Horse Racing Industry
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S2M-474, in the name of Susan Deacon, on the horse racing industry in Scotland.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament recognises the significant contribution that the horse racing industry makes to the economy, generating up to £125 million annually and providing the equivalent of 1,700 full-time jobs; commends the success of the racing industry in continuing to expand and develop, recognising its contribution to local economies and tourism; notes that there is widespread concern regarding the potential implications of the proposed Office of Fair Trading (OFT) rule 14 notice on the deregulation of the British horse racing industry and, in particular, on its likely impact on Scotland's five racecourses, Ayr, Hamilton Park, Kelso, Musselburgh and Perth, each of which is independently owned and managed with profits generated ploughed back into the sport for long-term growth, and considers that the Scottish Executive should work with representatives of the racing industry to identify opportunities to promote and develop the industry and to explore the possible implications of the OFT ruling.
I am sure that some members, when they were recovering from their mince pies and turkey, might have settled down at Christmas time to watch "The Great Escape"—again. If they did, they might remember the seminal scene in which wee Archie Ives, the Scottish flight officer, is stuck in the cooler with the American army captain played by Steve McQueen. The two reflect on their pre-war lives and wee Archie reveals that when he was back in Scotland he was a jockey. He utters the immortal words:
"These were the days. Aye—some of those Saturday nights in towns like Musselburgh and Hamilton."
I am not sure what Steve McQueen made of that, but I note that Scottish horse racing clearly established its place in Hollywood history. I hope that today, in this first ever debate on horse racing in the Scottish Parliament, we can establish the rightful place of Scottish horse racing in Holyrood's history. Westminster also discussed horse racing today; I hope that we can build on that synergy between the two Parliaments.
Scottish horse racing is a great industry and a great sport and it deserves our attention and support.
Horse racing has come a long way from its genesis as the sport of kings, there simply to entertain the aristocracy. However, it is not, as is sometimes thought, the preserve of the so-called serious punter. Racing is now the third-biggest sport in Scotland. People who go to racing come from all walks of life. Some of them are avid followers of fixtures, form and the Racing Post. Others—I readily confess to being in this second category—simply have an occasional flutter or go to the racing because they recognise that it is a great day out. More than 250,000 people went to racing in Scotland last year, which is a record. It is worth noting that, although attendance at racing has grown throughout the United Kingdom in recent years, its growth in Scotland has outstripped that in other parts of the UK. In short, Scottish horse racing is thriving.
Each of the five Scottish racecourses—Ayr, Hamilton park, Kelso, Musselburgh and Perth—is on the up, and we must build on that. Improvements constantly take place. More than £8 million has been invested in facilities at Scottish racecourses over the past few years, and there are more plans for development investment in the pipeline. I have seen at first hand the transformation that has taken place at Musselburgh racecourse over the last decade. The course has gone from being a pretty run-down home for occasional fixtures to a stylish, vibrant facility. It now hosts two dozen fixtures each year; it attracts more than 60,000 visitors; and it is worth around £3 million to the local economy.
It was not so long ago that the course was attended by a relatively small band of committed racegoers, who could get little more than a pie and a pint from a pretty unappealing watering hole there. Now, the course has high-quality bars, restaurants and conference facilities. It plays host to a range of corporate hospitality and corporate sponsorship packages. On family days, bouncy castles and sideshows are the norm. I pay tribute to all who have contributed to the success of Musselburgh racecourse, in particular East Lothian Council. I recognise that the other four Scottish racecourses have great stories to tell, too, and I look forward to hearing some of those from colleagues.
It is not just those who go to the races who reap the benefits of racing's success. Scottish horse racing is a major contributor to the economy and to tourism. A report on the economic impact of Scottish horse racing, commissioned by Scottish Racing and representing the five Scottish racecourses, was published in 2002 with Scottish Enterprise's support. It found that the five Scottish racecourses contribute £125 million a year to their local economies, and that the industry employs around 1,700 full-time-equivalent jobs. I must stress that those figures exclude the betting industry.
Race meetings generate huge benefits for local areas. Jockeys, trainers, owners, stable staff and racegoers account for tens of thousands of bed nights in hotels and bed and breakfasts. Millions of pounds are spent in the local shops and restaurants, in taxis and in so many other places besides. It is estimated that around 10 per cent of all those who attend race meetings come from outwith Scotland, which shows how widespread horse racing's tourism benefits are.
Successful though it has been, there is still a great deal more that can be done to build on the success of Scottish horse racing. That must be one of the key messages from tonight's debate. The time is now right for all those with an interest in Scottish horse racing to pull together to exploit its full potential. Bodies such as Scottish Enterprise, VisitScotland and sportscotland, as well as the Executive, have a key role to play, as do local authorities and the various local economic development and tourism networks.
The report to which I referred earlier identifies many of the key opportunities that exist, of which I will mention a few. There is scope for greater promotion of products from local suppliers to the horse racing industry; for the development of short break packages including race meetings for tourists; for the forging of closer links between racecourses, riding schools and other equine interests; and for the strengthening of links in the wider sports and leisure sector, so that there can be more joint exhibitions, activities and events. There is a whole host of ways in which education and learning activities in schools and colleges can be linked to the many strands of activity in the horse racing industry. The planned Scottish racing academy in East Lothian is a particularly important and exciting development, which deserves support. My colleague John Home Robertson will say more about that later.
Scottish racing is going from strength to strength, but we are not at the finishing post yet. There is now a real threat to the future of Scottish horse racing, in the form of the Office of Fair Trading rule 14 notice, which has attracted widespread opposition across the UK. If implemented, there would be a deregulation of horse racing and, essentially, a fixture free-for-all. All the interests in horse racing, and politicians from across the spectrum, have united against the proposal.
The proposal would cause particular concerns for Scotland, as all our racecourses are relatively small, and independently owned and managed. They pay no dividends and plough profits back into the racetracks. They are not part of some big racing group. In short, Scottish racecourses would be especially vulnerable in a fixture free-for-all.
Let me be clear that the vast majority of people who are involved in horse racing believe that there is a need for change. Indeed, in Scotland we want more fixtures and more control over dates. However, a free-for-all is not the answer. It would be plain daft. Every sport needs a degree of planning, co-ordination and control. Racing is no different. There is a crying need now for common sense to prevail and for a sensible way forward to be developed. The current uncertainty must end.
While recognising that the matters are for decision at a United Kingdom level, I urge the minister to take up the specific Scottish concerns with his UK counterpart who, I note, recently indicated in the House of Commons that he would be happy to have such discussions.
Scottish racing is going from strength to strength. There is so much to be built upon. I urge the minister in his reply to commit to working with the industry and with other agencies to build on that potential. I hope that we can see off some of the current threats. The Parliament and the Executive could make a real difference in this very important area.
A significant number of members want to take part in the debate, so I am moving the time for speeches to four minutes.
I congratulate Susan Deacon on securing today's important debate. It is important that the issues surrounding racing are debated here in the Parliament because racing is currently at a crossroads.
Like Susan Deacon, I want first to express my enthusiasm for racing and for Ayr racecourse in particular. As one of Scotland's five racecourses, Ayr plays a vital role in Ayrshire's local economy. In my view, it is the jewel in the crown of Scottish racing—although I would say that, wouldn't I?
The first meeting at Ayr took place in 1777. The Ayr gold cup was first run in 1804. The year 1824 saw the formation of the Western Meeting Club, which then moved lock, stock and barrel to its current site in 1907. National hunt racing began at Ayr in 1950. Ayr is now the home of the Scottish grand national, which is a spring event not to be missed in the Scottish racing calendar.
Recently, Ayr racecourse has been taken over by Richard Johnstone and Alan Macdonald. The new management team will redevelop the racecourse. They aim to take it on to the next stage and put it on a par with York or even Ascot. I share the welcome enthusiasm of the new owners. I see a positive future for racing at Ayr, which I enjoy particularly.
In addition, I foresee the low-cost airline Ryanair flying many thousands of racegoers into Ayrshire's Prestwick airport. They may come not just from the UK and Ireland but potentially from all over Europe as the new facilities at Ayr take shape. Racing fixture breaks and weekend breaks have enormous potential for the Ayrshire tourist economy. We could confidently expect to attract more than our fair share of those tourists through the use of low-cost air fares.
However, all the current enthusiasm and excitement around Ayr's racecourse could be put at risk by the Office of Fair Trading inquiry into British horse racing that Susan Deacon mentioned. If implemented, the OFT proposals could, in my view, be the death-knell of Scottish racing. A racing fixture free-for-all must not happen. If it does, Scotland and the north of England will lose out. Racing fixtures, prize money and television will move south to the centres of population, while peripheral courses in the north wither on the vine.
The current structured system works well. The 97 annual fixtures in Scotland generate £125 million annually for the Scottish economy. Indeed, Scotland punches marginally above its weight, with 11 per cent of British betting turnover taking place in Scotland. Some 29,000 tourists a year visit the Scottish racecourses. Today, I tell the OFT to back off and rethink its position. The wrong decision could destroy our industry and the potential that exists for its expansion, not least in Ayrshire.
Once again, I congratulate Susan Deacon on securing this debate. I hope that the minister will reflect on what he hears today and that in due course he will argue the Scottish racing industry's corner. Susan Deacon urged him to do that and I too urge him to do so. On a personal note, I would be delighted to welcome the minister to Ayr racecourse so that he can see for himself the quality of racing and entertainment that is on offer there. I look forward to the minister's closing remarks.
I join John Scott in congratulating Susan Deacon on securing this evening's debate. Members' business debates are of vital importance to the work of MSPs in raising matters of a specific nature in respect of wider issues. Given that Hamilton park, which is one of the five racecourses in Scotland, is in my constituency, the debate gives me the opportunity to do that.
In general, Lanarkshire is historically synonymous with heavy industry, especially coal and steel. My constituency consists of communities that were built up around those two previously large sources of betting revenue. What is less well known is that my constituency also has other historical significance and that it has some very beautiful areas of natural heritage.
The battle of Bothwell bridge was of great significance in respect of the involvement of the covenanters. No doubt, the battle involved many horses. That battle is not to be confused with the battle of the Bothwell Bridge Hotel, which involved Barry Ferguson, some Celtic supporters and a kebab.
My constituency also contains Strathclyde country park and is an integral part of the Clyde valley tourist area. This is the picturesque setting that is home to Hamilton park racecourse. Hamilton park is independently owned and holds 18 race meetings a year. As Susan Deacon said, along with the other courses in Scotland, it has experienced a growth in popularity. Success in recent years has seen it outperform national averages. There has also been a pleasing increase in the number of senior jockeys attending race meetings at Hamilton park in recent years, including the champion jockey Kieron Fallon.
Since 2000, racegoers' attendance has increased by 26 per cent, with 58,866 visitors attracted to the course in 2003. Since 2000, prize money has increased by 50 per cent to over £1 million in 2003. Over £3 million of racecourse income has been invested since the year 2000.
Hamilton park has been proud to win two awards this year. The first was for ground staff of the year for flat racing. The second—no matter what John Scott says—was for the best racecourse in Scotland and the north-east. The course was recently described in The Times by Alan Lee as
"a course heading for the heights".
The OFT has concluded that the orders and rules of racing limit the capacity for the racing industry to comply with competition law. The conclusion might result in a fixture free-for-all. It could also result in a reduction in the value of racecourse betting income and in the picture and data rights that total more than half of racecourse annual income.
Like those who run Hamilton park, I welcome the opportunity for more freedom to run more races and to have more of a say on race dates. I am told that another three or four fixtures a year could be added at Hamilton. Currently, only one-day events are held there, eight of which are held in the evening. Although that is of benefit to local hotels, Hamilton park is looking for growth. It wants to appeal to corporate business, attract additional local racegoers and host other events.
As Susan Deacon said, a fixture free-for-all is envisaged as a result of the OFT decision. That could pose certain downsides for Hamilton park. Like other courses in Scotland, the course is small, independent and at a geographical disadvantage in respect of accessibility. Although those factors do not undermine its achievements or its potential for further growth, there is the possibility that groups of racecourses in England could use their power to force smaller independent courses out of the good slots. Ultimately, that could reduce the attractiveness and viability of Scottish racing.
I urge the OFT to ensure that the racing industry can continue to operate within a structured framework that will allow successful independent racecourses to thrive. I am encouraged by the comments of the minister with responsibility for tourism and sport at Westminster that the Government wants to ensure that there are comprehensive arrangements for racing across the country.
Scotland's racecourses are looking for the support and backing of the Scottish Parliament for their continued growth. They also want an increase in the number of fixtures; the introduction of an all-weather racetrack; and the prospect of further economic development, investment and training. We need a self-sustaining Scottish racing industry that attracts breeders, owners and trainers. All of that would lead to an expansion of the industry, which, in turn, would lead to the industry making a greater contribution to the economy and to increased employment.
It is important that we have fair trading, but the OFT must not prevent good trading. There is justifiable concern that its efforts will do just that in respect of horse racing. The Scottish Executive should make every effort to ensure that the OFT addresses the industry's concerns.
First of all, I want to join in the chorus of appreciation to Susan Deacon for securing this afternoon's debate and for her eloquent introductory speech. The fact that we have cross-party support for saving the horse racing industry in Scotland is very encouraging. Indeed, it was a treat to hear a Tory stand up and defend the need for continued regulation to save one of our industries. I have no doubt that that is the end of John Scott's career in the Tory party, but it was worth while.
At this point, I must declare an interest. I live in Ayr and one of the constituencies that I cover as a list member is Hamilton North and Bellshill. The courses in both those areas are equally supreme in the service that they provide to Scotland.
John Scott and Michael McMahon have already referred to the investment that is being made in those two racecourses and Susan Deacon mentioned the investment that is being made in others. At this stage, it would be wholly inappropriate for any government organisation to do anything that would endanger the level and quality of investment that is being made in this industry north and south of the border.
If we include today's House of Commons debate, this members' business debate is the third on this issue since the Office of Fair Trading's stupid report and recommendation. The House of Commons also debated the matter on 18 September 2003 and, as I understand it from that debate, it very much shares our opinion that the Office of Fair Trading's report and recommendation should be consigned to the dustbin.
This is not the first time that we have had problems with the Office of Fair Trading. This time last year, we were talking about the need to defend our pharmacies against its recommendations. We eventually won that battle; we must win this battle too.
Members have already mentioned the economic impact report of the horse racing industry in Scotland. As the figures have already been quoted, I will not repeat them—after all, I received the same briefing as everyone else—but I should point out that the issue does not just centre on the economic impact of this recommendation. Horse racing is as much a social and cultural activity as it is an industry. It might not be as highfalutin' as Scottish Opera or Scottish Ballet, but it is much more culturally important to those of us from a working-class background than those other aspects of our cultural life, important as they are. A day at the races is not just for punters, it is a family affair. For many families, it is a day out for maw, paw and the weans. It would be a great tragedy if we had to accept the recommendations of the OFT—or the office of foolish trading—and destroy a good industry that is expanding in Scotland.
As a result, I hope that the minister will join us in sending a loud and clear message to his colleagues in the UK Government that, as far as Scotland is concerned, the OFT's recommendation is wholly unacceptable and that we want it to be consigned to the dustbin. In fact, if I was going to make a bet now, I would bet that the minister will agree to that and join us in putting the pressure on down south to ensure that that happens.
I join colleagues from all parties in congratulating Susan Deacon on securing this very important debate. Indeed, the debate must be important, because this is the first time I have ever seen a reporter from the East Lothian Courier in the press gallery.
Musselburgh racecourse crosses the boundary between Susan Deacon's constituency and my constituency. My only complaint is that the winning post is in her constituency, but we cannot have everything. I want to take this opportunity to reflect on the racecourse's recent spectacular development and to pay tribute to East Lothian Council—particularly to Provost Pat O'Brien, who is present this evening—for its foresight and courage in redeveloping what was a sadly neglected and rundown facility.
Over the past eight years, East Lothian Council has promoted the investment of £4 million in the course, buildings and services at Musselburgh. What a wonderful achievement that has produced. Rightly, the rebranding of the racecourse included the correction of the anomalous title of what used to be called Edinburgh racecourse. Those of us who know the honest toon well understand that Musselburgh is the senior burgh in its part of Scotland, so it is right that we now have Musselburgh racecourse.
The racecourse is a tremendous asset for East Lothian and the whole area. It stages 24 meetings each year and employs nine full-time staff plus up to 230 part-timers on race days. It attracts tens of thousands of visitors and is worth about £3 million to the local economy. However, I agree with Susan Deacon that the industry could do even more for Scotland, given the right policies from the Scottish Executive and our friends at Westminster. I join Susan Deacon and colleagues from all parties in expressing very serious concern about the threat of damaging interference arising from recommendations by the OFT. That must not be allowed to happen.
I want to flag up an exciting initiative that is being worked up in the Lothian area to develop the potential of the industry. At present, Scotland's racecourses depend heavily on people, skills and horses that come from other parts of the British isles. That is the case because Scotland does not have an institution for training and career development in this very specialised area. That situation is about to change, because we will have a Scottish racing academy here in the Lothians to develop skills, vocational excellence and careers for people in horse racing. We have received valuable help from the Northern Racing College in Doncaster. The plan is for students to start a Scottish vocational qualification course at Oatridge College in West Lothian, followed by practical training at Tony Dicken's racing stable at Dunbar and at Musselburgh racecourse in East Lothian. I hope that the minister will be able to confirm today that this exciting initiative will receive support from Scottish Enterprise, because we want Scottish students to start their training at the new Scottish racing academy next month.
I know that the First Minister and the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport have already visited Musselburgh racecourse and have seen what has been achieved there. I hope that the new Scottish racing academy will make it possible to develop even further the tremendous potential of the industry. Specifically, I hope to see more Scotland-bred and Scotland-trained horses, ridden by Scottish jockeys and supported by Scottish specialist staff at racecourses in Scotland, the United Kingdom and further afield.
I have left one group off the list of those who need further education—the bookies do not need any further training, because they are already taking quite enough money off people such as me. However, I must press the minister to confirm that Scottish Enterprise will back the Scottish racing academy initiative.
Like other members, I welcome the debate and congratulate Susan Deacon on her motion. I knew that a day would come when spending my teenage years in the bookies would come in handy—that day has arrived. I confess that I have a love-hate relationship with Scottish horse racing; I love winning and hate losing.
I have fond memories of going as a child first to Lanark racecourse, before it was closed, and more recently to Hamilton park with my mum, dad and sister, and of the fine times that we had. Alex Neil reminded me of a few of those. I even remember bunking off school and being lifted over the turnstiles into the racing. I do not know whether Susan Deacon had a similar joy at Musselburgh.
In recent years—rather than in recent months—I have had the opportunity and great joy of visiting all five Scottish racecourses. I remember going as a toddler to see the silver bell being run at Lanark. If I had to choose one sporting event to attend in the whole year—apart from perhaps to see Motherwell Football Club in the cup final—it would be the Cheltenham festival in March.
I share Susan Deacon's concerns about the rule that the Office of Fair Trading is suggesting. I pledge whatever support I can give to the Scottish racing industry to protect it from the market free-for-all to which Susan referred. I support the industry's future development, which involves ensuring that the big tracks do not get all the riches while the smaller tracks are forced to the wall, which appears to be the aim of the rule that has been proposed by the Office of Fair Trading.
In the last two minutes of my speech, I offer some sincerely felt suggestions to the Scottish racing industry. If—as I am sure it does—the industry wants to have the biggest possible constituency of Scots behind it, there are other matters that it must address. There are some things about the Scottish horse racing industry that I have difficulty with. For example, there is no doubt that the welfare of the animals is sometimes not given the consideration that it needs, especially when their racing days are over, and especially when we consider that two thirds of horses never win a single race.
I also have difficulty with what happens to the people who support the Scottish racing industry. I look at the Scottish racing industry and the British racing industry and, with regard to industrial relations, I see that the owners and trainers often treat their staff like serfs. A pecking order is strictly enforced. There is the doffing of caps, and the use of the terms "sir" and "lads"—even the stable girls are called lads. All that belongs to a time long ago and needs to be improved.
The Jockey Club often gives the impression that it is running the sport as it would run an army, with petty hierarchies, rules, nepotism and archaic procedures. In the betting shops that I go to, those are laughed at by ordinary punters, as are the silver rings, the Tattersalls and the grandstands. I am happy to say that I have been to racing in Ireland, France, America and Australia, and in race meetings in those places they do not have a class system with three different grades. There, people pay their money and they are all the same. I look forward to that situation arriving in Scotland.
The vast majority of jockeys in this country earn a pittance for putting their lives in jeopardy up to six times a day. Too much of the industry is based on the widespread use of cheap labour. A national minimum wage that was set at two thirds of the average would transform the lives of many in the industry, who pay a high price for their love of horses.
It is clear that the lifeblood of the racing industry is bookmaking and gambling. A great deal could be gained from examining France, where the gambling system—the pari-mutuel system—has been taken into public hands. I pay credit to Musselburgh, where I go regularly. It is great that the course is owned by East Lothian Council. I pay it credit for the enormous transformation that it has undergone in recent years. Improvements have also been made at Hamilton park. I welcome the reinvestment of profits in those racecourses, but I would like the enormous profits that the bookmaking firms make in this country to be ploughed back into racing and I would like to see a pari-mutuel or tote system.
I add to those of other members my congratulations to Susan Deacon on securing this debate. I express my appreciation to the minister for allowing me to say a few words as a constituency member.
I live about a mile from Kelso racecourse, which is featured in the motion. There has been a racecourse in Kelso since 1777, and it moved to its present position—north of the centre of the town—in 1822. It is a valuable local asset that provides a lot of sport, entertainment and employment for the local community. There are five to six full-time employees on the course and I understand that on race days 170 casual employees come to ensure that visitors have a grand day out, and that 25 employees are on the course on the day before and the day after each race day.
The racecourse attracts 40,000 visitors each year, which is of tremendous benefit to the local economy. Indeed, the television coverage is a good way of putting the Borders and Kelso—my home town—in the shop window, as it were. Not only do we get 40,000 visitors to the racecourse, but the added recognition that Kelso gets as a result of the racecourse's being there brings other visitors in, which is of immense benefit to the town.
The racecourse has done an awful lot recently. About £1.5 million has gone into two new grandstands, which are fine additions to the course. There are still some problems, however—access is not good and it would be helpful if there was a landing strip for small fixed-wing aircraft to come to the course. Those additions would be valuable locally, and would stimulate greater development on the course.
The catchment area, which includes the Borders and north Northumberland, comprises about 200,000 racegoers. In fact, the business is run from Wooler in north Northumberland, which is just a few miles from Kelso.
There is no doubt that the racecourse has a significant positive economic impact on Kelso. We are grateful for the efforts that the racecourse company puts into delivering those benefits, and for the recreational sporting opportunities that it ensures. It is also relevant to say that the racecourse is part of what might be described as the Borders' equine culture, in which we have point-to-points, summer festivals and common ridings.
Along with other members, I think that the free-for-all that the OFT report suggests would not be a good idea; indeed, it would be particularly damaging for the smallest courses, such as Kelso. Therefore, I hope that the minister will take on board members' views and use them in discussions with his colleagues in Westminster.
Many years ago, I made my first on-course bet at Kelso, on a horse with the unlikely name of Dobbin, which came in some 20 lengths ahead of the rest of the field. I sincerely hope that, for generations to come, people will be able to watch a Dobbin or a Nijinsky—or their heirs and successors—at the Kelso course, which is of immense benefit to the local community.
I do not have a direct constituency interest in horse racing—although there are many horses in my constituency, including some extremely successful racehorses, we do not have any courses for horses.
Euan Robson mentioned his first bet and I can recall my first bet on a horse—his name was Red Rum. My boyfriend at the time laughed at me for putting money on Red Rum, but he went on to win the grand national in question, as well as several subsequent grand nationals. I have felt some affection for horse racing ever since.
Like other members, I have general concerns about the OFT's rule 14 proposals, because I think that they run against the Scottish Executive's aspirations. Last year, the Executive created a new non-departmental public body, EventScotland, the intention of which was to bring major sporting and cultural events to Scotland. EventScotland was set up because we recognised the importance of major cultural and sporting events to the country's economy. The OFT's proposals threaten a sporting and cultural industry—as Alex Neil said, sport is culture in Scotland—that benefits greatly local economies and, in the case of major events, Scotland's national economy.
Fifteen years ago, I lived almost next door to Ayr racecourse. From outside the course, one got a very strange view of the track—one would see the horses thunder round, then disappear and then come thundering back round. During the decade or so for which I lived in Ayrshire, I observed directly the great benefit that accrued to the retail industry and to the hospitality businesses when the races—particularly races such as the Ayr gold cup and the Scottish grand national—were on. Eighteen months ago, I attended a presentation at Hamilton park racecourse and was struck by the evidence that was cited of its success in attracting families and young people to events at the course. That belies racing's image as being only for toffs or for men in macs who are dedicated gamblers.
Horse racing is predominantly a spectator sport and those people, such as Colin Fox and Susan Deacon, who have had a great interest in it over the years have not grown up to become jockeys. However, I think that there is a case for spectators to be able to watch a wide diversity of sporting activity, to stimulate their interest in sport and physical activity. Although the successes of a Scottish horse, a Scottish jockey or a Scottish trainer or owner are perhaps not as much the cause for national pride and celebration as the successes of an athlete or a football team, it is important that young people are exposed to different forms of physical activity for enjoyment as spectators, because that might encourage them to try out different sports and find the one that suits them.
Does the member agree that George Orwell was right when he said in "Animal Farm",
"Four legs good, two legs bad"?
I think that that depends on the two legs.
At present, equestrian sports and physical activities face some significant barriers. Although this evening's debate might not be the appropriate occasion on which to discuss them, I would appreciate a future opportunity to discuss with ministers the grave concerns that I have about the future of equestrian activity and some of the problems that are faced in the teaching of such activity.
Some of those matters are not within the capacity of government to address, such as the problems that are associated with insurance. However, it is within the capacity of government to rectify the OFT rule 14 recommendations. Therefore I, like others, urge the Executive to work with the industry to explore ways of further developing it and to ensure that actions that arise from the OFT report do not damage the potential of the industry to contribute even more significantly than it already does. We have already heard how significant the industry's contribution is to tourism and the economy in Scotland.
I commend Susan Deacon for her motion, which I was happy to sign, and I congratulate her on securing the debate.
Four of the five Scottish racecourses have been mentioned this evening and the remaining one is Perth, for which I am delighted to speak up as I drive past it every day on my way to Parliament. The recent success of the racecourse in Perth is something of which the city of Perth and the whole of Scotland can be proud. It was recently voted the best small course in Scotland and the north-east by members of the Racegoers Club and annual turnover has climbed from £100,000 to £1 million in the past 10 years. The focus on attracting sponsors and providing high levels of prize money has seen Perth climb to 14th place on the British Horseracing Board merit table.
In addition, the racecourse plays an important role in the civic and economic life of Perth and the surrounding area. It manages to draw average crowds of 3,000 people per race day, which is the highest at any of the Scottish racecourses. It is also a popular local tourist attraction. Families in particular enjoy the Perth gold cup day in June—Scotland's biggest family race day, which attracts more than 10,000 visitors. Families also enjoy the family fun race meeting in August, which has a range of activities for all. In light of its recent successes, the racecourse was recently awarded two new race days—2 and 3 July—which coincide with the Game Conservancy Scottish fair at Scone, which gives a massive boost to the local economy.
The Perth gold cup has been supported for the past few years by a grant from the partnership administration on Perth and Kinross Council. Far be it from me to introduce a partisan note to proceedings, but it is rather regrettable that the SNP opposition on Perth and Kinross Council has consistently opposed that grant. I say as gently as I can to SNP members that, in the interests of consistency, they might wish to have a word with their party colleagues on that council to suggest that they reconsider their opposition and support the horse racing industry.
The racecourse in Perth has also been successful in reaching out to the business community. Its excellent private facilities ensure that the racecourse remains high on the list of corporate opportunities. It provides a corporate outing for more than 200 companies, with more than 4,000 guests every year. Furthermore, the new owners and trainers suite, which is regarded as one of the best in Britain, provides excellent facilities for exhibitions and conferences on non-race days.
Perth racecourse is a model of success that shows what can be done and it matches other members' experiences of racecourses throughout Scotland.
Members have referred to the OFT ruling, which is a concern for the Scottish racing industry. However, it is not the only concern and other problems face the industry. A constituent who wrote to me recently identified the small number of Scottish thoroughbred horses that are racing. He wrote that our racing is almost totally dependent on horses coming from England and Ireland to keep it going. On the day of the Scottish grand national meeting at Ayr last April, the six jumping races featured just four Scottish-trained horses.
Much more must be done to promote the industry—it is not simply a matter of the OFT ruling. The Executive should work with the industry to identify opportunities to promote and develop the industry right across the board. For that reason I welcome the debate and I commend Susan Deacon for her motion.
As other members have done, I welcome the debate and congratulate Susan Deacon on bringing it to the chamber. The debate springs from a discussion that we had at Musselburgh races about how we could utilise the Parliament effectively to focus on matters on which we did not have the chance to focus in previous political structures. We also felt that a debate would allow us consider the particularities of the industry in Scotland, some of which are unique and could therefore be more adversely affected by the OFT report.
It is interesting that members from across the political divide—Conservative, SSP, SNP, Liberal Democrat and Labour—have contributed to the debate. The Tory contribution is probably based on the noble philosophy that racing is the sport of kings and that it is therefore quite right and proper for the Conservatives to stick up for the sport. We also heard from one of the members of the further left parties, which indicates that the sport is also for the common man. It is a unique all-party coalition. Even the free-marketeers among the Conservatives, such as Brian Monteith and Murdo Fraser, have done nothing other than to agree with the broad consensus on the potential implications of the OFT report.
Alex Neil, who was here earlier, mentioned a day at the races. Given my all-encompassing portfolio, which includes culture, I initially thought that he was referring to the film by the Marx brothers. I never thought that Marx and the OFT would be mentioned in the same sentence.
I have a sense of déjà vu, because we are debating an issue that is partly reserved but which has an impact on Scotland because of the OFT implications. In a previous ministerial post, when I dealt with the health portfolio, I had to deal with the issue of pharmacies. I hope that we can have reasonable success with the issue that we are debating tonight, just as we did with pharmacies. As Susan Deacon and other members have said, more than just the technicalities of competition law must be taken into account.
I visited Musselburgh, but I will not confess to having led a dissolute lifestyle such as Colin Fox says he had, traipsing round racecourses across Scotland. I was a very quiet, shy and unassuming child, as one can imagine from the contributions that I have made in the chamber as an adult. However, the work that has been done over the past 10 years, and which I have seen in Musselburgh, has resulted in a fine establishment at the racecourse there.
That has been achieved thanks to the vision of East Lothian Council, and I see Norman Murray from the council in the public gallery this evening, along with Pat O'Brien and many others who took the brave decision to use the council's role as a key investor to bring that work to fruition, when perhaps it would have been easier to make other decisions. What they saw is what many members have acknowledged as important this evening—that it is not just about racing per se, but about the economic and wider social benefits that racing brings to the broader communities that racecourses serve, not just in their own localities but across Scotland. Many members, quite rightly, have identified the ways in which we need to use that economic case powerfully as part of the debate that we wish to hold with the OFT.
I recognise the work that John Home Robertson highlighted with regard to the planned Scottish horse racing academy. Where I can, I shall give support to the development of an economic infrastructure to develop that and, if he can furnish me with further details, I shall raise the issue with the local enterprise company and with Scottish Enterprise to see whether we can open up some avenues to allow substantial developments to take place.
I see Stewart Stevenson rising to intervene. I shall accept his intervention, but I hope that it will not be about the George Orwell book that has now been called "The Caterpillar Diaries", just in case he refers to his previous quotation.
I am probably the member who has least connection with racing, but I have a powerful advocate of racing as one of my constituents and he used to speak here occasionally.
Does the minister believe that the logic of the OFT's recommendation in relation to racing would naturally lead, for example, to football clubs being unable to agree their fixture lists, which would cause widespread discontent and unhappiness throughout Scotland and elsewhere?
Funnily enough, I was just coming to the ghost of Christmas past. I am reminded of a discussion that I had at Musselburgh with Alex Salmond. We were discussing which horses to put money on, but when I asked him who would be the likely leader of the SNP three years from now, he would not give me that bet. That was an interesting discussion.
One of the key definitions in sport is the Nice declaration, which recognises that sporting bodies must have some authority to establish what is appropriate for those sports, taking into account existing legislation and competition law. Over the next short period, we must try to identify how there can be compatibility between having the capacity to organise the racing calendar in an appropriate way and recognising the impact on competition.
Those issues have been thrown up dramatically by the OFT report. The British Horseracing Board has taken that into account and may modify some of its practices to address the concerns. However, we do not want to lose sight of the long-term strategy, which is about the economic infrastructure and the quality of the racing card. There can be a proliferation of races, but the races will not necessarily have long-term sustainability if there is no real interest in the quality of horses that are involved. Many members have touched on those matters.
At the level of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, my colleague Tessa Jowell has written to the Office of Fair Trading in the context of the ruling. I take on board some of the key comments that she made in that letter, some of which relate to points that have been made in the chamber this evening. If the Parliament feels that it is appropriate, I would be happy to raise those points directly with the Office of Fair Trading. We want to strike a balance between achieving a more market-orientated approach and ensuring that the ability of the BHB to manage the overall good of the sport is not compromised. I am happy to take on board those issues and to reflect some of the discussions that Dick Caborn had on the matter earlier this month.
Members have mentioned many other local interests in the debate. I noted with interest that Michael McMahon mentioned the battle of Bothwell bridge, which involved the covenanters on horses. There is no truth in the rumour that the escape strategy for the battle of the Bothwell Bridge Hotel involved Barry Ferguson escaping on a white horse. I will leave that to members' imagination.
We must recognise that we can grow the sector. When racecourses—I spoke earlier today to the general manager of Musselburgh racecourse—were asked about the issue by the OFT, many suggested in their submissions that they could grow and stated they would like to have a wider race card. However, I do not think that their conclusions would have been what the OFT has recommended. We have to find a way of matching the aspiration of the racecourses with competition law. That is an important issue that we can address.
We must try to develop much more effectively the quality and range of facilities. A number of members have raised that issue competently in the debate. I will not echo what they have said, but I will say that there is an inextricable link between the quality of the infrastructure and the quality of the race output. I am happy to enter discussions with my colleagues within horse racing in Scotland to ensure that we develop the infrastructure more effectively.
These matters are reserved, so we must tread carefully with regard to some elements of the debate, but I will be happy to take on board some of the points that members have raised. Dick Caborn has offered to hear the views that have been expressed in the Scottish Parliament.
More important, I hope that the people who are in the public gallery recognise that this is an opportunity for the Scottish Parliament to do things in a small way to showcase and identify issues that perhaps would not have had the chance to be raised under any previous political structure. I hope that that will enable us to achieve a result—if we want to use a metaphor related to racing—that is sustainable in the long term and genuinely makes a difference.
I am happy to conclude with those remarks. I recognise the value of the contribution that has been made by members and, in particular, I congratulate Susan Deacon on raising the matter. I hope that we can take up the issues and achieve an outcome that respects the integrity of competition law, but, more important, respects and sustains the Scottish racing industry for the future so that we can grow that industry for our communities throughout Scotland.
Meeting closed at 18:03.