asked the Minister for Finance if it is the policy of the National Stud to lease partnerships in their thoroughbred stallions; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - National Stud Policy.
55.
I am informed by the Directors of the Irish National Stud Company Limited that hitherto all thoroughbred stallions at the National Stud have been acquired and retained in the full ownership of the company and that the question of leasing partnerships has not arisen.
Owing, however, to escalation of the price of thoroughbred stallions, the board does not exclude such an eventuality as purchase of part-ownership in a stallion which might be particularly suited to the needs of the stud and its clients and where full ownership was not feasible for financial or for other reasons.
Am I to understand from the Minister's reply that none of these thoroughbred stallions has been leased to date? My information is that Tudor Melody has been.
My information is that this has not taken place as yet although the board does not exclude the possibility of such a thing.
Does the Minister not consider that creating a leasehold in a thoroughbred stallion would prejudice the power the National Stud would have for the nomination of mares? At present they have a system whereby they equate it as fairly as possible. If they are subject to a partnership they will not be in a position to do that.
Does the Deputy mean in regard to the allocation or the price?
The allocation.
It is a possibility that I am quite sure the board would have borne in mind before they decided to take such action. As I have indicated, the information I have is that such action has not been taken. The board does not exclude the possibility of it but I have no doubt that, if they decided to engage in this kind of part-ownership, they would consider the point raised by the Deputy.
Can the board make that decision of their own volition or do they have to consult the Department or the Minister?
I think this would be a matter within the competence of the board. If it should appear that if the board made a decision on this and the consequence of that decision was to go against the whole purposes of the company the Minister would be entitled to interfere.
Further arising from that, would the Minister not agree that there could be a financial or taxation complication in view of the privileged position of the bloodstock breeders under our financial code, and that a very complicated situation could arise where part of the profits arising from a standing stallion would accrue to the National Stud and part would presumably go to a private company? Is that desirable?
I have not examined that possibility.
56.
asked the Minister for Finance if it is the policy of the National Stud to advertise the sales of thoroughbred stock that they are making or intend to make so that the public may have an opportunity of bidding if they so desire.
I am informed by the Board of Directors of the Irish National Stud Company Limited that, in conformity with practice in the bloodstock industry generally, thoroughbred bloodstock other than stallions to be sold by the company are offered for sale at the periodic public auctions of bloodstock at Ballsbridge or, occasionally, at Newmarket, England. In the case of stallions, I am informed that the company also follows normal practice in the bloodstock industry which is sale by private treaty without prior public advertisement.
Arising from the reply, is the Minister aware of the fact that a thoroughbred stallion, called Calcas, was bought for £50,000 and was sold for £5,000 which may well have been its price, but that it was not advertised in any way? This stallion was sold, so far as I can hear, at Doncaster by private treaty and no one got a chance to bid.
The general position is as stated by the Deputy. It is not true to say that no one got an opportunity to bid because, in fact, there was another offer for the stallion but it was turned down. It was lower than the offer eventually accepted.
I do not think that answers the question. Was the horse offered for public auction or was it sold by private sale?
I said in the original reply that the practice in the industry, and the one which has always been followed by the National Stud in the case of the sale of stallions, has been sale by private treaty without prior public advertisement. This was followed in this case also. What I am saying was not correct in the Deputy's contention was that nobody other than the purchaser had an opportunity to buy the stallion because somebody else made a bid for it.
We have quite a number of questions to deal with.
May I ask the Minister, in view of the fact that the bloodstock industry is no longer the confined one that it used to be but has now spread to Japan and other countries, is the policy of non-advertisement of stallions to be followed by the National Stud? Should they not go far afield looking for the best purchase price?
There are some quite good reasons for this practice which is followed by everybody in this industry and not only by the National Stud. So far as I know the reasons which have led to this practice still operate and would outweigh any advantages which might be gained by public advertisement.
We cannot discuss this question all evening. We have quite a number of questions to deal with.
What are the other reasons?
If the Deputy likes, he should put down another question.