Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine debate -
Wednesday, 2 Oct 2024

I remind members and witnesses to turn off their mobile phones. Witnesses giving evidence within the parliamentary precinct are protected by absolute privilege with respect to the evidence they give to a committee. This means that witnesses have full defence against any defamation action in respect of anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair's direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard and I remind them of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that as is reasonable, no adverse comments should be made against an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses who give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witnesses giving evidence within the parliamentary precincts and may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to publication by witnesses outside proceedings held by the committee of any matters arising from the proceedings.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against either a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Parliamentary privilege is considered to apply to utterances of members participating online in the committee meeting when their participation is from within the parliamentary precinct. Members may not participate online in a public meeting from outside the parliamentary precincts. Any attempt to do so will result in the member having their online access removed.

The purpose of today's meeting is for the committee to resume the discussion about the challenges facing the horse sport industry. The committee will hear from the following officials: from the Royal Dublin Society, RDS, Mr. Pat Hanly, deputy chief executive of finance, Lieutenant Colonel Tom Freyne, chair of equestrian committee, and Mr. Flor Madden, member of the trustee council; from the Irish Draught Horse Breeders' Association, Mr. Robert Draper, national chairperson, and Ms Amanda Fahey, director; from the Equestrian Competition Venues Owners' Alliance, ECVOA, Mr. Robert Fagan, member, Mr. Chris Byrne, member and who is joining remotely, and Mr. Pat McCartan, co-ordinator; and from Showjumping Ireland, Mr. Christopher Murphy, chairman, Mr. Desmond McFadden, vice chair, and Mr. Ronan Corrigan, chairman of management and finance. They are all welcome to this evening's meeting.

I will allow each group five minutes to read their opening statement, commencing with the RDS to be followed by the Irish Draught Horse Breeders' Association, the ECVOA and finishing with Showjumping Ireland. When the reading of the opening statements is complete, we will proceed to a question and answer session. I ask the RDS to make its opening statement please.

We thank the committee for the invitation and for the opportunity to address it this evening on the challenges to the Irish horse industry. The RDS equestrian mission, and therefore the mission of the Dublin Horse Show, is to support the Irish sport horse breeder and producer through the following steps: first, by showcasing the best Irish-bred horses; second, by developing a marketplace for Irish-bred horses; third, by encouraging the highest standards in breeding for purpose, horse welfare, ethical training and effective horsemanship; fourth, by demonstrating the benefits of the horse-human relationship for modern day society; and, fifth, by promoting showjumping by hosting an international show to the very highest standards.

While the industry is broad and diverse, it is also fair to say that it is extremely interlinked and interwoven. If there is complexity in the industry, it arises from the fact the value chain is long and it is difficult for an individual to be an expert in all areas from breeding the animal, producing it to be ridden and competing with it at elite levels, and that is just from the horse. Humans can be breeders, producers or competitors and the competence of each link in the chain determines the overall result, both economically and in-competition.

The RDS runs more than 130 competitions at its flagship event, focusing on developing each of the links in the chain. From foals and lead rein competitors to horses and riders representing their country in the Nation's Cup to the full spectrum of breeds, age groups and equestrian organisations, they are all represented at the Dublin Horse Show. Consequently, the RDS is well placed to identify the shared challenges for the Irish sport horse industry across social, educational, economic, high performance and breeding programs. The serious challenges facing the industry include a the lack of capacity in riding schools currently. There has been a reduction in the number of coaches available to the sporting organisations. There has been deterioration in the standard of riding outside youth high performance programmes. The cost and difficulty in getting insurance for equestrian activities is another challenge.

There is difficulty in finding capable and available individuals to start, produce and train horses. There has been an increase in the proportion of the population who have no direct experience of animals. There is an inability to find or afford competently produced ponies and horses. There is inefficient processing and administration of equine passports. There has been a lack of engagement with Irish sport horse or draught breeders on the development of the breeds and studbooks. There is a lack of strategic development and support for equine facilities

There is a need for the industry to have a service-led organisation to address shared industry challenges, skill gaps and weaknesses in the industry value chain. The industry should have a unified approach, taking input from industry stakeholders and ensuring it reflects the needs of affiliates. Any overarching or umbrella body must provide accountability to the industry, increase stakeholder engagement, use industry resources efficiently and engage stakeholders in strategic planning. Furthermore, it should be answerable to its affiliates, hold an annual general meeting where its executive and directors report to the affiliates and have a board of directors populated by representatives of the affiliate organisations.

The role of the Departments which control the funding of programmes is a necessary part of the governance structure of any such organisation. The Ministers for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media should have one appointment each on its board of directors, with the Northern Ireland Sports Forum taking another. The current structure, therefore, could be viewed as unbalanced.

As the RDS prepares for its 150th Horse Show, we would like to see an efficient passport system that allows breeders to sell their animals, buyers to register as owners and show organisers to determine eligibility for competitions based on studbook rules. We would also like to see investment in coaching to ensure that children are safe and competent to compete, support for a national register of equine therapists, the development of capacity in the riding school sector and support for the high performance affiliates through programme development, along with ensuring that Ireland’s horse culture continues to play a role in the social and educational development of its people.

As I have mentioned, the RDS works with all stakeholders and all of those appearing in the session this evening are resolute in their determination to work together for the betterment of our sports and industry. They are of one mind and are also here to ensure all the other associated affiliates concerns are relayed to the committee. The RDS thanks the committee for this opportunity and looks forward to the questions and input as I defer to my colleague, Mr. Robert Draper, from the Irish Draught Horse Breeders Association.

I thank the Cathaoirleach and committee members for this opportunity. The Irish Draught Horse Breeders Association, IDHBA, is the largest representative organisation of Irish draught owners, breeders and supporters on the island of Ireland, with members nationwide and affiliate groups internationally in the United Kingdom, Canada, North America, Australia and New Zealand. Aligning with the current increase in the popularity of the breed, the association has expanded to improve representation and raise the profile of the breed. Irish draughts are now competing across all equine disciplines and are competitive to a level that satisfies the needs of a major proportion of the total marketplace. The flexibility of the breed to perform in show classes, eventing, dressage, cross-country, show jumping, endurance riding, riding clubs, return to riding and more has driven the breeds recent growth in popularity.

The Irish draught is a foundation breed of the Irish sport horse and is currently classified as a rare breed. The breed has evolved incredibly through the centuries to meet current market needs and this, coupled with the fantastic temperament and soundness that the breed is known and loved for, has resulted in a fantastic product and is one of our few truly Irish horse breeds left.

The IDHBA has nominated a member to the new HSI structure. It has found the level of engagement and the process deficient due to the fact that it does not facilitate a structured, proportional, fair and transparent representation of the industry. The idea of the forum should be to create a basis of understanding the needs of the sector and to allow it to formulate strategy, policies and initiatives to support and develop the entire sector for the betterment of all.

Immediate concerns include the setting of policy and what industry and sector qualifications, references or experience those involved actually hold. Our concerns and basic requirements include: structured, proportional, fair and transparent representation within the equine industry; clear and transparent funding and financial accountability; improved transactional performance and relationships; consultation and involvement in strategy and strategic direction for the Irish draught breed; accurate, compliant and efficient maintenance and management of the Irish draught stud book against the tender awarded; efficient, compliant and transparent maintenance and management of the passport system; and improved equine traceability and efficient access to breed and industry data.

I thank the committee for its attention and I look forward to discussing in further detail the challenges facing the sector and the possible ways to approach them.

The Equestrian Competition Venues Owners Alliance, ECVOA, is the representative organisation of 18 of the busiest equestrian competition venues in Ireland. Formed in 2017 to address issues affecting the industry, it is the voice of the centres which host the vast majority of all equestrian activities held annually in the 32 counties. The equestrian venues which ECVOA represents are, in the main, family-owned businesses which have been developed and grown, at their own expense, by these families.

With proper investment, ECVOA believes that the sports horse industry can continue to grow and contribute meaningfully to the State. The concerns raised by members are that the sector and industry are being threatened, in part, by an unwillingness by the appointed body to interact in regard to the real day-to-day issues being faced by the sector. Similar to the RDS, from whom members have already heard, all ECVOA members, together with other venues, work with all sector and industry stakeholders and, as such, we believe all have a connected vision of the threats to and solutions for the industry. Venues work with most of the breeding societies and organisations to showcase the breeds through shows, inspections and events, and also provide to HSI the medium for stallion, mare and young stock inspections.

The sporting and leisure affiliate organisations also utilise the vast majority of venues. While it is fair to say that the venues derive an income from these activities, it is also important to recognise the significant and continuous investment required by venues to ensure a facility is retained at a suitable and safe standard. At our previous appearance before the committee, many members were well disposed to progressing a funding model similar to that within HRI, whereby venues supporting the sector could apply for funding where they were not eligible to apply for sports capital grants. This would be a significant move to assist in the improvement and development of facilities that would have an uplift effect on the entire sector. It would also assist in balancing the situation whereby a club with facilities can apply for sports capital grants which allow it to, in effect, gain a State-sponsored advantage over a private entity. The sports capital grants provided to these clubs are essential and should continue, but some balancing will alleviate the threat that venues may be lost or unable to meet the required standards due to investment pressures.

The situation relating to insurance and rates is also very serious. Whilst we accept that they are a necessary evil, we have been deprived of any real form official representation due to the fact that HSI, as the recognised body, has failed to progress the matter with the relevant Departments and councils despite repeated efforts.

Insurance was again highlighted this past weekend in circumstances where Coillte has moved to prevent access for horse riders. While we see again HSI being placed on various bodies, we see little in the way of successful outcome that will ensure the sustainability of the sector if those involved in the leisure and tourism aspect of the sector are prevented from developing it. This has a serious and cumulative effect on the production and breeding aspect of the entire sector. Like the other witnesses, we are of the view that change is needed urgently and that the direction of travel being adopted by HSI is not beneficial to the sport, the industry and the sector. We are accompanied today by members of the main sporting affiliates, both as officially invited organisations and those who with us as part of our delegations, namely Para Equestrian Ireland, PEI, and Dressage Ireland. We are anxious to discuss with the committee the needs of the sector and how it envisages being able to assist.

I ask that our fellow attendees from Showjumping Ireland continue with the opening statement.

I thank the Cathaoirleach and the committee members for the opportunity.

Showjumping Ireland is the largest equestrian sporting organisation in Ireland. We are the recognised governing body for the sport of showjumping nationally. Showjumping Ireland is the largest sporting affiliate and Olympic discipline. It currently has over 8,000 active members.

When we came before the committee on 20 September 2023, we left hoping that the follow-on would be that we might see moves that would help in recognising the real needs of the sport, the industry, the sector and, most importantly, the stakeholders and members. To say that we were disappointed is an understatement. The organisations before the committee earlier have already highlighted some of their concerns and we concur with them fully.

We are gravely concerned that the situation which we discussed with the committee last year between HSI and the main sporting affiliates has deteriorated even further. Despite meetings held in October and November with the board of HSI and the sporting affiliates at which frank statements and opinions were aired relating to HSI's direction and management, it would appear that the concerns and reservations relayed were in the main ignored.

The threat that revealed itself was, in fact, the new constitution of HSI that was adopted by the interim, partially populated board of the latter without any consultation with the affiliates and stakeholders. This, together with the refusal of the board to reinstate the councils and council-appointed directors, was in clear violation of the previous constitution of HSI. Furthermore, it would appear that Sport Ireland officials attending a meeting of HSI and the HP affiliates and stakeholders were unable to confirm that they had been consulted as required under the Sport Ireland governance code which fundamentally change the direction and status of HSI.

HSI has continued to move further away from any form of real consultation or accountability. This is not something that any member-based organisation that is accountable to its membership can endorse. As such, those organisations may be forced to adopt a different and more suitable and accountable direction.

Showjumping Ireland is aware that statements made by HSI to this committee relating to funding are factually inaccurate. Showjumping Ireland corresponded with HSI post the November meeting and in the aftermath of the correspondence sent to this committee by HSI following the meeting on 20 September. To date, HSI has not provided the detail requested to verify the claims it made.

Eight submissions that did not agree with the direction being adopted were published but were not adopted. It has been stated by HSI that other submissions were received which agreed with its direction, but it will not publish these. Is this credible or acceptable? Showjumping Ireland represents to the committee that its fellow HP affiliates have similar concerns and have requested that we make the committee aware of this. Those are PEI, Dressage Ireland and Eventing Ireland.

Showjumping Ireland still stands willing to fund international competition but this must be structured and carried out in a transparent and acceptable manner. HSI has declined to enter this process despite Showjumping Ireland outlining this to Mr. Paul McDermott of Sport Ireland at a meeting of affiliates and HSI. Mr. McDermott did not indicate any issue from his perspective as a Sport Ireland official where a budget submission could be made to the affiliate for funding toward HP activities. HSI stated at this meeting that it would not make a submission and appeared to take umbrage at the phrase. The committee should note that this committee was misinformed by HSI on 15 November 2023 in relation to the funding mechanism by Showjumping Ireland and has yet to correct the record as requested. We would like to discuss in detail with the committee the statements made on 15 November 2023 relating to HP funding.

Showjumping Ireland and other HP affiliates provided direct assistance to youth and senior squads in 2023 and 2024 on foot of no direct support being provided by HSI in certain instances. Serious issues were identified in the HP funding model and use of same during the meeting between HSI, Sport Ireland and the HP affiliates. The purpose of this meeting was to work with all stakeholders to gain better return from funding and ensure athletes receive better supports. All HP affiliates share the same concerns relating to this area and transparency and accountability and have signalled this to HSI and continue to do so.

As the committee will be aware, many sporting affiliates have had members who are disadvantaged due to the current and previous delays with passports. This related to unacceptable delays in simple areas, such as change of ownership. This means that the member cannot register the animal and thus may not be able to compete the animal, sell the animal, etc. They are not able to transport as they no longer retain the passport in their possession. What excuse can be given for such inefficiency that causes significant issues for the industry. The delays in passport activities were cited by HSI as being due to a decision by the Department of agriculture and this was relayed directly to this committee and Deputy Fitzmaurice. Can the committee confirm if inquiries were made relating to this statement, and if this was the case?

Showjumping Ireland had almost 200,000 competition rounds jumped in 2023. That number will increase in 2024. This shows the level of activity within showjumping alone, and other affiliates will have figures relative to their own activities. Every horse jumping these rounds should have its passport present with it and the committee will appreciate it is not acceptable that an issuing entity cannot ensure a service to assist members and stakeholders comply with the law.

As sporting bodies, we maintain large databases. Events earlier this year shocked the country due to the investigations by RTÉ. This had a direct impact on the affiliates and the reputation of the industry. HSI has not interacted with the affiliate bodies to date to work with them to address or ensure that affiliates are aware of any measures been undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to prevent any recurrence. Few visible actions have been undertaken to address the damage to the integrity and reputation of the sector.

Showjumping Ireland, like the other HP affiliates, was disappointed with the changes to the constitution of HSI. Based on the dates that they were formulated, proposed and lodged with CRO, it might even be suspected that the changes were being adopted during the period when the board of HSI was meeting the affiliates and yet chose not to discuss the significant changes being made. The interim board had adopted a new constitution before it sought to have a meeting with the affiliates. Affiliates were invited to a briefing to tell them what had been done, not to discuss with them what was being considered.

Further to this, the affiliates have been advised that it could be challenged. We have seen a number of instances where HSI has attempted to undermine and damage the governance of the sector and sport. These actions have jeopardised state funding to the sector from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and further heightened the concerns of the affiliates. Again, we would like to discuss them in detail with the committee. The affiliates continue to face issues relating to actions taken or decisions made by HSI where they are taken without reference to the responsible bodies. This again undermines trust and shows a disrespect toward those involved in the sector.

The years 2023 and 2024 have been extremely successful for equestrian sport in general. While we were all disappointed that we did not win medals in Paris, we were also very proud of the performances of our athletes and horses. Our youth squads across all disciplines are the envy of the world and bring championship medals home year after year. This success is born out of the foundation put in place by the national affiliates and their associated partners, venues, shows, coaches, trainers, parents, owners and breeders. A significant problem is the lack of join-up and continuity of management of the programme. It concerns affiliates that this is a hindrance to the proper development and support of the sport and industry.

The affiliate bodies have looked at this situation clinically and the evidence suggests that the current entity is unable to develop and gain the necessary financial resources to support the administrative and coaching programmes to ensure the success of the sector and sport.

There is an absolute need for this committee to meet with the Irish Horse Board, which has been granted the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine's marketing tender.

SJI has invested heavily in its online systems and they are now acknowledged as being hugely important to the worldwide market. The systems are free to use and had in excess of 200 million visits in the last 16 months alone. This markets the entire sector to a worldwide audience. EI and DI also maintain competition databases which are all the main drivers, together with competition venues and shows, in ensuring buyers look to Ireland to source horses. It is essential there is joined-up thinking in this area and. This committee may be able to work with the Irish Horse Board and all stakeholders to identify any areas within their tender requirements that could hamper providing the actual support to the sector.

We thank the Cathaoirleach and members for their time and interest in this important sector and for hearing our views. We hope to discuss with members our solutions to grow and develop the sport, industry and sector.

I thank all the groups for coming in to us. Probably a year on, it is disappointing that we have not seen any change in the situation. If anything, it has got progressively worse and certainly the feedback we are getting with regard to passports is that the situation has deteriorated significantly. Anecdotally, I am being told by staff in Horse Sport Ireland and also people trying to access passports that there has been a complete breakdown in delivery this year. I think that is borne out by everything that has been said today. HSI got €600,000 in Brexit funding to implement a new passport strategy. We are able to deliver 1 million passports for humans in a year in a much more challenging environment, one in which identification is checked across borders and continents, yet we cannot issue passports for foals in a timely manner.

On the issue of passports for foals, Mr. Fagan might answer this question. There is a legal requirement on anyone selling a foal to have a passport at the sale. My understanding is that at one of the most recent sales, something north of 60 of the foals presented for sale did not have a passport. I have an email from one owner which states he sold his foal to a buyer in the UK and is still awaiting a passport. Does Mr. Fagan have any correspondence from the Department of agriculture advising that sales venues cannot sell foals unless they have a passport?

We have an irony here in that the Department of agriculture has given €600,000 in Brexit funding to Horse Sport Ireland to administer and process passports and, at the same time, it is writing out to sales venues and telling them they cannot process the sale of foals unless they have a passport. The market is breaking down. We already see a fallback in the sales and value of young stock this year. We will go into it in more detail but I am extremely disappointed that the Department has not sat up and taken notice of what this committee is saying about Horse Sport Ireland. We have had virtually every affiliate in this sector come in here and tell us that this system is simply not working. Not only it is not working, but it is broken and it is doing huge, irreparable damage to the industry. When we meet in private next week I hope my colleagues will support me when I request that the Department appoint an independent auditor immediately to review operations at Horse Sport Ireland. We simply cannot allow matters to unfold in the manner they are at the moment.

With regard to Horse Sport Ireland and the Olympics, will Mr. Corrigan explain who is responsible for international showjumping up as far as the Olympics? Who looks after the teams?

Mr. Corrigan said he was disappointed with the Olympics, as the whole country was. We were expecting some kind of medal, of whatever colour. Across the world, we were winning at every show in the lead-up to the Olympics. I think we have four of the top 20 rider-and-horse combinations in the world. Does Mr. Corrigan have any idea why there was a breakdown at the Olympics?

With regard to the Olympics, I would say it was just a degree of misfortune. We performed quite well going into them and performed quite well at them. The argument could be made that we almost peaked too soon. We had very competent riders and very good horses there. Everything looked very good and we were the number one team going in. We all said openly that we should not be shouting about being the number one team in the world because the rugby team was shouting that as well. Poles fall and tracks were very big on final days. We were just unfortunate.

Yes. In particular, there were statements made that Showjumping Ireland collects a levy on behalf of Horse Sport Ireland for international affairs and it was not paying the moneys collected by it to be given to international affairs. The correction is that since 2010, I believe, Showjumping Ireland has given round-figure amounts towards international participation. It has not collected a levy since the times of the Equestrian Federation of Ireland, EFI. Moneys are collected into SJI for the administration of its sport and the support of its activities. From that, its management, finance committees and board make a decision as to the level of support provided to international affairs. That was done for a three-year period with an agreement in place where books were opened and accounts and plans prepared, and that worked very well. At the end of that three-year agreement, no follow-on agreement was put in place. It was very ad hoc and very much a case of "How much can you give?". In the last number of years, SJI sought to regularise that again and to have a situation where plans would be put forward and could be costed properly. There was a degree of resistance to that. We just could not get agreement that they would be submitted for Showjumping Ireland. As I think some of the others here will confirm, we intended to increase the amount of funding to international participation but it was conditional on submissions being made, so we could have a proper budget and structure to return to the members and justify any increase in funding.

Yes, we are worried about the output and efficiency of it but we are worried about the content and accuracy of it as well. We have received reassurances but to echo all of what the committee has heard so far on the passport issue, all of our members are seeing delays across the board. That is probably the number one issue we are dealing with in calls from our membership.

It gives me great cause for concern for those who are currently trying to sell foals. We see there are difficulties in getting passports issued. I am aware of somebody who arrived within the last couple of days and they wished to get a change of ownership done on a passport. They were informed it would take four weeks but there was an alternative. Should they wish to pay a premium fee of €150, it could be issued instantly.

Deputy Flaherty mentioned a sale last week. From my figures, there were 88 foals presented for sale on that day, of which 16 had passports. It is a legal requirement to have a passport in order to sell and to move. You cannot move your foal on.

For those who have been in a position to sell, they cannot receive the money they got for those until the passport situation is resolved, and there may be further problems down the road.

Yes, there is a concern and there is concern going forward insofar as breeders are concerned about selling foals, and many of our breeders are small breeders. These are not large breeders. They are small breeders with perhaps one or two mares and foals per year. If they cannot sell a foal, the next real commercial time to sell that foal is roughly as a three-year-old. Therefore, if a breeder has limited availability to hold stock and has to hold a foal now until it is a three-year-old, that has implications on the commercial viability of that small breeder and farmer as well.

Obviously, we have great respect for the RDS and for the Dublin Horse Show in particular given our historical connection and the fact that the very first horse show was held on the gardens of Leinster House beside Merrion Square. We have great affinity with the RDS. Would Mr. Madden say we were at a crisis in the sector?

Yes. For a number of our classes in the RDS each year, we like the riders to arrive at a minimum standard. We like that to be assessed in advance and for people to sign off on it. For the last couple of years, we have not been able to enforce that. We are not able to do so because there are not sufficient suitably qualified people around the country in order to sign off on that standard of riding. It is a huge concern to where we are at the moment.

Very much so. It is a vibrant sector. It is a billion pound industry that could grow exponentially with not a huge amount of investment. How the investment is done would need to be very carefully thought out. Certainly, when we look at the Equestrian Competition Venues Owners Alliance, ECVOA, which involves 18 of the largest equestrian centres, we see that practically 95% of all equestrian pursuits go through equestrian centres. We hold the shows, the events and all the demonstrations and that kind of stuff. We give our facilities for training and that kind of thing. If we do not have those centres at a very high standard, we are risking very expensive young horses and risking riders and producers. Therefore, what we have to do is invest wisely. We would urge this committee to support us in getting investment for that specific sector. We believe that if the Government invests wisely and supports us in this, we will show tremendous benefits through the industry to grow the industry and contribute to its additional success.

I thank Mr. McCartan very much. I will come back to Mr. Draper and Mr. Madden. With regard to the Brexit adjustment funding and the €600,000 for the new passport system that was allocated to Horse Sport Ireland, are the witnesses hearing that there are glitches and issues within that system to the point that it can get as far as issuing a DNA ID kit, but there are issues with it after that?

No, the 16 foals were pre the date. The old system was running in early spring, so if people had a very early foal, they could have gone in through the old system. Some people foresaw potential issues and did get their foals' passport applications in early. They have come through on the old passport system. They switched over then in July to a new system.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. In listening to some of the comments and in reply to Deputy Flaherty about where we are with the threats, we have to realise that HSI is not fit for purpose. With the changes Mr. Corrigan alluded to, it is effectively a private company with no accountability to the industry or to the funders of the industry. The recent changes in its constitution have focused on HSI's needs, not the industry's requirements. One would have to say that HSI has altered the constitution to neutralise the high-performance part of our industry and the representation at a board level and other levels. It has, in a sense, just played along the system and given succour to the requirement to engage. There has been no engagement with the industry. Self-preservation seems to dominate its thinking when it declares that it is the legitimate authority and sole arbiter over our industry. That is contained in its new constitution. It makes a mockery of everybody else in the private sector that another private company can come along and claim jurisdiction over it. They have isolated and insulated themselves from the industry and the high-performance sector. It is a significant cause for concern. They do not possess the expertise. Most of us have been in the industry for a lifetime or for generations and we would not claim to have the expertise. However, we have career administrators who are now dictating to the industry what direction it should take and how it should go. They are very serious threats to the industry at this stage because all the Government funding, be it from the Department of agriculture or the Department of sport, is being channelled through HSI. It is a big risk for everybody else in the industry when the administration of that has been done in this fashion.

I will conclude on one point, and it is not a question. We have had €600,000 allocated for a new passport system. I know it is not on a par with a bike shed or a security hut, but it is still €600,000 of public money that has been given for a system that we are being told has to date not issued a passport. It is alarming for us. As I said, we will discuss it in private, but we must request that the Department intervene.

I thank members and our witnesses who came here today, namely, Mr. Madden, Mr. Draper, Mr. McCartan and Mr. Corrigan. I particularly want to acknowledge the presence of Lieutenant Colonel Tom Freyne, head of the Irish Army Equitation School. He is very welcome.

I will say at the outset that I have been involved in equestrian sport for many years from pony clubs right up, so I know this area quite well and take a huge interest in it still. A lot of things have been said here. People listening in from the outside to what has been said - I want to draw particular reference to Mr. Corrigan - would think this is a toxic relationship. It is actually a very sad state of affairs for those who are hugely interested in and committed to this sector to be watching this debate. We must remember that the public are watching too and that this is being webcast. Mr. Corrigan is on the record here, as we all are.

I will ask some pertinent questions and play a bit of a devil's advocate because I think it is really important. In terms of the RDS, Mr. Madden has summarised the scenario in two simple pages, and I commend him on that. I have a lot of time for the RDS and the work it does. Of course, we all want to showcase the best of Irish breeding and horses. We all want competition and development in the marketplace of the Irish horse. Mr. Madden set out ten key objectives and I agree with all of them.

I do not have a problem with any of that. I was at the Aga Khan this year and it was great to be there. It is a fantastic organisation and I want the witnesses to convey to the board my, and I am sure everyone else's, delight with the professionalism of the RDS and the way it has advocated and advanced. Reading this, I am not sure if the witnesses are here to do a pitch for the RDS to take the job or replace the work, functions and governance of HSI, but we will come to that in a few moments. There would be natural conflicts if the RDS were to express a view. I will pose a few questions on that possible scenario, which I sense from reading the RDS document that it is pitching for. I might be wrong. As I have the opportunity to question the witnesses, they have the opportunity to correct or rebut me.

The final paragraph of the RDS's opening statement refers to working together for the betterment of our sports and industry. I will start on that basis because that is important. HSI is not here today so is at somewhat of a disadvantage. I have no doubt that in a few days its representatives will take time to read the transcript of these meetings. I want to get some context. HSI is the only approved body for doping testing. The RDS this year at the horse show had, I am advised, some 1,400 to 1,500 horses competing. I know about the international federation's roles, functions and obligations and its responsibility for oversight, governance and testing. There is an international dimension to that element of equestrian sport and there is movement across jurisdictions. The RDS will be familiar with the national classes, but it has no jurisdiction in terms of doping there. It might facilitate and assist HSI, which is the only body approved in the country to do doping tests. Are the witnesses in a position to tell the committee how many HSI doping tests took place in the RDS in August in the show?

I am not very far wrong. We will round it off to 1,400. I am not suggesting the RDS has an axe to grind but it is always difficult for an enforcement body that has oversight responsibilities. Out of all the organisations before us, HSI and nobody else oversees doping testing in the Republic of Ireland. Did that ever come into the witnesses' equation or thoughts? Is there dissatisfaction? Has someone got an axe to grind about the independence and integrity of an independent body funded by this State through the Department of agriculture and Department of sport? The witnesses need to think about that. We need to have greater understanding if we are going to look at HSI and to have people coming in here highly critical of it. I have no axe to grind with them. I know none of them and have no dealings with them but I am concerned by the tone and tenor of the written statements the witnesses have placed before us. We need to look at that again. I am shocked, in light of all the doping scandals in the equestrian and horse world, that the number is so low. I take it the RDS fully facilitated the HSI. Was there any resistance in advance of the horse show? I do not tend to ask questions I do not know the answers to - I might as well be honest. Will the witnesses share with us if there was any concern between them and HSI in the run-up to this year's horse show in relation to oversight of doping at the horse show?

Why? Explain to laypeople who would not necessarily know that process. The RDS runs the show and is subject to independent validation and function in terms of doping by an independent body that it clearly has a dispute with. Why does the RDS determine the class? Is it not standard practice and normal for any sport that the body would determine and decide, facilitated by the RDS, who they would take the tests from?

We did not, and nor did we do it last year. This year we allocated classes randomly in advance and we allocated the position of who would be tested in that class in advance. We had to take into consideration the number and how long it takes from a testing point of view. They were spread over a number of days but all in advance.

Mr. Draper is telling us here in the Oireachtas, the Parliament with statutory responsibilities in this area, that the IDHBA had issues with the accuracy of the studbook. That is a very serious allegation. The organisation did not formally exercise a process, however, to elevate that in a formal way, and that is a concern to me. I am not sure if we have a paper trail of that because of the IDHBA's failure, as I would see it, but correct me if I am wrong, to put that in a process to HSI and say it has an issue with the accuracy of the studbooks.

It is important to put this in context. The first thing I got from HSI was a letter of apology that it forgot to invite us to attend a meeting where it was selecting its representatives and to inform us that we had been allocated a position. In response, I asked for information, background, what exactly we were supposed to do, what the rules of engagement would be and how that was going to be administered. We needed a briefing of what position it was offering us, what that position would entail and what its responsibilities would be. None of that was forthcoming. As soon as that is forthcoming, we will then look at it, analyse it and make a decision as a body.

At present, we are in a vacuum. We are being asked to join the party without even knowing what the party is about. I had concerns about previous engagements with HSI where undertakings were given and never followed through. As regards the inclusion of ECVOA, HSI engaged with everybody else but forgot to engage with us and then found the time to send a letter of apology for this lack of engagement but asked us to engage the day before it would make its selection, and that is simply inadequate.

I thank the Chair and everyone who has attended today. I am new to the committee and was not here for previous engagements on this topic but I have read the opening statements, done some research and missed a few calls from people as well.

Basically, there is a clear and serious breakdown in relationships here. One of the things that came across from reading through the opening statements related to who was setting policies for the industry and sector and what qualifications did they have. There seems to be a question mark as to the general direction the industry is going, why it is going in that direction and how it is doing so. I would like to tease that out a bit. What has been suggested by that comment? Perhaps Mr. Draper could respond.

It is the understanding of the industry in its totality and how each area is contributing to that. The experience of our voluntary breeders organisation is very different. The way the affiliates are set up, we are all in our own silos. We need to have a plan for each area and that is all tied into the industry as a whole.

Regarding transparency, which was mentioned, we hear about places on the board, appointments, how things are managed and the difficulties around all of that. I take it this comes from past experience. Are there attempts to resolve these issues that are not being engaged with as actively as they could be by the sector?

The reality is every organisation and sector needs a governing body, someone who sets and maintains the rules to ensure it is done properly and all of that. HSI clearly has that role. What is the status of HSI? A private company was mentioned. Is it a limited company by guarantee? What way is it set up? Is it a private limited company by guarantee?

The Deputy can interrupt me as I go. If we go back a little over two years, a board consisting of nine members was in place. Eight of those positions were filled. The ninth was dedicated to Northern Ireland and that position could not be filled at the time. Of those eight, four were ministerial appointments and the remaining four came from among the affiliates. There were four advisory groups which the affiliates populated. The chair of each of those advisory groups automatically became a director of HSI. In other words, a chair within an advisory group was elected and he or she automatically had a seat on the board.

That was the case up until last November, almost 12 months ago. I may be a few weeks out on that. At that stage, over the space of a week, the then board resigned and the Minister for agriculture appointed four directors as an interim board. When they were appointed, the Minister said it would be until after the Olympics in order to provide stability.

So the board consisted of four, all ministerial appointments. A quorum of three was required for a board to meet. One of its jobs was to devise a new board structure. That new board structure, which they recommended, was for nine people. Again, four direct ministerial appointments. The fifth person was to be from the Northern Ireland Sports Forum, which I think is the correct title. The remaining four would go back again into the constituent groups but with one difference. Each of these advisory groups, that previously their chair was automatically a board member, were now asked to nominate two people who would then be interviewed "for consideration" for appointment as a director, so no guarantee any longer. If the two people who were interviewed were not considered suitable then the appointment would go back to the Minister. So in theory, under the new system, the Minister appoints four people to start, a fifth is appointed by the Northern Ireland Sports Forum and the remaining four, who would come from those four advisory fora, would nominate two people each, and if they were considered they would be appointed.

There was an expert panel formed to interview and hold that interview process. I can provide the names following this session but there was a panel.

There is one further concern. It is now possible that all nine positions can be filled without having any affiliate representative. I am not saying it will happen but it is possible. If any director during their term has to resign, for whatever reason or if they are deceased, their replacement will be appointed by the Minister. So it is possible on two fronts, from an affiliate point of view, that the affiliates will have no voice on the board. It is a bit like, for example, a Deputy going for an election in a couple of weeks or months and the top two people who are elected are suddenly called in for an interview and an external person will deem whether they are suitable or not to take up a seat. That is the concern of affiliates - that the voice may not be heard.

The position right now is that of four of those advisory groups, three directors have been appointed and the fourth high-performance group have not had a quorum to meet. I shall refer to Mr. Draper because he is represented at one of the advisory fora and one of his members has had interaction in relation to it. Is Mr. Draper happy to comment?

I am aware of the various issues, including the passports. It has been mentioned that some of it may have been administrative errors or whatever and you took the word on that. However, there are clear difficulties there. What are the people who represent everyone in the sector doing about that, if they are on the board? Three are on the board. One has to go on the board. What are they doing about these issues? Are they representing you?

That is one of our major issues; even the proportion of the representation within our forum, which is 22 or 24 people. Some organisations have two representatives and we do not how this was divided out. The horse board can have four nominees but it has not taken them up. We do not really understand. Complete strangers were put in a room and asked to appoint a chair plus put forward two nominees. So, for us, the process was not good.

I met the chair and the Chief Executive of Horse Sport Ireland just before Christmas. At that meeting I put forward very much the view, which I am quite happy to share here again with the committee, that the board does need to be represented by people directly elected by affiliates. At that meeting they shared a concern about gender balance. We brought that back to RDS and discussed it. We invited affiliates in and we openly discussed the matter. To the best of my knowledge, all of the affiliates were invited. Many came and we discussed it. At the conclusion of one of those meetings we recommended that there would be a board of seven members. One from each of the four advisory groups whoever their chairs where. Then, from a gender balance point of view, the Minister had two remaining places, and the seventh would be from Northern Ireland. So for gender balance to be addressed, we felt that the Minister could address that as opposed to initially he appointing and the affiliates having to address the matter. That was a positive, constructive suggestion which we made. That four would be directly voted upon and appointed by the affiliates, two from the Minister and one from Northern Ireland.

We also felt that the majority of decisions on the board would then be driven by industry. Crucially, funding is controlled by the Department so he who controls the purse strings can control many things. Accountability is there through the Department. We believe accountability is huge here but the policy or strategy could be driven by those within and from the affiliates, within the industry.

I welcome everybody and we all accept the integrity of everyone here. There seems to be a major problem. The one theme that runs through all of the reports by the organisations is that they all have a major problem with the HSI.

I am a bit confused when Mr. Corrigan says there is an interim board set up. How can an interim board change a constitution? How can that be done?

We were the first ones to start looking at this, and we asked that question collectively when affiliates attended a meeting with HSI. When the board resigned, the Minister was perfectly entitled to make his appointments. Within the old pre-January 2024 constitution of HSI, it stated that where the directors representing the councils have resigned, it is incumbent on the remainder of the board to ensure the councils meet to appoint a new director to replace them. I referenced that in our statement. When we met this committee last year, our understanding leaving the room was that the interim board of HSI would facilitate that. The councils would reform and be taken out of abeyance, which they were put into. They would appoint new chairpersons, those chairpersons would then take their seats on the board, and if there were a change to be made for whatever purpose at least the industry would be involved in it and have buy-in because those directors were reporting directly back to the councils, which were populated by the affiliates. Everybody was happy that would work. What happened was the interim board ignored what we had asked it. We also asked it directly to do that in October last year when we sat in a meeting in the HSI board room. We asked for that same thing to be done. What happened instead was the interim board held an AGM. It had a quorum, so it was entitled to hold an AGM, but it devised and adopted a brand-new constitution. That constitution did not have the input of directors' representatives from the councils that were written into the old constitution, and which were populated by the affiliates. I would not like to say anyone acted illegally, but we have a scenario where good faith was certainly not being used, in that the industry was left aside from having insider involvement in the rewriting of a constitution that was going to affect the industry. That is one of the fundamental problems. The constitution now has written out the councils, written out the make-up of the councils, written out the direct representation as to how a chairperson or whoever comes forward to it, so it has taken away the need to have what they now call the forums. The forums can be changed by the board within its own constitution. That is clear when you read the new constitution of HSI. It is a limited company, but it is predominantly funded by the State. It has some commercial elements within it, but it is funded by the State. Where affiliates, as they were, have concerns is that we now have an entity in which they have a limited input, that can decide to carry out actions that could have serious impacts on those affiliates and that it is endowed with a title which is the national governing body for high-performance sport. When that title was endowed to it circa 2006 under the Dowling report it was with the buy-in of the then affiliates and the handing over that title from the old EFI. The EFI gave it on the basis that, at the time, the affiliates had direct representation onto the board. They had people sitting directly on the board to look after sporting industry interests. It was a big board, and I am not saying it was perfect. It changed under the Indecon review. The affiliates still lived with it. They were quite happy with it, but this constitution has been changed without any consultation with the industry similar to that which took place as part of the Indecon review. They were not deeply involved in the changes that have been made. Mr. Byrne alluded to it. He was invited to become a member of something into which he had no input and no knowledge of how it was going to function.

That is what I am referring to as its constitution. The prior constitution, memorandum and articles of association clearly laid out how the councils fitted into it with the names of the parties who made up the councils, so in effect it was written into the laws of that company. If you look at the new constitution, they no longer exist within that.

From a showjumping perspective, insurance certainly gets bigger every year. We are all scrambling around in the market hoping we can get an underwriter to take on our risk whether it is showjumping, eventing, dressage, para-equestrian, horse board activities or RDS activities. The venues also have to have their own insurance. Again, to a degree we are all having to paddle our own canoes. There is no industry-led structured approach to how we can get better insurance to cover all of us, to mitigate risk and work with the insurance underwriters. There probably are not any Irish-based underwriters taking this at all. There is a minimum number of underwriters through Lloyd’s that will take up this risk. Our problem is that we are being left with no real lead on this. To be honest, I do not think the expertise is there to have it. However, we are in a vacuum, as someone referred to it earlier. We have a body we are supposed to recognise as an industry umbrella body, which was set up as a body to support and enhance how we do things, but when the really important things happen, we are left to do it ourselves.

Senator Boyhan asked about anti-dope testing. From the showjumping perspective we can speak authoritatively on this because we are the only affiliate doing a significant amount of testing and we do it in consultation and partnership with HSI, which is the Sport Ireland-nominated body to carry out that testing. However, HSI's role is that for every euro the affiliate provides towards funding it will use Sport Ireland funding - euro for euro. That is how it is funded. HSI will make the decision on the vet and appoint the vet. HSI will make the decision on the testing laboratory, whether it is in France or the equine centre. It will make the decision on that. It will also predominantly make the decision on the number of tests carried out at each event. The process for selection of animals, riders, or whatever, to be tested at an event is done in consultation with the senior officials from the affiliate on the day, as per its rules and regulations so if there is a positive test it stands up if challenged or taken to court. That is why the affiliate must have a structure that suits its activities. It is not a case that HSI can test at a draught show should it wish to do so at the RDS, at eventing, dressage or whatever it may be. However, in the instance it is testing at an event, it needs the expertise of the officials trained by the affiliates to be specifically competent in carrying out their roles. That is the difference. HSI does not carry out that role.

As I said at the start, there seems to be a huge lack of communication across all disciplines. I ask all the witnesses what they see as the solution to this problem. There is obviously a major problem out there and nobody wants to see the industry going down. The picture being painted at the moment is that the industry is in dire trouble.

The industry is healthy. It is worth more than €1 billion per year. We are winning medals across all disciplines at youth levels and senior levels. The industry itself is healthy. The irony of what has happened is that a lot of the affiliates are now more closely aligned than they ever were and are more involved with each other's activities and concerns than they ever were.

The solution is that the entity put in place with good intentions be instructed and directed to carry out the role it was set up to do. It should not be competing with the affiliates. It was set up as an umbrella body to support the affiliates and it needs to do that, not compete with, or dictate to them. It is there to support them. That is what it is meant to be. It was set up as a conduit to help increase State support to an industry that very much needed it at the time. It is now an industry that is growing and creating more economic activity for the country, creating more jobs, more employment and everything for the country.

The entity set up to do that must start realising that is its function, not competing for its own position as an authority. The affiliates, the NGBs, should have a presence to govern their sports and activities. HSI, as the entity, should exist to support their activities, not try to impinge on the affiliates' ability to carry out their roles.

The Deputy asked what the solution is. I refer him to my opening statement, in which I said the industry should have a unified approach, taking input from industry stakeholders and ensuring it reflects the needs of affiliates. An overarching or umbrella body must provide accountability to the industry. I referred to increased stakeholder engagement, using industry resources efficiently and engaging with stakeholders in strategic planning. I will refer to planning in a moment if we have time. Furthermore, any umbrella body should be answerable to its affiliates and hold an annual general meeting at which its executive and directors would report to the affiliates. It should have a board of directors populated with representatives.

In my view and that of the RDS, there is largely an absence regarding strategising for the future. I shall split the concept of strategy into internal or organisational strategy and strategy from an industry point of view. I referred to internal strategy when I met representatives of HSI last December, but that was about company structure. Consider the last time the RDS was engaged in industry-related strategic planning, or what we refer to as reaching new heights, which is part of the current programme for Government. Before we came into this session, we met Deputy Coveney, who was Minister for agriculture at the time in question. That is how long it has been since we have had serious engagement on strategy related to the industry. The consequences of this concern training, which we can refer to later and which comprises one of the biggest problems.

I wish to follow on from Deputy Mythen's question. I apologise as I had to go to a vote, and there is a possibility I will have to do so again. If I ask a question but have to go before hearing the answer, I will be able to read the transcript.

My question is a broad one for all the witnesses. We have been hearing from both sides for two years and know most, if not all, of the problems at this stage. We try to be solution driven. The witnesses' dedication to their sector and desire to see it sustained and advanced is obvious this evening. I fear that with all that is going on and if things are as bad on the ground as they appear to be, we will start to lose some of our better high-performance people. Mr. McCartan, in answering Deputy Flaherty, referred to sports capital, the great work his organisation is doing and how it cannot get funding as it is private. If we had the money he is lobbying for at our disposal, what body would we give it to be confident it would go where Mr. McCartan highlighted it is needed? Under the current structure, even if the money were abundant, we would not know where to go to ensure it would get to where it was needed. In this regard, let us consider the HRI model for capital development grants, whereby it pays out to its affiliates. As Mr. McCartan's organisation is private, it cannot get sports capital. I see exactly where it is caught but I also see the conundrum associated with the question of who we would give the money to if we had it this evening. What structure would he like to see that would allow him to know that, when we hand the money to someone, it will eventually get to where it is so badly needed or is requested for?

It is an excellent point. It boils back to the same point again, which is that there is no strategy for the industry. There is certainly a huge need for investment across many facets of the industry, but there is no overarching strategy for five, ten or 20 years. That is where Horse Sport Ireland is seriously failing the industry and sector. Those concerned are living from day to day, hand to mouth, and not doing what they are supposed to do, which is to offer leadership, a plan and a strategy. We have a huge industry that needs these.

The Senator is absolutely right that while money could be thrown at individual projects, we are only fiddling around the place unless the whole thing is joined up with a correct strategy. The concern of many here is that we do not have the input from the affiliates to work with HSI to develop a strategy that would bring the industry forward.

Could I come in there? It boils down to leadership. Unfortunately, the leadership for the past couple of years has been questionable. If in my job I do not do something right, I have to answer to somebody. There has been a litany of catastrophes over recent years. Mr. Freyne, who is present this evening, was part of the old executive. To put him on the spot, he might be able to throw light on matters. There was a good executive previously but it just went down the wrong road. None of us is against having a forum or governing body, which is very important; it is just that the leadership is lacking. I do not know whether Mr. Freyne could give some background information on the previous executive. I understand there was never an exit interview in any of the previous executives. Those concerned all resigned, yet we just soldiered on headless for the next two or three years.

To take up that point, I was a member of the previous board, the larger one. It was tasked with reaching new heights. The formulation of that board following the Dowling report was such that it had representatives from other stakeholders across the industry – all the affiliates. For example, Showjumping Ireland had four members on the board, Eventing Ireland had two and Dressage Ireland had one. I believe the Irish Horse Board had four. The number depended on the size of the affiliated organisation. If I recollect correctly, there were 17 people on the board. Mr. Beecher was one of the chairs. The first chair we had was Joe Walsh. He was the man who set the whole thing up. He was the Government-appointed chairman of the original board.

The Indecon report examined the organisation and suggested that the size of the board be reduced to increase efficiency. There was a huge amount of discussion on this. The memorandums, articles and constitution lodged with the authority at the time set out the structures for the pre-January 2024 Horse Sport Ireland. That was what was alluded to by Mr. Madden. There were four Government appointees on the body, and the advisory councils. I was part of the original board of HSI. It was turkeys voting for Christmas in that each of the affiliates and organisations, following considerable discussion and interaction, agreed the best way forward for the governing body was to reduce the size of the board. In the constitution, and as alluded to, each organisation was allotted a certain number of places. I am here as a representative of the RDS and I am the CEO of the equitation school. The school had a seat on the high-performance advisory council and the coaching and education advisory council. The RDS had a seat on the high-performance advisory council and also on the coaching and education advisory council. Showjumping Ireland had the original chairmanship. Each of the affiliates and organisations was guaranteed a pathway through to board membership. I was one of the directors along with two of the Government-appointed directors who opted to resign back in November 2022. We did so because we were not satisfied with the direction HSI was taking.

What happened when the rest of the board resigned was the Government appointees came in. They suspended the advisory councils. In effect, they prevented the stakeholders and affiliates from sending forward their representatives to make the decision on what the new memorandum would be. The main crux of why we are here today is the new memorandums and articles that are now registered prevent guaranteed stakeholder engagement. That is the process that has led us to where we are now. The original structure, in my opinion, was fit for purpose and did a lot of very good work when there was significant stakeholder involvement. For sure, there was a breakdown in the structures at one stage. The proposal whereby the main funding partners, namely, the Departments of agriculture and sport, would also sit on the board and represent those main funding partners is a way forward. The simple answer to the question is stakeholder involvement in decision-making and policy. The organisation and direction of the umbrella organisation is what is required. Currently, there is no guaranteed structure that will allow that to happen.

To follow on from that, there is an absence of policy for our para-athletes and for riding for the disabled. There is an absence of policy for children who require equine therapy. These are people we are all letting down. We are telling a four-year-old child who has to wait a minimum of two years for equine therapy to come back in two years and maybe we can talk to him or her. We are letting these people down. We are letting down our para-athletes. These are the most vulnerable people we have and we are failing them.

I agree with everything Mr. Madden said. I go back to Senator Daly's comment about, if there were a pot of money, where it could be directed. I have to declare a certain interest in this insofar as I have been chair of three LEADER companies over a 15-year period. I see no reason funds could not be directed towards the equine industry through the rural development programme and ring-fenced towards specific infrastructural development. Such companies have all the mechanisms, they understand corporate governance and they are well used to being audited by third-party organisations. If that were done in the interim to get funding rolling into the industry, when HSI's future is rectified, then maybe funding could be channelled through it on a similar basis as rural development. We should not be devoid of investment or an opportunity for capital development simply on the basis that there is no conduit we have confidence in.

I will address the same matter. Before that, I am seeking clarification from Showjumping Ireland. From our previous meetings and correspondence, we heard bits and pieces about a bit of a stand-off between Showjumping Ireland, Sport Ireland and Horse Sport Ireland when it comes to the financing of the high performance unit. Where is that at the moment? Where does Showjumping Ireland see it going? When we talk about a high performance unit in showjumping or equestrian, LA will be in four years' time, Brisbane will be four years after that and wherever it will be in 2036. The horses Showjumping Ireland would like to see at those Olympics are being broken now or are even starting out. It is an eight- or 12-year cycle. It is certainly not a sport where a breakdown in the high performance unit can be afforded. In addressing the first question, the representatives might just give me an idea of where that all is.

Unfortunately, that is in a very bad place at the moment. As we alluded to in our statement, we met with two representatives of Sport Ireland, along with representatives from Horse Sport Ireland. All high performance affiliates were present. They all asked for the same thing - input into planning the financial support mechanisms for the high performance squads. That is what they asked for. Sport Ireland explained the rationale for its funding. I know it is not agriculture funding, but it explained that it works through core and high performance.

We said we are quite willing to look for funding but we are accountable to our members. When we go to an AGM, 200 or 300 people will ask us what that funding was spent on. Our problem is that we could not get input into it. We left that meeting with a very clear ask, and Mr. McDermott saw no real issue with it provided it would not cause delays, which was that Horse Sport Ireland would put together its four-year programme each time, costed out so we could see it over the four years. We did that many years ago. It means we are supporting all aspects of high performance. We could see and justify where funding is going and could address funding where it is needed. That has not happened. There has been no submission from HSI. In fact, it took umbrage at the fact we asked it to submit its programme. It would not and has not done so.

Where we are is that Showjumping Ireland, and I can speak for Dressage Ireland as well, is at an absolute standstill regarding discussions on high performance funding. Some of the other affiliates are having difficulty drawing down Covid grants that were granted to them on foot of the fact they have asked questions about high performance funding. It is being done like a quid pro quo or, "If you give us some money, we will give you some of your Covid funding money." That is how that is happening. The chairman of our national-----

We thought that meeting Sport Ireland would help that. In fairness to Mr. McDermott, and Ms O'Sullivan who attended, they left that meeting saying they were quite willing for us to meet again at Sport Ireland to try to progress this. However, nothing has come from the Horse Sport Ireland team outlining its plan for the next four years, its aspirations, what it thinks it is going to cost, and what the affiliates can contribute towards that. We are a membership. We have to go on the basis that we have a certain number of members this year. We do not know whether a recession will come in two years' time and our membership will be halved, which means our income will be a fraction of what it was. We need to plan in order that we can put money aside to ensure we support an Olympic programme, a World Games programme and a European programme.

A big issue we have a huge concern about - the Senator alluded to the fact this is a 12-year plan - is that the people who are riding ponies now will potentially be riding horses in the Olympics in 12 years' time. Our biggest concern is that our youth athlete teams are starved of funding. We acknowledge they are not getting huge amounts from Sport Ireland, but the affiliates wish to support them and do support them. The chairman of the pony committee is beside me. I will let him speak because he has first-hand experience of sitting at a committee where there was no budget plan or plan, and people were told at the last minute that funds for that programme had been hatcheted in half, with no warning.

As well as being vice chairman of Showjumping Ireland, I have been chairman of the national pony committee for the past four to five years. One of the main situations that has happened is the lack of trust. There is no trust between the affiliates and Horse Sport Ireland. There has certainly been a complete fall-down. I have attended meetings with Horse Sport Ireland for the past two and a half years. At the very start, the situation was we looked for some money for ponies. As most people sitting here probably know, in the past four to five years, the success of ponies for Ireland has been second to none. We are the envy of the world in the way we have won gold, silver, bronze and individual medals. We won everything. Horse Sport Ireland gives nothing towards that at all.

In one case, I looked for some extra money. It is all down to a lack of trust and no trust between the affiliates and Horse Sport Ireland, as I said. On one occasion, when the ponies were going out to jump at one of the European shows, we were told Horse Sport Ireland would not send them. It is the body that has to send the registrations and everything through before the ponies go, but it told us it could not send them because it did not have any money. We could not have any money to pay the entry fees. I turned round and said the following.

We will transfer the entry fee, whatever it is, from Showjumping Ireland, to Horse Sport Ireland to pay the NGBs. They came back to me and said the actual amount they need for the entry fee is almost €13,000. In the process of trying to get that transferred, I discovered there was no entry fee. The parents were paying the entry fee. The only money given by Horse Sport Ireland to the ponies is the entry fees for the European championships. It gives no money of any description. A lot of the problem lies there. The whole thing fell down and it is gone beyond repair.

I do not know where to start because there is so much that I have to say. I am very disappointed that 12 years on we have the same disputes going on and the same troubles and rows. When I was Minister of State in 2012, we had troubles with passports and breeding. I recall appointing an independent chairman – I cannot remember his name but Mr. Freyne might remember it - to see if we could bring things together. At the time, we had the same rows with the Departments. The Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Sport, Gaeltacht and Media and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine are fighting over territory as well. It was mentioned that, at that time, Deputy Coveney was Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I was Minister of State with responsibility for sport. I wanted one Department or the other to take total control. There were rows within the Departments as they did not want to let that bit of power go. I set up Sport Ireland when I was Minister of State. I brought the legislation through the Dáil and appointed the chief executive.

I welcome the witnesses. I am directing my questions to whoever wants to answer them. I was very disappointed with our performance in the previous two Olympics; I am not going to pretend otherwise. People can wash it any way they want, but we are a country that breeds horses. We are known for our horses. We love horses. We understand horses. Yet, we saw sports in the Olympics and I do not know how they got there. The countries they came from were not able to bring home gold, silver or bronze medals. We are a country of horses and we did badly in the past two Olympics. We have done nothing about it. We have the finest horse riders in the country and we have the finest horses. Other countries such as Great Britain and Germany have horses that bred in Ireland and they win gold medals. What is wrong with our horses and riders that we cannot win a bronze, silver or gold medal at the Olympics? The games happen every four years. We should be able to do better. Something is wrong.

I want to take up a point that has been raised. A mother came to see me recently whose daughter's ambition is to be a horse rider. She is a young girl who lives in a town. The mother went to the trouble of talking to a local farmer who was prepared to give her a small bit of ground. He also had a little shed. He said if she got a little pony for her daughter he would deal with the insurance, but she could not get a pony because she did not have the resources. Lots of people are being left out of that game because of finances. It is a sport for rich men and women.

A point was made, correctly, about therapy for people with disabilities. I know children who got an opportunity in that regard in Connemara who progressed very well. I came across such places when I was Minister of State with responsibility for sport. Mention was made of the LEADER programme. When I was involved with the LEADER programme, funding was provided for therapies for people with disabilities. That should happen.

I want to speak about the RDS and, in particular, the recent Dublin Horse Show. I had the pleasure of being there for a day. I brought my daughter and granddaughter. We had a wonderful day. We went on the Thursday, not the Friday. I never enjoyed a day like it. I was not under any pressure. When I was Minister of State with responsibility for sport, I launched the show on many occasions when Tourism Ireland provided a lot of the funding for it. The people involved in it are decent.

I call on the Chair to bring in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. We must do something about all the rows that are going on in horse racing and in the equestrian area. When that is going on in any sport, it explains where we are at in regard to the Olympics. We must do something about it.

Were any civil servants, county managers, or whatever else, among the board members appointed by the Minister? That is what has this country destroyed. Every board is being taken over by former county managers, former assistant secretaries and former civil servants. It is a case of giving jobs to the boys and girls. We are doing nothing about it. We have allowed it to happen. They will not appoint people who know something about it. They will not put a politician on a board because we know too much about everything. Politicians are not allowed to go on boards, yet we have every civil servant who does not know a horse from a bull. That is the truth. They are coming in then and telling the professionals and the people involved in the sport how to run it.

We must bring in the Department, once and for all. There is a power struggle between the Department and all the different groupings. We set up an agency to try and deal with that to ensure boards are representative of all. Instead of that, the Minister has four appointments, including one for Northern Ireland. He has total control. If anybody resigns, he can fill the position. The board is not democratically elected. It is a piecemeal board that does not represent anybody.

If people from the ground up are not involved in the GAA, soccer and rugby and who know something about the sport, there is no point in having them on the board. We must have people on the board who understand the profession. What can we do to bring everybody together? What can we do to set up a new board? What role does the Minister have? Which Minister is dealing with it now? When I was Minister of State with responsibility for sport, I could not appoint the chairman without going to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the board could not be appointed without coming to me. That is what goes on at Department level.

The groups represented here do not have representation on the board that is supposed to be representing them. Something must be done because the industry is the loser. It is a very important industry. Someone gave the figure that the industry is worth €1 billion to this country. Why would we let an industry like that fall apart? Why are we not doing something about it? I ask whoever wants to respond what we must do from today to try and correct what is wrong.

It is refreshing to hear the Deputy. He hit the nail on the head. As we have said over and over, our biggest concern has been that the new constitution of HSI 2024 is designed to effectively protect HSI's existence. It is not accountable to the affiliates. It is accountable to its own members. The only members it has are its board, so it is, effectively, accountable to itself.

How do we fix it? We need the committee to help us to put something in place that will serve the sports and the industry, because they all link together. We all link together. The Deputy mentioned the two Ministries being in a power struggle. It is a constant thing. The Deputy perceives us to be in a power struggle with HSI. We are not in a power struggle with it. I will be frank in how I say it; we are trying to give HSI a kick in the ass to realise we want to look after our sport and our industry. We are all passionate about it. A lot of us make our living out of it. We have our families involved for generations. We are not going to harm this industry but we are going to fight tooth and nail to support it and grow it.

When HSI came into existence, it was a terrific idea. It was an umbrella body that was going to find funding to fund sport and breeding and grow both so that they would come together. It definitely did that for a while but, unfortunately, it started to deviate because the thing that was bringing them together took on a life of its own and it forgot what it was meant to do. That is still the case. There is no use in talking about reversing it. We have done that. We spent last year talking about that. We have given it a year. Reversing it is not going to work. This thing needs a mallet to land on top of it. The industry needs to be supported and recognised. Most importantly, it needs to be listened to properly, not just to let it talk and then leave the room and do whatever you want to do yourself. HSI needs to listen to the industry, as the Deputy alluded to - the people who know exactly what is going on. Mr. Madden referenced it. I know this first-hand because my wife works with Riding for the Disabled Ireland, and therapy with children and horses. She will tell first-hand that there is nothing better than to see a little child, or in some instances adults who have disabilities, come out of themselves for that one hour they get. The centres are run predominantly by volunteers who give up their time freely and get very little assistance from the big bodies.

We are obsessed with the Olympics, and rightly so. Medals bring us success and pride to the country. One feeds off the other. That is really important to see. We cannot have a board, whether it be nine or 17 people, who forget about that. That is the reality of it. They forget about the venues who put their facilities in place, the ECVOA venues, who spent hundreds of thousands on their venues so they are safe and suitable to help therapy children and to teach children how to ride so they are in a situation to deal with what the Deputy looked for, for example, the child who needs somewhere to put their pony because it will give them an outlet instead of hanging around on the side of a corner somewhere or getting into mischief. That is what we all work to do. The RDS is a foundation based on helping, supporting and doing those things. Showjumping Ireland does the very same thing. Our safeguarding policies, support policies and our training policies are all based on finding that child who is eight years of age, and we bring them all the way through to jumping in the Dublin Horse Show. Jumping in Dublin is the pinnacle for them nationally, and the RDS helps us every year in doing that. We plough our resources into it.

We want to join the 12.2 child up to the ones the Deputy wants to see lifting the Olympic medal. We cannot do that if the whole thing is not joined up and if they do not recognise each other’s strengths. We currently have a situation where there is an entity and there is, not a power struggle, but a distrust between the organisations, that we will do so much work and then it is taken away and you have no input into it anymore. However, when it fails or does not deliver what people expect it to deliver, who takes the flack for it? It is the people nationally, because they have lost interest in it. The sponsorship then disappears. The corporate support and the national systems disappear. That is what happens to us. We end up ploughing resources into rebuilding that for the for the next four years, and then the same thing happens.

We need it joined up. We need all committee members to drop that mallet on the table and say enough is enough, it is time to sit up, that you do not care how important you think you are, you are getting in a room and listening to these people. That is what we need, and it is all we want them to do. It is not about personalities or the people on the board all the time. I am sure they are very competent people. They were very able and capable civil servants in their Departments. However, the Deputy is right. Some of them have very little practical knowledge of what is wanted and that has to change. Put the people who have the best interests of the sport and the industry in places where they can influence and develop and do things properly. That is all we want, as well as transparency.

Transparency is the most important thing. If State funding is coming into this, every single person should be able to see a set of accounts that shows what the last penny was spent on. We have to do it for our organisations. We sit in front of them. We would be quite happy to give our accounts to members and they could go through them and see exactly what we spend our money on. Can the Deputy say they have the same thing from an entity that is in receipt of a large amount of State funding? We can and will do that. Can everyone else within the sector do that?

I agree with Mr. Corrigan. The time has come. We have talked enough about it. We know there are problems and they have to be dealt with. The industry is now being affected and that is why it needs to be corrected. It is not about the gold medals and the Olympics. It is about participating and giving an opportunity to the child in a disadvantaged area who might like horse riding, for example, the child who has ambition, like the eight-year-old child I have, who wants to be a showjumper but does not have the resources or the help.

Perhaps somebody could answer this. I do not know the industry. Is there anywhere that somebody in the industry would give an end-of-life pony to a good home rather than what we saw - being savagely murdered in an abattoir? We are still waiting for the report on that. That still has not come before this committee when it should. Is there anywhere a horse like that could be made available to a child like that at a reasonable rate? They want to pay something but they cannot afford the prices. They cannot compete with people who will do it in a professional way.

From the showjumping perspective, of course we do that. There are pony producing people. There are people who have ponies. We have seen them. I will give the Deputy the example of a pony called Mickeybo. He has jumped in Dublin for 13 or 14 years. He has taught 13 or 14 children how to jump in Dublin. He has brought them in that ring and there is always a smile coming out. He is only one pony like that. To answer the Deputy’s question, yes. The industry needs to know that those people are there. They need to be able to tell us what they are looking for. Of course our industry, everyone sitting here today, would go out of their way to help them.

If Mr. Corrigan knows one, I am available and I know the person who wants it.

I will finish on this. This is an important industry. I was the Minister for sport. We had the passport problem, the breeding problem and the rows. I thought we had gone past that. Regarding high performance, I am surprised at two things, even though I was Minister for sport. I did not realise that the witnesses could not apply under the sports capital. I know high performance is there and it is supposed to be equally distributed. Some organisations get a massive amount of high performance money and they are still high performance. They are not doing much good in the past 20 years. Some people are not living in Ireland but use the nationality and country, and get good high performance money. They do not perform when they go to the Olympics but that is not about performance. I would like to see a bit more funding going into the sport. The first thing that has to be done, as Mr. Corrigan said, is people have to be brought together. Somebody has to take the hammer and somebody has to take control. They have to listen to the industry and the industry has to respond. That is all I have to say.

I welcome all the guests who have come here. Being the last speaker, I am able to reflect on other people’s questions and the contributions of the witnesses. Mr. Corrigan said this is not about personalities. I differ with him on that. I think this is about personalities. Are there any good people on the HSI board now?

Competent in certain areas, yes. Our concern is that they may not be knowledgeable enough as to what our sector and industry wants. If the Minister looks at them, they are very competent in the role they were in previously. Maybe he believes they will be competent and good in guiding the sector. However, our problem is the sector is not getting in the room properly to say what is needed. Those people are, effectively, deciding on the policy and they are deciding what the sector wants, even though the sector is telling them it is not what it needs; that it wants something else.

We had this discussion with them. It refers to what Mr. McCartan, Mr. Fagan and Mr. Chris Byrne said. HRI has a good system where it supports racecourses to develop them, which develops things. The HRI board is made up primarily of nominees from the different sections of the industry. Why are we so different? That is what I am looking at. Why are we so different? We are a smaller industry but we are actually spread wider because we have ponies, horses and children. Racing does not have that. It has breeding and competition. We have that. It has a board that is broad but it has direct input from people who are very knowledgeable in the industry and actually represent sectors of the industry. The bookmakers, trainers and stable staff are all sitting on the board, which means they are accountable to the people on the ground. They are also accountable to the Minister, which is correct, and to the taxpayer. They are accountable and answerable to the people on the ground. If you have a problem, you will be darn sure that, for example, if there is a message the bookies needs to get across, Daragh Fitzpatrick as the bookies’ representative on the board of HRI gets it across. The trainers, the stable staff – they are all the there. Then what have we got? We have HRI, which works with the IHRB, which is the rules committee. It works with Irish Thoroughbred Marketing. They all work together because they all recognise the specialist expertise each person has. That is what we are missing. There are competent and very good people there. Unfortunately, those people, based on the creature they have now in their constitution, are actually not able to use all the people who are sitting here, and I can refer to other high-performance affiliates who are sitting at home and are probably watching us. They are crying they want support.

Para Equestrian Ireland is disabled people who are trying to compete internationally. It has 47 members out shaking buckets. It is a charity. It should not be asked for any contribution towards high performance.

We should be giving them more. I am sorry to be long-winded in answering the question, but competent people are certainly in place.

I do not like calling Mr. Freyne by that name because I know him, so I will call him Tom if that is okay. As a former Minister of State, I dealt a lot with Tom. He did an absolutely fantastic job in the equitation school and I am very familiar with it. I was very supportive of it when I was Minister of State. Tom, are you the only witness here who was on the board of HSI?

It would definitely give us stakeholder involvement that would be listened to. Eight submissions were made by the affiliates prior to Christmas. These were received by HSI. Many of them recommended going back to what obtained pre-Indecon, which was having advisory councils and the previous constitution. It was smaller but it probably was more efficient. I was a member of the 17-person board and it was a slow-moving organisation to be fair. It was a very steady ship. The members supported each other and there was great support for para equestrian, defence and the Army Equitation School. We all looked after each other but maybe we were not as fluid as we needed to be. This was the reason for moving to the advisory forum methodology. I still believe it could be a good way, with the improvement of bringing in the major funding partners of agriculture and sport to be involved on the board. It would be better than what we have now because for sure we need stakeholder involvement. They need to be listened to and to be part of the decision-making process. The point has been made that they bring in the skills and knowledge needed to bring the sector forward.

The last meeting we had with HSI was a combined meeting of the high-performance affiliates, ourselves and the board of HSI with the new chairman. We called that meeting with the board. We requested it on the basis we wanted to develop a relationship. We wanted to be able to move forward. I ask Deputy Kehoe to forgive me because I know he wants a quick answer. Senator Boyhan indicated that he wanted to be devil's advocate and certainly did so in his own inimitable way. I ask Deputy Kehoe to allow me to do the same. At that board meeting, my opening comment was that the difficulty with the board was not the board. The people present were the board and the executive. I challenged the executive at that meeting to the effect that it was not fit for purpose. It was the problem prior to the new board and it remains the problem. It is still the problem today. A spade is a spade. That is the last meeting we had with it. It agreed to meet us again, but no further meeting was held.

When HSI came before the committee to discuss licensing, I had a major go off it because it is totally not professional in the way it does its job in that regard. This is what I hear back from constituents who are involved in the sport horse industry. I am interested in Mr Hanly's exchange with Senator Boyhan. I thought it was a little frosty. I want to tease the matter out a bit more. During the four or five days of the showjumping event at the RDS, what is the process with HSI regarding drug testing? Can it not just walk in and say it wants to test horse A, B, C and D in this class and in the 3 p.m. tomorrow class it wants to test horse A, B, C and D, and so on over the course of the event? Why does it have to go to the RDS? Why does the RDS have to prearrange that it is only allowed to test this class, that class or whatever? At an all-Ireland final or any intercounty fixture, doctors can walk into the dressing room and say they want to test this, that or the other player. They can be held up for another two hours depending on a urine sample or whatever it is. Why is it not the same at the RDS?

Off the top of my head, it is somewhere around €10,000. Testing animals is quite expensive because there is testing for a very wide range of substances. The medication list is quite long. It is time-consuming and an expensive process. As Mr. Corrigan explained earlier, there is a requirement for the organisation to provide some support for identifying the animal, taking charge of the animal and bringing it to the testing area where the test is completed. The results go off and the process after that is conducted by HSI.

It depends on the horse. For some horses it is easier. It might be done in half an hour.

They usually have to take blood and urine samples. Depending on the horse, the urine process can be time-consuming. There was a suggestion earlier that we should be doing more tests but they are labour intensive for the vets. It is difficult for them to do more than three tests per day. They have to keep enough time free between classes to ensure they can carry out that work.

Coaching. We are so short of coaches. That is a major problem and it is feeding into all of the problems we will discuss. I do not want to get too technical but there are three levels, which are coaching 1, 2 and 3. Coaching 1 is the assistant coach level. Coaching 2 is up to national level. Coaching 3 is for international high performance. The last time there was-----

The coaching levels are organised by HSI. For level 1, the assistant coach level, the most recent course was in the spring of last year. For level 2, the national level, it has been more than five years since the most recent course. For level 3, the international level, the most recent course was in 2015. I will speak more about level 1, the assistant coach level. I stand to be corrected, but I think the cost of that course used to be approximately €300. More recently, it has gone up to €3,200 or €3,300, which is a 1000% increase. Let us focus on that for a moment. Level 1 coaches tend to be the younger people who we need to come into our industry. Teagasc enters an international competition for young breeders and Ireland won the world championship a couple of years ago. Many of those young people, under the age of 23 or 24, had planned to do the level 1 course before the 1000% increase in the cost. That plan evaporated. Coaching is the big request here. If we do not coach, people are not going to come into our schools and we are not going to be able to get our riders up to a good level. We are not going to be able to get people to produce horses at a high enough level. Coaching is the big request.

Senator Boyhan suggested that the RDS wants to take over. I would love to set the record straight and I am sure the Senator will hear it later. That is absolutely not the case. The RDS does not want to take over. In the history of the RDS, it has never taken over. The RDS helped to set up the National Gallery of Ireland and the RDS stepped away. The National Museum of Ireland was set up by the RDS and it stepped away. I could mention the Botanic Gardens and go on and on. The RDS does not want to take over. It wants to support and help.

The Deputy asked what we want the Minister to do. We want him to get us talking and listening properly. That is what we really want. It is not about money. There is a great deal of money in the industry and much of it will flow into it if we are all joined up. That is the reality. Deputy Ring asked a question about our Olympic teams. We look at the Olympic teams of other nations and at the Irish soccer team and the corporate sponsorship they have. They are supported by corporates. Our international showjumping squads get a pittance because it is not joined up from the start to the finish. The people who can join it up are sitting before the committee, as are their fellow affiliates. I would ask the Minister to sit down and have an open meeting where everything is up for discussion and we could be walking out of the door with a lovely clean sheet of paper and thinking we can start again. Lieutenant Colonel Freyne mentioned it. I was on the first board. Mr. Joe Walsh used to say, every time he met us, "A rising tide lifts all boats." He was very good at getting us all to co-operate with each other. I agree with Lieutenant Colonel Freyne that there were too many people on that board and Showjumping Ireland was part of that problem because we had four representatives on the board. We would have been quite happy and could have managed quite well if we had two representatives on the board. If every organisation lost a couple of members, we would have had a board of 12 or 14 people that would have done a job. As is the case at the committee, everybody gets in a room, learns about each other's problems and concerns and comes up with solutions. The executive is then told to make it happen. That is what I would like.

I appreciate we are over time so I am thankful to the Chairperson for letting me back in. We are in the twilight of this Government. We have been hearing these issues for more than a year and it is deeply troubling. We are seeing no light at the end of the tunnel. I propose that the committee writes to the Minister for agriculture and asks him to appoint independent consultants to do a root-and-branch analysis of HSI, with a view to providing a footprint for the future direction of the sector, looking at everything from coaching to breeding and the production of future competitors.

We will have that on the agenda for our next private meeting. We have had a comprehensive discussion. As members have said clearly, it is disquieting to see that the issues are continuing to boil. For an industry that is a cornerstone of our culture, it is upsetting that there is such disquiet among the grassroots of the horse sport industry. As a committee, we have heard the witnesses loud and clear. We will discuss matters when we meet in private. We will be reporting the deliberations to the Minister. Deputy Flaherty made a proposal to write to the Minister and that will be on our agenda at the committee's next private meeting. I thank the witnesses for their contributions.