I should like to continue along the line of discussion originated by the Taoiseach, as it affects the people who are concerned with the bloodstock industry generally. I am now glad that somebody who is interested in the business is here, Deputy Barrett. Prior to this we did not have anybody from the Fianna Fáil benches who was interested in breeding, racing or otherwise.
Racing Board and Racecourses Bill, 1975: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".
That is totally incorrect.
The Deputy is contradicting himself; he is like the market, he fluctuates. Prior to this he complimented Deputy Crowley on being an owner and trainer but now he has changed his mind.
The Fianna Fáil group should have brought into this House somebody who knows something about this Bill; they did not up to then. I mentioned particularly Deputy Haughey and Deputy Barrett. I am glad the latter is here. Widows' weeds and crocodile tears were shed here this morning by Deputy O'Malley on behalf of the bookmakers. I should like to repeat that never since the introduction of legalisation of betting have the bookmakers had access to any Minister. I speak as one who has been a bookmaker for more than 40 years. If my memory serves me right, the late Seán T. O'Kelly introduced the Racing Board Act in 1945 and Deputy Paddy Smith introduced the Bord na gCon Act. Those people never tried to get acceptance of the views of the people most concerned in the industry until now. The bookmakers met, not alone the Minister for Finance, but the Taoiseach also. We are convinced, because of what the Taoiseach said to us that while he is in office—which will be for a long time—that what he is now doing is the right thing for the industry.
I wish to refer to 1945 when the Act was first introduced and when we were trying to plead to a Minister who would not see us. I was one of those who was trying to plead with him: I tried to knock at his door but could not meet him. We were told then indirectly, outside this House, by certain people who were members of Fianna Fáil and bookmakers, that this and that would be done. However, we could never get in to talk to a Minister about the whole thing. We did this yesterday. Bookmakers are happy with the reception by the Taoiseach yesterday. We are satisfied that the 1 per cent being introduced will be provided particularly for the smaller man, such as Deputy Crowley, who has——
Small in the owner sense.
I speak in generalities. We accept the Taoiseach's assurance that while he is there this 1 per cent will not be increased.
I did not hear the Taoiseach give that assurance.
He never gave it.
We know it. The bookmakers are satisfied with what the Taoiseach said to us. Fianna Fáil Deputies need not shed crocodile tears over tombstones for bookmakers. We will stand on our own feet. We got assurances that we never succeeded in getting while Fianna Fáil were in power. At the same time they took our subscriptions, our contributions and our heavy levies to the Fianna Fáil Party. Now they shed crocodile tears for us. We can look after our own profession and we do not need Deputy O'Malley to tell us about something we have been born, and reared in. Their grandfathers, fathers and grandsons were here yesterday speaking to the Taoiseach. He is a man who understands our profession. We are satisfied with what is happening. Let nobody misrepresent us or talk to us about this.
What about the statements of Mr. Barrett, Secretary of the Deputy's association?
We have a few Fianna Fáil men.
What about the Red Menace?
As a bookmaker by profession for more than 40 years I want to assure this House that we are satisfied with everything in this Bill. Let nobody from Fianna Fáil shed these tears for us. We are satisfied that the Taoiseach has met us and we have teased out all our problems with him. We know that the Taoiseach is prepared to meet us again and again.
If you are happy why do you have to meet him again?
Because there are matters in our profession that the Deputy knows little or nothing about, and I am not going to educate him. Let him go back to the Jesuits and they might educate him but I am not going to do it in my profession as a bookmaker. I want to assure the Taoiseach again that everybody is happy and satisfied with what is contained in this Bill.
Deputy Crowley mentioned our show jumpers. The show jumpers were knocked completely by Fianna Fáil and we had the Dan Corrys, the Gerry Dwyers of Limerick and the Cyril Hartys who made our showjumpers famous all over the world, and what happened? Fianna Fáil withdrew their travelling allowances, their expenses, their entertainment, and the Army jumping team collapsed because of the action of nobody else but the Fianna Fáil Party.
I am prepared and I am sure the whole Coalition are prepared to see the Army jumping team and the bloodstock from our nation properly represented and wearing our colours in international fields, but it is very hard to dig a ridge that has already been covered and sown over by Fianna Fáil. Again we will have the Gerry Dwyers and the Cyril Hartys if we can only go back to the days when these people were treated properly.
Let there be no misunderstanding in anybody's mind within Fianna Fáil, we are satisfied with the contents of this Bill. We have encouraged it and we wanted it because, as I have said, we are the cheapest racing nation in the world. Our racing has been kept to a minimum of 1945 prices, admission fees, free carriage for horses, owners, trainers and all the people concerned, more than any place else in Europe, and the world is satisfied because of what we are doing. By putting an increase of 1 per cent on the levy charged we believe that, without our recommendation which has already gone to the Taoiseach and which he is considering and which will go back to him for further consideration, this Bill will provide for the bloodstock industry something that was never achieved previously.
My first inkling that such a Bill was in the pipeline was when the Minister for Finance made his budget speech. At that time he made reference to an increase in the levy from 5 per cent to 10 per cent. My first reaction at that time was to indicate that I would be totally against that 10 per cent. It is with reluctance that I would agree to the 6 per cent that has been mentioned here, but we must remember that, no matter what assurances are given to certain members of a certain fraternity behind closed doors and that might not subsequently be adhered to, what we must apply ourselves to is what is actually in the Bill.
The Bill, as I read it, proposes to increase the levy on course betting from 5 per cent to a possible 10 per cent. I know we are told now that it will be only a 1 per cent increase, to 6 per cent, but human nature being what it is, if we give the Racing Board a free hand to increase it as they think fit, people will need a little more, and so the 6 per cent in 1976 will surely become 7 per cent in 1977. I can see the percentage keeping pace with the years, and by the time we get to 1980 we will have a 10 per cent increase in the levy.
Our attitude on this side of the House is to ask the Taoiseach to ensure that the 6 per cent that he has promised and that he is quite willing to grant to Members on the otherside of the House be written into the Bill. If it is necessary for the Racing Board to come back and look for an increase they can come back to us and we will meet them as we are meeting them now with the interests of racing and the interests of the bloodstock industry at heart. We should remember that at the moment the levy is a percentage levy. If the betting goes well there is every reason to hope that the percentage will go well too and an examination of the figures, which I will deal with later, shows that there has been a substantial increase in betting each year. There would need to be a substantial increase to keep pace with inflation, but the increase perhaps is more than the inflationary increase, and, therefore, as things stand now 6 per cent in a good year should be enough to keep the wheels turning and allow the Racing Board to achieve what they hope for.
I am convinced that a 10 per cent increase would put a stop to a great deal of betting. People who go to a race meeting now and have a £1 bet on each of the six races realise that they are going to pay 30p to the Exchequer. The proposal now is that it be made 36p even if they never back a winner. That is enough to expect anyone to pay and we should not give anyone carte blanche to do more than that.
I have listened attentively to the people who have spoken on this Bill. I have listened to the Taoiseach. I am glad that we have a Taoiseach who is a racing man and a horse man and that somebody has intervened with the Minister for Finance to ensure that the 10 per cent he mentioned on budget day will be cut to a proposed 6 per cent now. However, as I said before, I would like to see that figure written into the Bill hard and fast so that we could be sure it was there. I have also listened to Deputy O'Malley and, unlike those who are carping in their criticism from the opposite side, I feel that he made a very good case. He examined the Bill and examined the previous Bill to such effect that he was in a position to point out that there might be a possible flaw in the previous Bill and that the poor, unfortunate bookmakers out of their winnings are giving far more in taxation than they are required to give.
The then Minister refused to meet us.
I am sure some of them feel very strongly about that. Deputy O'Malley, in his contribution, showed that he had done his homework well as regards this Bill. I listened to Deputy Crowley, too, who dealt with the future of the racing industry and further explained the need for assistance to this very valuable industry. I listened to Deputy Coughlan before and after lunch and in the main I felt that he dealt in abuse of Deputy O'Malley. He questioned Deputy O'Malley's motives in coming in here to speak on behalf of Fianna Fáil. Everybody who has spoken on the Bill up to now was interested in the Bill from a racing point of view. They looked on it as a very valuable industry, both racing and bloodstock, and they looked for its improvement and preservation. But Deputy Coughlan spoke as a bookmaker. His interest in racing stems from the fact that he handles money and not horses.
I have often heard it said that those that deal a lot with horses become equine in their appearance. I dare say that those that deal in money become very merciless and that their life is guided by the fact that they are dealing solely in money. To me as a representative of Kildare I think horses are lovely and I think that money is dirty. Everything that Deputy Coughlan has said has convinced me of that particular view.
I would like to deal with this Bill and horse racing as an industry and I need hardly stress to the Taoiseach or anyone else how important it is to my county where it gives employment in many ways. The first type of employment that springs to mind and the people with whom I am more closely allied than any others would be the stable lads. We have trainers and farriers and saddlers. We have a market for straw and oats and hay. In an indirect way we have a market for contractors, erection of buildings and pailings and digs for stable boys. I am a little worried that we have running this country a cabinet that is composed of certain people about whose interest in racing I am very dubious.
I am particularly doubtful about the interest of the present Minister for Post and Telegraphs. I read a book he wrote called “The States of Ireland” and in one of the chapters he devoted considerable time——
What book was that?
This is a book written by your colleague who dubbed you a buffoon at one stage and I agree with him there.
Nat Gould?
He devoted a chapter to denigrating Deputy Haughey and possibly he utilised what he felt was the most supreme form of denigration and he said that Deputy Haughey——
Would the Deputy please return to the Bill?
I will, Sir—lived in an eighteenth century fashion in which horses played a conspicuous part. He felt that anyone who lived in a fashion where horses played a conspicuous part was a very low type indeed. I hope that that feeling has not permeated the rest of the Cabinet. But I have a feeling that, like woodworm in any other cabinet, that is likely to happen.
We are fortunate in this country to have the climate and the bloodstock that we have and for many years we have been exporting horses to many countries. I remember in my young days horses being exported to Russia and South Africa and Belgium, and in spite of the fact that more recently many of the horses that are winning our best races have not been bred in Ireland it is apparent that to renew the line all these people must come back to Ireland to purchase new stock from us. Our climate and our land and our limestone seem to give horses that particular quality that is not available or that is bred out in other countries.
We are fortunate that we have an industry that has taken a position in the shop window of the world, and we should not take this for granted and we should foster it in every way we can.
It has been mentioned that it is necessary to increase our prize money. The need for this is apparent. Yesterday, we had an English Derby that was worth £106,000. We should remember that the prize money that is available to owners here in Ireland is very much less than the prize money available to the people in England and particularly in France. Our leading trainer last year, who had over 100 winners here in Ireland would, I am sure, have cause for thought if he viewed the prize money garnered by those 100 winners and the prize money that was gained by some of his entries who won some of the prestige races in England. Possibly it is a sobering thought that the owner of those horses, who transferred those horses here to Ireland as a result of certain taxation proposals in England last year, has now brought them back to England again. The Bill that was being debated a few minutes ago before this House, the Bill on wealth tax, has driven many people out of racing in Ireland and has made the future of the breeding industry and the future of investment by very wealthy people and the consequent employment very doubtful indeed.
I am not so much concerned with the increase in big prize money for prestige races. Yesterday when the Derby was being run in England we had racing in two venues here in Ireland and there was a sizeable field for a stake of £345 in Sligo. It is essential that we improve our prize money at our small meetings rather than the big prestige races even though they may be at the Curragh, Leopardstown and the Park. From looking at the figures and from a study of racing over a considerable number of years I believe that we have at the moment in our country too many bad horses in training. This is to be seen every time there is a maiden race or a four- or five-year-old hurdle. They usually have to be divided and we have horses there that are unlikely ever to win a race. We should remember that many wealthy people are not in racing for the purpose of making money; it is a hobby with them. Many people who keep a horse down the country would hope that they will get a winner that will keep them in business and if they do not, they will probably be out of business.
Deputy O'Malley, during his contribution, divided the prize money available for the year by the number of horses in training and he came up with a figure that each horse is likely to get something in the region of £300 or a little more.
But he omitted free transport and little or no cost for admission. Figures can be baffling and there is no greater baffler in this House than Deputy O'Malley.
(Interruptions.)
If you take all that into account even the Taoiseach admitted that it is conservative to say that £1,200 a year would keep a horse in training. I am sure it would be nearer the £2,000 mark. An owner would hope to gain £300 by investing £2,000. Not many people are in a position to do that. I think we should discourage some of the owners that we have. If this can be done there would have to be a limit placed on the amount of horses in training because there is a limit to the amount of horses that racing can absorb in this country, just as there is a limit to the amount of horses that we can breed and hope to sell and keep our industry viable.
It has been mentioned here by a representative of the bookmakers that the 6 per cent increase is a delight to them, that they are entirely happy with this. I can see that this 6 per cent increase will lead to a need for a great amount of small coins, and I would hope that the representative of the bookmakers will make it clear to his colleagues that they should come to each race meeting with plenty of small change. I trust that those people who receive your bet quite graciously will pay out just as graciously and will not ask if you have your tax ready. I hope that when we bring to their notice the fact that this 6 per cent, the extra one per cent, which will prove difficult to pay in taxation, should be very acceptable to them and that their representative here in the House was quite happy with it. I hope we will have no quibbles with any bookmaker over paying, particularly after the last race.
I am glad that an appeals committee for bookmakers is to be set up. This is something that is needed. It has already been in existence in the greyhound industry. The appeals board that is likely to be set up will possibly benefit from some of the flaws that were seen in that earlier one. Bookmakers have a right to appeal.
I compliment the Racing Board on having machinery at their disposal to allow the punters the right to appeal. I had an unfortunate experience at Punchestown when a bookmaker refused to pay me but when I brought a member of the Racing Board to him I was paid. This type of appeal board would have to be a two-way zone.
Deputy O'Malley mentioned that the penalties to be imposed on those who contravene the regulations appear to be substantial. I presume the penalties are in keeping with the amount of money that those who are hoping to defraud the Exchequer are likely to make. I suppose they are needed for that. What happens to the penalties imposed? Perhaps they could be ploughed back into racing rather than to go to the Exchequer. Very little off-course betting tax, apart from the £100,000 mentioned by the Taoiseach, finds its way back into racing. If we are sincere about improving our racing industry we would—as they do in other countries —improve the conditions and plough the money back into the industry.
We must approach the whole problem with open minds. Racing is not the preserve of the rich. Our approach should be a helpful one rather than one which milks it of everything possible.
I am glad the Taoiseach mentioned the National Stud. I, too, would like to join with the compliments that have been paid to this establishment. I compliment them on the steady progress they have made particularly in the last few years. I am aware that they have made a considerable profit. The stud is being run as a model stud should be run. I am very proud to be able to bring visitors from abroad to our National Stud and let them see what we have on offer. Being a National Stud and their business being known to everyone they are often cockshots for criticism. Some considerable criticism was levied at them some years ago when Tulyar was bought and there was subdued criticism when he was subsequently sold. I am sure there will be criticism now that Whistling Wind has been sold to Japan and his progeny has won races with uncomfortable regularity. In general the National Stud is providing high class stallions at a subsidised fee to our producers are doing a tremendous job.
The availability of chasing sires to breeders is something that could be improved. It is impossible to recognise a chasing sire and in many cases the sire is dead before his progeny has made the grade. Those who would look upon Red Rum and his sire and ask: "how would you pick out a chasing sire?" would probably be right. There have been studs in Kildare that have produced sires like Fortino, Vulgan, and Bargello. They seem always to be in the forefront as far as chasing sires are concerned. I was hoping that the present sire in the National Stud, Guilymar, might prove his usefulness in this category but he has not done so up to now. I hope another look will be given to this and help given to the people who are in the business of producing horses for jumping or for stores at a later stage.
It has been mentioned that this Bill has a 10 per cent maximum, that this maximum could be imposed at the will of the Racing Board and that this would cause an increase in illegal betting. I think that would happen if it was increased to 10 per cent because there would be twice as big an incentive to avail of illegal betting and to take part in illegal betting than there is now. Six per cent may not have much effect in this regard but I hope it is 6 per cent that is adhered to.
Deputy O'Malley mentioned that the £100,000 paid to the Racing Board by the Exchequer is more than is paid back by way of tax and that this tax was only increased to this amount recently. It is an indication of the Government's attitude that they take from racing rather than invest in racing. I am glad that the proposal will lead to increased grants to racecourses. Many racecourses are said to be losing money. I would have hoped that no further efforts will be made to close down any of the existing racecourses. I have seen the demise of two in Mullingar and certain others were scheduled for the guillotine too but I am glad that has been stopped. There was a system of grading of racecourses at that time and certain racecourses were not to get any help. I am glad to see that they have got a reprieve. Some of them— like Kilbeggan—which were due for the guillotine and were reprieved have proved very successful.
Racing plays an important role as an assistance to tourism. It would be well to remember that there was racing in Tralee before there was any rose but it might be difficult to have a rose in Tralee without having the races.
There was racing in Tralee before the Deputy was born.
Deputy McEllistrim was telling me about Deputy Coughlan's activities in Tralee. The Galway and Tramore meetings in August are other examples of racing being the cornerstone of a festival. In any other industry we would expect grants and subsidies from the Government rather than to be taxed.
In racing we have dealt with the problems of the owners and the trainers. Deputy Crowley dealt with the problems of the jockeys, particularly national hunt jockeys. I would like to comment on the wages now being paid to stable boys. There has been a furore in England on this subject which led to picketing and a strike at Newmarket. Stable boys' wages are low; their hours are long, the work is hard but the perks are fairly limited. We were told that the Minister for Labour had in his Department certain people who were kite flyers, so to speak, people who were in a position to give advance warning of trouble. It might be well that these precursors of distress would apply themselves to this problem of stable boys, particularly in the Curragh area and see if they could help.
Deputy Coughlan said that he never solicits. Every successful bookmaker I know seems to solicit all the time because they are always shouting their odds. If that is not soliciting I do not know what is.
I wish the Government and in particular this city Cabinet would realise that we are dealing with the racing and bloodstock industry. We are dealing with an industry which gives great employment. It is an industry in which, even now, there is no recession. While we have factories in distress in Kildare, in racing there is no one on a five-day week. The poor fellows involved in racing are all on a seven-day week. There is no cut-back. They are doing this without any significant help from the Exchequer by way of grants or subsidies. I am sure they are a help to tourism. In many cases races are the major attraction around which a festival is built and they provide a market for our produce in many ways.
The people involved in breeding and ownership of racehorses are very upset by the wealth tax. I am confident of that and I know I have the facts right, and other taxes. We should realise that owners as such are not in racing to make money, that if the leading ten owners in any year and their winnings were bracketted on one side and the cost of keeping the strings of horses in training bracketted on the other side the cost of keeping the horses in training would be much more than the amount of prize money they have won—and they are the leading ten owners. It is no wonder, then, that they are forced to bring off a coup on occasions. It is dubious whether this is a wise thing to do with the present climate here and in England.
There is no future in it.
We should not frighten them away. In spite of the criticisms I have made I would like to pay tribute to the Racing Board. They do a good job for racing and I want them to continue to do so. For many years, the winning of the Derby by any English challenger was a formality but even this year, yesterday's English Derby winner has indicated that he might come over for our Sweeps Derby here. It is no longer a formality and it is due to the efforts of many people that this has been changed and even reversed and our challengers can go over there and pose a threat.
I would like to pay tribute, too, to the firms that sponsor our racing. It is good advertising for them and it is money well spent. I am glad that admission charges are being kept down. I would hope that this would have the effect of attracting more people to racing. I would like to compliment various managements in different racecourses—Punchestown, for one—for their family day, and other racecourses who have innovations like this to attract more people to racing. When we see a million people have gone racing in Ireland in a year it sounds a big figure, but when you divide it up among all the race meetings we have it is not such a very big figure at all. I would prefer that the racing in Ireland was at the stage where the present 5 per cent of a bigger amount that would be got from betting each year by a bigger race going public would be more than the 6 per cent that might be got from a diminishing attendance.
We know, if we examine the amount in betting, that there was £11.8 million bet in 1970. These were bets with the books. That increased from £11.8 million to £18.4 million in 1974; at the same time, Tote betting increased in the same year from £4.4 million to £5.8 million. That to me represents a pretty steady increase and therefore the percentage increase should have been steady too. I would ask the Taoiseach to ensure that this Cabinet, his National Coalition Government, approach racing and betting with the view of people anxious to help, to put in rather than to take out. I am happy enough to accept the extra 1 per cent increase if it is needed now and if it will do good to racing. We are happy enough to settle for that. I trust the Minister will accept 6 per cent only for now and that he will not look for a potential 10 per cent to be used by the Racing Board at will.
First of all, the Irish horse has been a great ambassador for our nation. In every racecourse in the world, in every showjumping centre, the Irish horse has brought credit and honour to this country. I would like to pay a tribute to our Taoiseach for coming here and introducing this Bill. When I look back I can remember the support the late President Cosgrave gave to horse breeding and to horse-racing. It is no wonder that his son should continue to take an interest in these activities. In that I include Mrs. Cosgrave whose family have been associated with the breeding and training and racing of horses and whose family have produced the best horses in the world. I would also like to mention several other families here—it would take a long time to speak of them all —who have assisted racing, and I will not forget to mention Joe McGrath, who started a stud here and whose horses won every important race in the British Isles and outside it.
Racing has given considerable employment here and if anything happened that would reduce that employment, it would have serious consequences for the country. It is up to us here in Dáil Éireann to do everything we can to help the industry at this time. With regard to the money involved in prizes, as Deputies opposite said, inflation has reduced its value and prize money must be increased to keep pace as far as possible with inflation. I had the prilivege of being in Cheltenham when that great racehorse won the Cheltenham Gold Cup for the first time. I was amazed to see the number of Irish exiles who attended that meeting and were so proud to be associated with an Irish winner. Indeed, the Irish roar as they call it at Cheltenham is recognised as meaning that a big percentage of those who follow the sport are Irishmen. Many of them may give up their day's hire or week's hire to attend these races.
The same applies to showjumping, whether in the White City, Rome, Canada or the United States. Our horses and riders have indeed brought the name of Ireland to the fore. Visitors from those countries have come here and bought our Irish horses and indeed those horses have been recognised as the best the world can produce. I hope we will continue breeding and keeping this type of horse and that we will give to the breeders every assistance we possibly can.
The National Stud is doing great work for the small breeder. This was initiated very recently and I want to thank them for it because without that help small breeders would not be able to pay the big fees demanded and given for those great sires that are at international studs.
One aspect of horse breeding I would like to draw to the attention of the House is the breeding of showjumpers principally from the Irish draught mares. I believe that enough encouragement is not given to the breeding and keeping of these mares. If that breed is to be kept and encouraged, a substantial sum must be given to the owners to keep them and breed from Irish draught stallions.
If that is not done, we will lose the foundation stock for our showjumpers. While some advance has been made recently, and more nominations have been given for this type of mare, it is not really enough, that the best type should be given at least the sum of £50 towards the holding and the breeding of Irish draught horses. They are the foundation of our showjumpers and if we lose them we will not be able to replace them. Anything that can be done to help the horse-breeding industry should be done and I know every member of my party will agree with me.
I should like to say a few words on this Bill. Having heard Deputy Power's contribution—I did not hear the earlier ones—I feel he covered the course very well. He did an excellent job of going through all the different facets and features of racing and showed a deep knowledge of the industry.
I also heard Deputy Coughlan's contribution. We know that the bookmakers are always very happy— rarely have I seen an unhappy one. I do not think the punters worry very much whether the bookmakers are happy or not but we like to see Deputy Coughlan happy. He is pleased with everything contained in the Bill even though he was critical of Fianna Fáil. He said we robbed the horse-breeding industry and did everything possible to harm it. Everybody knows that it was under successive Fianna Fáil Governments that racing reached its present standard, where we have become an important nation as regards the breeding of horses. It was under Fianna Fáil that racing was commenced after the last war when it had been curtailed because of rationing and it was under Fianna Fáil that the Irish Sweeps Derby was started. Therefore, our party did not do much harm to the racing industry.
With regard to the Bill, we all appreciate, as the Taoiseach said in his opening speech, the importance of racing and the bloodstock industry to the country. It is an industry that has survived and expanded and it contributes a great deal to our balance of payments. We hope it will continue to expand.
It was due to the efforts of the people involved in the industry that it expanded. Many of them never got much out of it despite the fact that racing, over the years, was identified as the sport of the rich. It is far from that. Without the small punter and the ordinary racegoer there would be no racing. It would probably reach the stage where two horses would be racing, watched by two millionaires. The racing public are all important and must be given first consideration.
We must also consider the breeders, owners, jockeys and stable lads. The owners are most important because without them there would not be any horses. Conditions must be sufficiently attractive to encourage people to own and train horses because it not easy to do that today. If the overall charges were estimated they would be in the region of £2,000 and it would probably be higher in the Dublin area than in the south and west. Horse-owners, particularly the small man must have some incentive to continue. We are not concerned with the millionaire-type of horse-owners who have horses in training with the O'Briens and Prendergasts and many other trainers.
What about the Costellos?
No millionaire owners there. These people are not interested in the stake money; they are interested in the glory of winning the Irish Sweeps Derby, the Epsom Derby, the Prix de l'Arc de Triumphe, the Grand National or the Cheltenham Gold Cup. The people who race horses at Limerick, Tralee, Thurles or Galway are the small owners. They have often to struggle to keep a horse in training but they enjoy racing and like to be involved in the industry. The only way it can be made worthwhile for these people is to have increased stake money. It is ridiculous at present to have a large number of horses racing for a first prize of £207. It bears no relation to the increasing costs of being involved in racing. Therefore, we should try to get the Racing Board to do something about stake money. Stake money in the metropolitan area is better than on provincial tracks. The percentage should be confined to 6 per cent and not be left open to 10 per cent when the Racing Board decide to apply for permission to increase it.
We also maintain that the 1 per cent, the extra money which would come from the Racing Board, should be put into stake money. Without increased stakes racing will not be improved. I am not thinking of the large races but of the provincial tracks. Even 1 per cent of the bookmakers' course levy, the total for 1974 was £896,000, comes to a very sizable sum, and it would be a tremendous injection of prize money. It would have a most beneficial effect on our racing industry. It would give a great fillip to present owners and would encourage new people to become involved. At present people do not feel that it is worth while racing for £200 or £207 for first prize. The only way they can subsidise their costs is to try to get involved in a gamble to the detriment of the bookmakers, of course. There is nothing wrong with gambling. It has always been part of horse racing and part of greyhound racing. There is nothing like a good, healthy, clean gamble, though the bookmakers are not too happy when the gamble comes off. Most racegoers, particularly Irishmen, like a good gamble. They admire people when they bring it off. In this country, when a good gamble is brought off, the bookmakers do not whinge so much as bookmakers across the water, something we witnessed a few months ago.
They would not have objected, of course, if the horse had lost.
As far as we know, our own bookmakers who were involved in this particular gamble paid out without a word but we cannot say the same about the fraternity across the water, who started whinging, roaring and crying and created a great fuss when they were caught with their trousers down. As Deputy Crowley said, we would not have heard one word about it if "Gay Future" finished up that day without a future.
They would not even have refunded the money.
They would not have thought of refunding it. The smaller stake money brings in more and more gambling but there is no way of stopping that. The tendency to concentrate on the returns from gambling in racing is greater when there is nothing else to race for. There must be some incentive. The small owners are the people who must be looked after and £170,000 odd is a sizeable amount of money, if it is ploughed back properly into the provincial tracks and the stake money which is so very inadequate.
As everyone appreciates, the industry has always stood on its own feet and has added in no small way to our balance of payments through exports down through the years, whether they be foals, yearlings, unraced two-year-olds, or even the horses in training. We have sent abroad some of the finest horses in the world, not only to England, France and America, but to other countries where they have performed with great distinction. They will continue to do so and will bring fame and establish the names of the sires here in Ireland.
The breeding side is all important. There are many fine studs here, some privately owned and some owned by foreigners. They have, undoubtedly, an important function and have produced some very fine horses and sires with a great racing history and performance behind them. The National Stud is most important but the very expensive sires there are beyond the reach of the small breeders. It is only proper that they should have available to them top-class sires at reasonable fees.
Breeding of light racers can be very chancy. Every year we read about the Ballsbridge and Newmarket autumn sales, about prices like £50,000 and £60,000 and about all those that make the big money. However, if one looks down the small print there are always some down in the three figures as well. The sires and dams of these are usually found to be fairly well bred. Some people can be lucky and make a lot of money, if they hit on the right strain, but there are many more who take the risk of paying the stud fee, hoping for the best, and are not so lucky.
Therefore, the National Stud is all-important as the foundation of racing, so as to ensure that our small breeders will continue in business and will have available to them top-class sires at reasonable stud fees. The National Stud have had some fine sires. They have given big money for some of them. They gave big money for one that was a total failure, namely, Tulyar, even though he was a Derby and a St. Leger winner. They were lucky to sell him when they did at a reasonable figure. They have also imported some French and other strains in order to make top-class sires available to the small breeders and we hope they will continue to do so.
Deputy Power mentioned the fact that the national hunt side of horse breeding should be looked at with a view to having better sires. It takes time to realise that a sire is a national hunt proposition. The national hunt horse does not develop as early in life. We hope that our national hunt will be fully maintained and that the National Stud will look to the national hunt side of breeding. We all love to see the Derby and to see five furlong sprints, but the sight of a really good steeplechase is really the tops in racing. We know the attraction of the English and Irish Grand Nationals, or even the Galway Plate every year. Even the stay-at-home public watch them on television. I regret to say that Mallow racecourse has no decent big race in the year, although it is the only racetrack inside the boundaries of County Cork. The Cork people should do something about it.
That is a bit unfair.
There are very many owners and breeders inside the boundaries of County Cork and there are many racing establishments.
Does it call for sponsorship?
It does and, in all fairness, it is the largest county in Ireland and, with such an interest in racing, there is room for development within the boundaries of County Cork. In County Kerry, where I do not think there is one horse trained, they have three festival meetings each year with some quite attractive races: Killarney, Tralee and Listowel. This is something that the Cork people might consider.
You have not so many race courses.
We have one on the boundary—right on the Shannon, as the Deputy knows well. He also knows that over 50 per cent of the racegoers and punters at the Limerick track are from across the Shannon.
There is no racetrack in Clare.
There is one in a place called Miltown Malbay but it is too near the Atlantic Ocean. There was too much sand.
We notice that the total number of bloodstock in the country is 20,000 and the number of horses in training is 4,600. I do not know if that is an increase in recent years or if the numbers are going down. I should have thought that the number of owners is not increasing because of the lack of prize money at the provincial tracks. I understand that there is now a tendency of people grouping together to form a small group of four or five people to buy a horse. This is the most economic way to do it. The more money we can put before owners in the form of stakes, the better it will be for racing and for the racing public, who are the all-important people, and it will probably be even better for the bookmakers from time to time. One per cent will give £170,000 or thereabouts. If this sum was devoted towards the prize money on this occasion and the increase confined to 6 per cent we would be doing a great day's work for the racing industry, for the breeding industry and for our entire bloodstock industry, which is the first essential.
Deputy Coughlan mentioned that Fianna Fáil played hell with the Irish jumping team, show jumpers and so forth. I do not subscribe to this idea at all. It was during Fianna Fáil periods of government that these show jumpers, the Army jumping team and so on, improved and became internationally famous. Again, it was under Fianna Fáil in very recent years that Bord na gCapall was set up. They are trying to set about the task of improving our current show jumping image as far as they are able and trying to do so in a business-like way.
This is a very difficult task, as most people realise, because the current prices for good, promising established show jumpers or nearly established show jumpers is so high because of the demand from foreign purchasers that it is prohibitive, first of all, for Irish people to retain them because the sale price for them is too tempting and, secondly, it is prohibitive for Irish people to purchase them in order to retain them. There is bound to be a big export market for top-class show jumpers. Bord na gCapall attempted to overcome this difficulty not only by purchasing a few horses themselves but also by trying a system of leasing horses. It seemed to bring about some improvement and we hope this will continue.
We also hope that our Army jumpers will remain in business and improve. They had a few lean years because the horses they had were not performing very well. We always seem to compare them with the great days of show jumping when we had Daniel Corry, Colonel Aherne and Captain Tubridy, whom Deputy Coughlan left out.
No relation.
We always seem to think in terms of those great days. The Army have had some lean years and we hope that situation will not continue indefinitely. Through Bord na gCapall an attempt was made by the previous Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries to tackle the problems about which most people were becoming critical, particularly around the time of the Aga Khan Trophy at Ballsbridge when we were not successful for some years. I suppose it is only natural that people would be critical when they were accustomed to hearing so much about performances of Irish teams in the past.
We are not critical of the basic principle in this Bill. The bookmakers have accepted it but they will not be paying the increase. It is the punters who will be paying it but the bookmakers will be collecting it.
That is not so.
This is quite common and the bookmakers seem to accept it. We believe that 10 per cent is too much. It is an exorbitant amount. Raising it to 6 per cent at present is quite acceptable to us but our recommendation is that the extra 1 per cent and the money involved, £170,000, should, as a priority, be ploughed back into increasing the miserable stake money which many owners are racing for and which is really not worth considering. If you win you get £207 in many races and the place money is really negligible. Without good stake money you will not maintain racing. One example of this is France, where there is a thriving racing industry. France has tremendous stakes even down to the fourth horse.
No bookies.
They have no bookies but I am not anti-bookie by any means. France is probably the leading racing country on this side of the Atlantic. We are famous but our stake money does not compare with the French. The French have surpassed Britain, which was the leading racing country for years. British stake money does not compare favourably with French stake money even though their Derby was worth over £100,000 yesterday.
Our stake money compares very unfavourably also with English stake money, if you look at the average stake money paid in England. The strongest recommendation we can make from this side of the House is that the stake money be improved because by doing so you improve the standard of racing and you get more people involved in it. If you improve racing and have even more runners you will attract more and more people through the turnstiles, the bookmakers will have a large turnover and the 1 per cent will escalate immediately because you will have an increased turnover going through the books and through the tote, which also contributes towards racing. I recommend that the increase be confined to 6 per cent and that an increase in the stake money be the first priority.
The Bill before the House has received quite a considerable welcome from both sides. The Opposition will be happy if the levy is retained at 6 per cent so that a greater amount of money will be available to increase stakes and prizes. It is extremely necessary that the prize money be increased substantially if we are to retain our place in the racing world. Indeed, if it were not for the sponsors in recent years we might very well not be in the happy position in which we are regarding the racing business today.
There are other items which cry out for attention, apart from the increase in stakes, such as the amenities and facilities provided in various racecourses. Many of them are extremely old and lacking in facilities. When they are privately owned they certainly are not in a financial position to modernise and bring them up to the standards which are required today. If something, is not done speedily in this direction I can foresee a considerable fall-off in attendances and they certainly will not be a tourist attraction.
The Taoiseach was very emphatic in his opening speech this morning that bloodstock is a tourist attraction but he also said we must not be complacent. It is on those words that I would like to base the next few remarks. We must not be complacent. If we just go on increasing stake money or prize money and neglect the other items we will find ourselves very shortly trying to lock the door when the horse is gone.
One of the bodies which came in for very highly deserved praise today was the National Stud. Like Deputy Power, I am very proud of the National Stud. Living as we are in the centre of the racing headquarters at the Curragh it is not unreasonable to expect that there would be an attraction to the county for racing and bloodstock interests.
In addition to the Curragh we have the world famous Punchestown and Naas. On my own doorstep we now have one of the most modern equestrian centres and, in a couple of months' time, we will have the most modern sales complex in the world. All these contribute in no small way to the economy of our county. Taking the Curragh alone, the employment in the racing stables amounts to a minimum of 400, and that is a conservative figure. They would be catering for a minimum of 1,000 horses. The figures mentioned today for keeping a horse seem to range between a £1,000 and £2,000 and that adds up to somewhere between £1 million and £2 million in Kildare and the surrounding counties. That is no small money.
It does not go below £2,000.
Not much below it. However, I am not familiar with the figures. A big amount of money is spent on hay, oats, wages, food and so on, in the area and that is why we want to see the industry expand if at all possible. In the make up of racing we seem to think solely of the horse. Of course, without the horse we do not have a race; but we forget the stable boys and the jockeys. Deputy Power, and other speakers, mentioned them but we have a facility at present in the National Stud for training those young boys. This is not referred to often enough or sufficiently recognised for the service being given. Apart from a six-month course in stud management for which they get students from all parts of the world, including Japan and Germany, there is also a two-year course for apprentice jockeys.
At present the National Stud can only cater for 15 but they are hoping to be able to cater for 30 next year. This is a two-year course for 30 young men for whom the National Stud have not got adequate facilities. It is a great pity that more attention is not given to this side of this important industry, because in addition to receiving the basic training in the industry they are also being educated. Were it not for the assistance they are receiving from the Kildare Vocational Education Committee, and from the Army, I do not think this course could be held. The vocational education committee are providing teachers free for them. The Army make available their gymnasium and swimming pool.
Naturally jockeys must be fit physically and mentally, more physically than mentally. However, it all too often happens that young men of the right weight go into the racing business and are denied a basic education. Here they have an opportunity which should not be overlooked. At the same time it is impossible for the National Stud out of their resources to provide the amenities which are necessary.
They have not got accommodation for any more although they would like to cater for at least 50. They require accommodation and at present for the everyday overheads they depend on the generosity of subscribers. It is a tragedy that they have to go with cap in hand to various people, admittedly people who are eventually going to benefit from this service. It is the duty of the State, through the Racing Board, to make available a considerable sum to them for the magnificent work they are doing. While they have all this available at Tully one item is missing. The efforts to have them all under one roof will not be achieved until Bord na gCapall set up there too. This has not happened yet and the courses run by Bord na gCapall, such as the farriers' course, are removed from the rest of the centre.
If they were all under the one roof we would have a centre catering for every aspect of the horse industry. Other speakers referred to other matters and there is no point in labouring the case any further. One other point I should like to draw the attention of the House to is in regard to the training facilities on the Curragh. Inside the railed-off area is available to all trainers but at a fee. A really good training area should be made available to trainers free on the Curragh. I am informed that the Cloud Gallop is useless and that a new one is badly required. That can be looked into although it may be outside the scope of the Bill. I should like to welcome the Bill and hope that some of the extra money will be given to provide the facilities required in the National Stud.
I should like to thank Deputies for the welcome all sides have given the Bill. Even though sometimes it was couched in different terms the response which the House has given indicates that the aim we all have is to improve racing and to make it so attractive that it will continue to expand and develop. A number of Deputies referred to different aspects of the proposals in the Bill and the desirability of retaining the levy at the figure I mentioned, 6 per cent.
I should like to correct one misapprehension that may have existed. Originally, under the 1945 Act, the board had a levy as high as 5 per cent. That was subsequently dropped to the 2½ per cent but, in fact, the original levy was 5 per cent. I say that because when Deputies compared the existing 5 per cent and the maximum limit included in the Bill it is obvious that 10 per cent in the present-day values is less than 5 per cent was in 1945.
At that time the 5 per cent levy was regarded as excessive and was reduced. It was only subsequently raised over the years. The suggestion which Deputy O'Malley made, and a number of others, including Deputy Barrett, was that it should be specifically stated in the Bill. The objection to putting in a small figure, an increase of only 1 per cent, is that it requires amending legislation and although Governments have come and gone in the last 30 years the 5 per cent included in the 1945 Act has remained until now. There is one marked change in this Bill which I have referred to, that under section 9 any regulations made by the Racing Board would have to be laid on the table in the House. The usual proviso applies to this that if a resolution is passed within 21 days its annulment is without prejudice to anything done in the meantime.
Deputy O'Malley suggested that that should be in positive form. I do not think it is necessary to do so because no State board would implement a decision of this sort in the knowledge that a motion would be put down suggesting that it be annulled. In a more contentious area the proviso in the Act dealing with the remuneration of a number of public officials including judges and politicians is laid on the table and subsequently if no amending or annulling order is made within the required period of 21 sitting days, it is formally signed and becomes effective. The purpose of this measure is to inject more money into racing. The objective of the Racing Board when it was established was to do this, and it has undoubtedly made a significant contribution.
As Deputy Barrett remarked, France is the best example in our racing range of the amount of money that is contributed to racing from betting levies. In France in 1973 the total contribution to racing from the betting levy was £84 million; in Britain the figure for 1972-73 was £8.3 million; in Italy the figure was £16.9 million; in Japan in 1971, £180 million; and in Ireland £1.8 million. There are no bookmakers in France, whereas in Britain and here there are. I think racing would be much poorer without these colourful characters who operate at race meetings. There are not as many colourful characters as there were. There are still a few left. Deputy Coughlan may not be suaviter in modo but he is certainly fortiter in re. The contribution made by bookmakers is considerable. In France all the money is levied on betting on the totalisator. In Britain and here the SP offices as well as the bookmakers and the tote take a share of the money. There is another aspect we do not often take account of: in this country there is betting on football pools as well as on racing. Admittedly the football pools are in Britain but quite a considerable amount of money is channelled into these areas. The difference is one that is obviously reflected in the figures.
In so far as a tax on wealthy owners is concerned, that is an important element, but I agree with Deputy Coughlan and Deputy Barrett and other speakers that what is really needed is an assurance that relatively small owners are able to stay in the business.
It is for that reason that the emphasis in the course of this debate has been on increasing the stakes at the smaller tracks. I would certainly ensure that the Racing Board are appraised of the views expressed by Deputies from all sides of the House, that they read and digest carefully the views expressed here. It is a fact that racing is a speculative business. It is significant—and I differ to this extent with some of the remarks Deputy Power made—that the wealth tax does not apply to bloodstock. It is exempt. In 1973 when VAT was introduced bloodstock was also exempted. The owner mentioned by the Deputy who has horses being trained in the Curragh said that one of the reasons why he chose to come to the Curragh was that VAT was not applied in this country. Subsequently last year he sent out some horses; some he kept in training here, but he raced them in England because the stakes were better, and he had had some success there.
So far as the proposals in the Bill about the appeals board are concerned, I think they were generally welcomed. The National Stud and Bord na gCapall were mentioned by Deputies. The National Stud are doing a good job. The annual average profit they have made in the last three or four years is about £30,000. They have undertaken a very considerable reconstruction programme. Undoubtedly what Deputy Malone said is a fact, that what they have undertaken in respect of the apprenticeship scheme is most praiseworthy. The Kildare Vocational Education Committee and the Army are helping to facilitate them and also other persons who are interested and anxious to see it develop and expand.
I will discuss with the National Stud what further efforts can be made to expedite the completion of the necessary work there. This scheme is in its infancy. It is probably better to proceed gradually with it because as Deputies know, a great many young lads aspire to be jockeys but a variety of factors inhibit them. They aspire to emulate the well merited success of people like Pat Eddery. Many encounter weight problems, height problems and an inability to rise to the level necessary for successful careers as jockeys, although they ride reasonably well in the ordinary accepted sense of that term.
In regard to the development of the Army jumping team, people tend to compare the past which was in many respects an era in which like was being compared with like. In the twenties and thirties the contenders for competitions like the Aga Khan Cup were entirely Army teams and exclusively represented a particular country. In the immediate post-war era for a short time that was still so. With the exception of ourselves—and recently we have had a mixed team —and possibly two representatives from Italy of well-known distinction, the D'Inzeo brothers—almost all the other contestants for these international competitions are private individuals. As Deputy Barrett said, we have a small population, but considering our size we have a very large racegoing population because one million racegoers annually is roughly one in three persons. Admittedly most of them are the same people going over and over again just as I understand most people who bet at the bookmakers are the same clients and for that reason the bookmakers like to remain on good terms with them.
For our size we have a relatively large racegoing population. Other countries have much larger populations and because of their wealth and resources it is a fact that we have to compete with their resources and with their numbers. On the other hand, every year, with few exceptions, we have won international competitions abroad yet there is disappointment because as I say people tend to compare different situations; in other words they are not comparing like with like.
So far as the Army Equitation school is concerned we have provided a substantial increase in funds for the purchase of horses. Here again luck and chance, as Deputy Barrett mentioned, play a large part in it, but so far as finance is concerned the money that is necessary is being made available. In addition, as Deputies have mentioned, Bord na gCapall have operated a leasing scheme and some of the recent successes of the Army jumping team were on leased horses. I am certain that in one case at least at the weekend—and I think the previous weekend or a couple of weeks ago also—the successful Army rider was riding a horse leased from Bord na gCapall. So far as our resources permit it is a fact that generally as much as possible is being done.
I would agree with the remarks made by Deputy Barrett and Deputy Malone, that the important thing is to get the money into racing, to make it attractive for the owner, to make it financially worth his while. It is obvious that it is not worth the while of many owners. One of the reasons why people are combining is to enable them to have a share in the sport of owning a horse or owning a few horses and at a comparatively reasonable figure where three or four are involved.
In addition, what Deputy Malone said is correct: it is essential to improve the amenities. Long ago people were prepared to go to racing under almost any conditions. That is no longer so, there are the amenities and attractions of other sports.
Here, again, the modern development of television can bring racing into anybody's home, almost certainly on Saturdays and occasionally during the week. Also, people can switch from one track to another and, as Deputies know, one can sometimes see as many as eight or ten races on Saturdays when there are good programmes. That, in itself, has an attraction because people can see the races from the comfort of their homes or perhaps a licensed premises and get in touch with their bookmaker and have a bet on the telephone. Therefore, it is essential that the amenities should be improved and I understand that the Racing Board are proceeding with their overall improvement programme.
Some query was made about the grading of courses. I understand that it has been decided by the Racing Board not to proceed with that because the number of runners has substantially increased. The number of horses being trained last year was 4,600. The number has increased over each of the last few years from 4,200 in 1972 to 4,500 in 1973 and last year to 4,600. The number of runners has increased in the last four years from 2,600 to 3,000. This, admittedly, would appear to refute the suggestions that racing is not economic. On the other hand, in that time there has been a very substantial increase in the number of owners who share horses, and arrangements are now available whereby they are entitled to do so.
The number of thoroughbreds in the country has increased from 17,400 in 1970 to 19,800 in 1973: the 1974 figures are not available. The value of bloodstock steadily increased until 1972; 1973 and 1974 were not so good, as Deputies have mentioned, and sales increased again up to 1973 but last year as a result of the recession, declined. It is important in this economic climate that we should ensure that the maximum amount is put back into racing because undoubtedly what many Deputies have said is a fact, that racing in Britain is not in nearly as healthy a condition as it was formerly. In fact the figure for yesterday's Derby to a certain extent camouflages the real position.
Most Deputies will be aware that this year, even leaving aside the recent dispute with the stable lads in Britain, there have been repeated statements by the Chairman of the Racehorse Trainers' Association and a very lengthy interview by one leading trainer, indicating the rising cost. He gave figures for wages, for food, for carriage, for trailer services, for veterinary services and all the overheads indicate that costs far outstripped the return.
I think the figures mentioned on the opposite side, certainly the higher figures are correct. Somebody mentioned that one might get a horse in training for £1,200. Anyone who would train a horse for that now would have to get himself examined; certainly he would be overwhelmed with patrons going to him. I imagine it would be much more like double that figure. Indeed, in Britain it is even higher still. Therefore, we have a chance now, and we must recognise that our great competitor is France. The circumstances there are very different because so much money is channelled into racing.
Would not that come through the office for the off-course betting? Is not the tax collected——
It would, of course, settle it. The Deputy knows that any Minister for Finance seeks as many sources of revenue as he can. We have to consider the system which operates there and very few people would like that to happen here. One of the things that makes racing attractive here and in Britain is the bookmaker. Certainly, the growth in the amount of money spent in betting with the bookmakers has been quite remarkable. It is no wonder that they are reasonably happy because the money has gone from £11.8 million, five years ago to £18 million-odd last year.
One other point which Deputy O'Malley raised in his speech is the deduction and the proposed amendment of section 27 of the original Act by section 3 (a) of this Bill. But in fact—whether it was to protect themselves or not—the Racing Board had a form which bookmakers signed and this enabled the Racing Board to issue a permit on the basis that the bookmaker paid the levy to the Board. In the case of a winning bet he would pay the backer or give him credit for the amount accruing to him on such a bet, including the stake less the amount of the levy at the prescribed rate enforced from time to time calculated on such amount, and to comply in all respects with the terms of the Racing Board and Racecourses Act and the regulations made thereunder with the lawful directions of the board. That was signed by the applicant, witnessed and the witness was either a clergyman, a peace commissioner, a civil servant or a member of the Garda. That was the method employed in order to overcome the possible defect of the Act. This is being remedied in the proposed amendment.
I should like to thank Deputy O'Sullivan for his kind remarks and also to thank the House for the welcome it has given the Bill. The proposals are reasonable. As I mentioned initially, it is the board's intention not to increase the levy beyond 1 per cent and that can only be done with the consent of the Minister for Finance. If in the future, the board seek to increase it, they must have the consent of the Minister for Finance and any regulation made thereunder can, under the proposed terms of the Bill, be amended by a resolution.
The other major change is the establishment of an appeals committee similar to the provision in the Act establishing Bord na gCon.
Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, June 10th, 1975.