AMONG an impressive panel, it was MEP Mairead McGuinness who took centre stage for much of the seminar `What if – a vision for 2028’.

McGuinness tried to deliver a positive message, and confidence in Ireland’s negotiations at Brexit discussions will have certainly increased as a result of listening to her illuminating talk, but the situation remains rather grim and anything but clear.

TRIPARTITE AT RISK

The EU still doesn’t know if the UK will be agreeable to little or no changes but we were assured we shouldn’t see any change before the end of 2020. As the EU is underpinned by strict rules, which will not be relaxed, the Tripartite Agreement will no longer apply to the UK. McGuinness stated that the core principles of the EU will not be diluted because one member state decides to leave.

“We hope when we sit down to negotiate, common sense will prevail but the EU is not prepared to tweak its principles to accommodate the UK. If we cannot overcome our problems, there will be real difficulties for your industry,” she warned.

As Louis Romanet pointed out, if agreement can’t be reached, all of Europe will suffer, not the UK. McGuinness emphasised the risk to humans as well as our bloodstock as the end of the Tripartite Agreement will have serious consequences for pharmaceuticals. “It is possible to reach a sound agreement, but only if everyone understands the consequences,” she stressed.

Joe Foley was concerned about the potential threat of tariffs being imposed on horses transferring to Britain and whether staff could travel freely to Britain for the sales or race days. McGuinness could supply no reassuring answer. “There are likely to be implications,” she revealed, “as the UK is very strong about wanting to take back control about movement of people.

“It took a long time for the UK to understand the issue of a border, which was quite extraordinary. Unless the UK withdraws its red lines there will be change. If this goes bad we’re ruined, this industry.

“I say until I’m blue in the face the UK needs to stay in the Customs Union. I find it very difficult to understand what the UK wants and until we see a clear message of what conditions they want, we can’t sit down and negotiate.”

She found listening to the panel very helpful and admitted to learning a great deal, inviting further discussions with industry professionals. “There is an open door when it comes to stating your case, we don’t want any industry to be damaged.”

The panel then tackled its vision for 2028, which is at least based upon the surer footing of a current industry worth €1.84bn to the national economy, employing 29,000 people and producing 21% of the world’s 100 top-rated horses.

MORE PRIZE MONEY

The downside is that for every €1,000 an owner spends, on average they will get back only €300 in prize money. Jessica Harrington said she would love to see minimum prize money raised to €15,000, leading to more owners coming in and a chance to win back training fees. “If we could provide a level base and continue with the top level as it is, it will filter down,” she argued. “Very few trainers are making a living and we need to consider our staff.”

Eddie O’Leary was in full agreement: “If you win one race you should be able to cover your training. There’s a fantastic trade for second-hand horses, but Irish racing is seriously competitive.”

Foley added: “Prize money isn’t the only issue but it is the most important. If you can cover the cost of training by winning a race you could increase ownership by 50%, I think.”

He also voiced a wish to see the Irish Equine Centre get accreditation and be used for all testing, as well as used as an education campus.

BETTING TAX

Where the extra funding comes from is another matter for debate, with the increase in betting tax high on the wish list. As Romanet pointed out regarding potential funds, “if you followed the French model it would be €250m not €50m! With the number of foals increasing you must increase prize money and at lower levels, because if you produce more racehorses you will not produce more top-class horses, so you need to give prize money to lesser horses. Increase prize money in the middle-of-the-road races or you must decrease the number of foals.

“If you have more horses then you have more betting, so more revenue.

“It’s a global plan, if you can convince your government that your industry can generate more employment and revenue, you can increase funding.”

INVESTMENT

Help in this respect came from another guest speaker, Terence O’Rourke, chairman of Enterprise Ireland. He explained that Enterprise Ireland invests €350m and has a €70m income from investments in Irish businesses. “We support indigenous Irish businesses who export, with capital grants, research and development grants and training grants. By generating extra economic activity, we bring money back into the country.

“Irish companies going abroad have to be good at what they do and Irish bloodstock is recognised as the best in world. Its success is very helpful to us in our job, it’s a very important card to carry when we go into an office. The thoroughbred industry is also important for the research and innovation it encourages. So don’t just ask for money, ask for help to increase your innovation, your training and education and your links with universities.”

Elizabeth Headon, Alliance for Racing and Breeding, explained that we currently have in Ireland a €1bn betting turnover, with €70m betting tax collected. “Betting turnover has gone up five-fold since 2002 but the tax collected hasn’t,” she complained. “70% of sports betting turnover comes from racing and greyhound racing. There has never been more money bet on racing than today. We’re delivering the best return. The problem is the government is concerned that the 1% tax is paid from the bookmakers’ bottom line, because when it was originally reduced from 10% to 1% the bookmakers paid it themselves.”

She reminded us the budget will be finalised by June, so we need to mobilise the industry and discuss this issue. “Show the mutual benefit to bookmakers. Bookmakers elsewhere in the world are paying a lot more and are not complaining but ours are. We were close enough last time, it’s not a lost cause. The tax payer should not be paying and there’s no need to.”

Romanet described 1% as “disgraceful! You need to present a strategy plan,” he advised.

O’Leary argued for a minimum of 5% levy on any win-only bet, and tax-free on-course, which Powell pointed out was going back in time. Foley agreed with Hayden and felt that by increasing betting tax and investing in racing, bookmakers would also benefit. “If we raised it to just 2% we could do magnificent things with this industry.”

Harrington was on O’Leary’s side, agreeing that tax-free on-course betting would get more people to go racing.

Joe Osborne urged “all of us here tonight to lobby, they (ministers) are responding to what they hear on the street. There are enough collective brains to get there,” but warned, “If betting tax is increased there’s no guarantee it will come back to us, it needs to be ring-fenced.”

PASSION

As the debate came to a close, Romanet confessed he had been heartened by the passion of the industry. “You have strong voices and your industry has always been listened to. The problem is to get the industry agreeing on the main goals and work out the strategy.”

“We need to pull together and communicate,” Harrington agreed. “We need to say we are good, we are great, we will succeed. Improve our whole industry from the bottom up.”