhounds. The committee was told by a veterinarian that even in sterile conditions, surgical AI carries risks and is a highly invasive procedure. Given that the recommendation secured cross-party support at the committee, I am sure there will be no problem in supporting a ban here.

The final issue of concern, which I also raised with the Minister at the committee, is the recommendation by the Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation, IGOBF, that its members do not give dogs to welfare organisations that have an anti-racing status. That is completely inappropriate. The Irish Retired Greyhound Trust, IRGT, is funded with public money, which it uses to help some of the welfare organisations that take the excess dogs the trust cannot deal with. The IRGT has a waiting list of between four and five months. It is completely inappropriate for the IGOBF to tell its members not to give dogs to shelters that are looking to put dogs in forever homes.