I welcome the Minister of State to the House but I am disappointed that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, who is responsible for Bord na gCon did not see fit to come to the House. I accept that the Minister here is not responsible; he is representing the Government. I hope it is not an indication of the Government's interest in Bord na gCon.
The board was established 34 years ago and the legislation reflected the philosophy of the time and the approach by semi-State companies to administration, etc. That has now changed and the greyhound industry is an entertainment industry leaving the board with few administrative purposes. Bord na gCon is now managing an entertainment industry more than carrying out an administrative function. However, the board has not adapted to the changes, although it may be that existing legislation did not permit or facilitate it to do so.
The growth in attendances and the associated revenue over a number of years masked the inadequacies of the board but now with lower attendances these inadequacies are exposed. I ask the Minister of State to inform the House about developments on the recommendations of the Sixth Oireachtas Joint Committee on Commercial State-sponsored Bodies which reported in 1992. I was on that committee and Senator Lanigan and I took a special interest in this. I come from Limerick where the headquarters of Bord na gCon is situated and the greyhound industry is particularly important to Munster, as the Minister of State is aware. I would like an update on where the recommendations now stand.
The first recommendation dealt with the control function of the industry. The committee felt that the board had a semi-judicial control over the activities of its own members. It was controlling itself; in effect, the policeman was policing himself. The report recommended that the control function should be hived off to an independent control authority which would be comprised of seven members, five of whom would have knowledge and experience in all aspects of the industry, including breeding, owning, track ownership and bookmaking, while the other two would be from outside the industry. Its task would be to ensure that the highest standards would be observed in greyhound racing and it would also be responsible for implementing a code of practice for bookmakers. What developments have taken place in that area?
The report also wanted the track management to be more commercially orientated and it recommended that an organisation constituted like Bord na gCon could not compete effectively in a fast moving entertainment business. It recognised the difficulties involved in disposing of all the tracks but it said that a single track company should be formed, a subsidiary of Bord na gCon with its own board of directors who would be recruited from outside the industry but who would have relevant commercial experience. This was to bring a commercial orientation to the track management. What developments have taken place in that regard?
The committee also looked at the disposal of tracks and recommended the disposal of some of them. Has anything developed in that regard? The committee noted that some tracks would not find buyers as they were not efficient. The report also recommended that the tote should be assigned to the track company and if it could not make a reasonable contribution to the company's activities, it should be disposed of by sale or franchise to outside groups. Has that been considered?
The levy is relatively costly to administer and is uncertain in its impact. Many of the tracks pay out a similar amount in prize money as they collect in levy and there is an administrative procedure surrounding that. Is that being looked at? The joint committee urged that alternative methods be investigated for collecting the levy. There is no reason one should collect a lot of money in levy and then give much of it back in prize money. There must be a more administratively effective way of collecting the surplus from the levy over the prize money.
The committee also looked at the composition of Bord na gCon and felt that the board should include members drawn from the main interests in the industry, such as breeders, owners, bookmakers and private track operators. It also recommended that there should be three independent members chosen for their commercial expertise. It would require legislation to change the composition of the board and I wonder if legislation is proposed. It is not included in the new Greyhound Industry (Amendment) Bill, 1993, which has been published. That would have been an opportunity to implement many of these proposals, most of which require legislation and an amendment to the 1954 Act.
With regard to the regulation of horse and greyhound racing fixtures I welcome the proposal in the new Bill that there should be greyhound racing on a Sunday.
