The Bill now before the Seanad proposes to amend and repeal sections of the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958. The main provisions of the Bill are the reduction of the term of office of the board's ordinary members from five to three years, terminating on a rotational basis and for the removal of the specific vocational requirement for board membership; the muzzling of greyhounds at coursing meetings and trials and for the veterinary supervision of hares before, during and after such meetings and the removal of the prohibition on greyhound racing on Sundays. This Bill represents the first amendment to be proposed in respect of the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958.
When the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958, was enacted, its primary aims were the development of the greyhound industry, including greyhound racing and coursing, and for better control of greyhound race tracks and coursing grounds. Under that Act, Bord na gCon was established and assumed the role performed since 1916 by the Irish Coursing Club in relation to the control of greyhound racing. The board was also charged with the responsibility for the improvement and development of the industry as a whole while the coursing club retained control of coursing throughout the 32 counties. Indeed, the 1958 Act recognised the special position of the coursing club, providing as it did in a Schedule to the Act the constitution for that body. The club itself was given responsibility under the Act for maintaining the greyhound stud book and for controlling coursing, subject to the general direction of Bord na gCon.
The relationship between the board and the club is, it would be fair to say, unique in Ireland. The 1958 Act shifted responsibility for the overall control and development of the industry from a private body, namely, the club, to the newly formed board. In doing so, the Act acknowledged the contribution made by the club to the industry by recognising it as the keeper of the greyhound stud book and the controlling authority for the breeding controlling authority for greyhound coursing and by reserving three seats at the board for members of the executive of the club.
The importance of the greyhound industry in rural areas cannot be underestimated. Some 8,000 people are involved in the industry as breeders, owners and trainers. The breeding, rearing and training of greyhounds is, as I have said on a number of occasions outside the House, an integral part of the fabric of rural life in Ireland. It is an alternative enterprise of not insignificant proportions. When compared with the more glamorous alternative enterprises, such as horse breeding or agri-tourism, it may seem at first glance to be of minor significance. However, the figures tell a different story.
The University of Limerick and Bord na gCon have carried out surveys recently which show that three-quarters of the 8,000 people directly involved in the industry are small farmers. The activities of greyhound breeding, rearing and training generated an estimated farm income of £16 million or an average of £2,600 per farmer. Overall, the value of the industry to the national economy is put at £40 million. At grass roots level, the industry is in reasonably good condition. Breeders and rearers have a great deal of expertise and enjoy natural advantages in the production of greyhounds. However, the sector has not reached its full potential.
The industry is basically export-orientated, its main market being the United Kingdom. If the sector is to reach its full potential, existing export markets must be exploited to the full and new markets identified and developed. To achieve this aim, it is critical that buyers are attracted from abroad. A key variable in this equation is the performance of the greyhound racing sector. Aside from the merits which this sector has to recommend it on its own account, such as the direct and indirect employment that it provides and its contribution to the quality of life for residents and tourists, it is also the shop window for the industry.
Against this background of opportunity and potential, it is regrettable to have to report to the House that the current state of the greyhound industry as a whole is far from prosperous. The vital statistics of this sector of the industry speak for themselves. Attendances at greyhound race meetings fell from one million people in 1975 to approximately 700,000 in 1992. Levy income, one of the board's two main sources of generated income, increased between 1981 and 1991 by only £100,000 to £1.2 million. This, of course, represents a substantial reduction in real terms. Levy income is believed to have dropped to a figure slightly in excess of £1 million in 1992. Reduced attendances have also affected the tote. Net proceeds from the tote dropped from £700,000 in 1981 to 169,000 in 1991. Provisional figures for 1992 show a slight recovery to about £300,000.
In recent years, the board's income has been supplemented by grants-in-aid from revenue generated by the off-course betting levy. These grants-in-aid amounted to £0.5 million in 1990 and £0.75 million in each of the years 1991, 1992 and 1993. Despite this, all of the board's income is now used up on administration and prize money, leaving no funds available for developing the industry or for grant aiding the maintenance or improvement of facilities at tracks.
It is significant to note that against the backdrop of an on-course betting levy and tote income declining in real terms, the board found it possible to maintain its contribution to prize money. The board's contribution to prize money is in excess of £800,000 per annum and represents some 55 per cent of the board's operating income. Total prize money has seen a marked increase since the mid-1980s with the contributions from private sector sponsors increasing steadily. The sponsors were recruited by the board and the track managements themselves.
The tracks have to rely on income from administration fees, trial fees, bookmaker pitch fees and profits from bar and catering activities. The tracks find it difficult to operate profitably on this basis and there are no funds generated which could be used for reinvestment in facilities. The net result is that the tracks have become progressively run down.
It is particularly unfortunate that this should happen when the development of the positive showcase features of the industry, mainly the racing sector, has been identified as a key element in reviving the fortunes of the industry as a whole. There is little prospect, given the ever expanding variety of leisure activities from which the general public can choose, of attracting increased attendance at greyhound race meetings unless the facilities provided are upgraded to the standards expected today. This simple truth must be fully appreciated and addressed by those involved in the industry.
The board has recognised the difficulty within the industry and responded by drawing up a five year development plan. This plan, which was adopted in 1990, is aimed at restoring the board to profitability and redeveloping the industry. Its principal features are computerisation of operations; adoption of cost cutting measures and the reorganisation of management functions; reallocation of prize money with emphasis on raising attendance at the premier tracks; securing increased sponsorship and other income generating activities; the introduction of improved controls of racing and betting; greyhound breeding to be designated as an alternative farm enterprise; a national stud and a marketing centre to be established; and Shelbourne Park to be developed as the premier greyhound track in the country. As part of this plan Clonmel track was sold and Youghal track has been put up for sale. The question of the disposal of the Harold's Cross track, and the transfer of its racing fixtures to Shelbourne Park, is under consideration.
These measures have not, however, been enough to give the necessary fillip to this depressed industry. It is obvious from the board's experience and to any informed observer of the industry that nothing less than a fundamental restructuring of the industry is necessary. Indeed, as I indicated at the outset, it is now 35 years since the Oireachtas had the opportunity to consider in detail the legislative foundation for this industry. In this context the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Walsh, established a task force consisting of representatives of Bord na gCon and officials from the Department to examine the structures, financing and legislation governing the whole industry. The group was established in 1992 and its remit included the issue of coursing.
The task force concluded its deliberations some time ago. Subsequently the Department submitted a position paper on the industry to Minister Walsh and myself. Following consideration of the issue by us, proposals were put to and approved by Government last June. The Government recognised that a comprehensive amendment of the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958, is desirable and that this would be a time consuming and complex exercise. It, therefore, approved the preparation and introduction into the Dáil of a short Bill dealing with three issues of an urgent nature. Heads of a second Bill updating and amending the provisions of the 1958 Act are at present in the course of preparation in the Department and I will be pressing to have this work completed as soon as possible.
As I indicated at the outset, the Bill now before the House contains the following provisions (1) to amend section 9 of the 1958 Act by reducing the term of office of the board members from five to three years, terminating on a rotational basis, and by removing the specific vocational requirement for board membership; (2) to amend section 36 of the Act to provide for the making of regulations concerning the muzzling of greyhounds at coursing meetings and trials and for the proper treatment and veterinary supervision of hares before, during and after such meetings; and (3) to amend section 23 of the Act by removing the prohibition on greyhound racing on Sundays, Good Friday and Christmas Day.
The current legislation provides that the board consists of six ordinary members and a chairman. Under the Act as it stands, the terms of office of all ordinary members of the board expires at the same time every fifth year. This arrangement is undesirable for two reasons. The five year term in office is too long and can lead to stagnation closing, as it does, the opportunity of introducing new people and ideas onto the board for a five year period. It also dilutes the Minister's responsibility to tailor the composition of the board to address current issues facing the industry as they arise. The appointment of a new board every five years also militates against continuity and an entirely new board would obviously take some time to find its feet.
The measures proposed in the Bill will, I hope, remedy this situation by reducing the term of office to three years and by providing that members retire on a rotational basis. This simply means that every year the positions held by two ordinary members of the board will fall vacant. This rotational mechanism has worked to great effect in a number of State bodies and is becoming increasingly popular in modern legislation.
Turning to the question of the removal of the specific vocational requirement, the Act as it stands provides that three of the six members of the board, and not more than three, shall be members of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club. It should be clear to Senators that this provision has as its raison d'tre the very historical basis of the board itself. As I already said, the board took over the club's role in relation to greyhound racing when it was established in 1959. In recognition of this and of the fact that the expertise in the control of greyhound racing at that time resided in the club, it was considered desirable to reserve these places on the board for club members.
This provision is now too restrictive and means that only three places are available for all other sectors of the industry, such as owners, breeders, trainers, private track owners and bookmakers. A case could also be made that the board should include someone with good business and financial experience and expertise. I fully recognise that members of the ICC could claim to represent greyhound owners, breeders, trainers and even private track owners, and, indeed, a new board might well contain several people who happen to be members of the standing committee of the ICC. However, the statutory requirement is no longer valid and should be removed. The inclusion of this provision in the 1958 Act must be looked at in the light of the circumstances obtaining at that time. That is to say that it was a recognition of the de facto position that the club had a role in relation to the control and organisation of greyhound racing up to the establishment of the board.
Earlier this year the question of coursing was given a comprehensive examination in the Dáil in the context of the Wildlife Bill, 1993. The debate on that Bill was valuable. As I made clear at that time, and on several occasions since, my aim to remove the kill. This feature of coursing is unacceptable in the current climate and taints the entire industry. I will use every means at my disposal to achieve this end. The Irish Coursing Club has voluntarily introduced controls and measures aimed at eliminating the kill during coursing meetings and trials. These include rules changes to reduce the number of courses; improved veterinary supervision; better conservation of hare stocks and the development of a muzzle. This latter measure has required significant research by the club. Initially a soft leather muzzle was used and more recently a plastic one. The search for the most suitable muzzle from an animal welfare point of view will continue.
I have set up a monitoring committee within the Department to oversee the implementation of these measures, to assess their implications and to advise on the need for any other measures. In accordance with the agreement they reached with me, the ICC commenced the phasing in of muzzling on a trial basis at the beginning of the current season. In the initial stage of the trials, the greyhounds participating in the semi-finals and finals of all stakes were muzzled. The ICC recently agreed to extend these trials on muzzling to over 50 per cent of all courses.
The latest information available to me, covering the period up to 10 December, is that out of 1,932 courses involving muzzles six hares were killed and ten more were injured and were put down. The momentum towards increasing the level of muzzling will continue with all greyhounds being muzzled at enclosed coursing meetings before the end of this season and possibly as early as January.
It is my belief that the agreement which we have reached with the club will be observed without the necessity of legislative backing. Nevertheless, I consider it prudent to avail of this opportunity to include a provision authorising the Minister to make regulations providing for the muzzling of greyhounds at coursing meetings and for the proper care and veterinary supervision of hares before, during and after such meetings. These are enabling provisions which will give the Minister power to introduce the required measures without delay if the need arises. In the present circumstances and in view of the responsible attitude adopted by the club, the need for the regulations is questionable. I hope Senators agree that my policy of control by consent is the correct one in this issue. However, I assure the House that if the need arises I will have no hesitation in introducing appropriate regulations.
Turning to the third and final substantial issue in the Bill, it is proposed to remove the statutory provision prohibiting greyhound racing on Sundays, Good Friday and Christmas Day. The removal of the restriction on holding greyhound races on particular days is universally welcomed by all sectors of the industry. It should be clear that the greyhound industry is in direct competition with other activities in the leisure business. No similar restrictions concerning the days on which horse racing may take place exist and I believe it would be only fair to apply the same principle to the greyhound industry. For this reason I seek the removal of references to all prohibited days. While I have no particular desire to see greyhound racing on Good Friday or Christmas Day, I am staunchly of the view that the greyhound industry should not be seen as operating at any disadvantage, whether real or perceived, vis-à-vis other forms of entertainment against which they have to compete for customers.
The Bill also provides that this measure will be effective from 1 December 1992. This is being done to regularise the position regarding two particular meetings held on Sundays during the past year, one of which was a charity event organised by the board and the other major international event at the privately owned Dundalk track. At the time both of these events were run, Government policy in regard to the ban on Sunday racing had been publicly stated. Consequently, I believe this measure is warranted and desirable.
In conclusion, I would say that it is our responsibility as legislators to provide the statutory framework which will enable the industry to reach its full potential. The current legislative framework is the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958. A thorough overhaul of this legislation is now called for and I hope to present a Bill to the House in the new year which will hopefully establish a legal framework which can be instrumental in enabling the greyhound industry to reach its full potential.
In the interim this preliminary Bill, dealing with three urgent matters, is presented to the House for adoption. The issues — the reconstitution of Bord na gCon, the removal of the ban of Sunday greyhound racing and enabling provisions empowering the Minister to make regulations governing the muzzling of greyhounds at coursing meetings and veterinary supervision of hares — are desirable and I recommend their adoption to the House.