Plans to ban greyhound racing in Wales are proving complex and contentious, leaving the Senedd’s Culture Committee unable to come to an agreed position on the Prohibition of Greyhound Racing (Wales) Bill.
The Committee, which has been scrutinising the Bill, found much of the evidence it received to be contested. It criticised the Welsh Government’s decision to ban greyhound racing without a rigorous, evidence-led approach to the Bill’s development.
This article sets out some of the issues raised at Stage 1 of the Bill’s scrutiny which are detailed further in the Culture Committee’s report.
A sport on its last legs?
Wales is among a small number of countries where commercial greyhound racing takes place - the others being England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Vietnam and the USA. However in several of these countries, there are plans to phase it out.
Historically in the UK, greyhound racing has taken place on so called “flapping tracks” - amateur venues where racing is conducted on a relatively informal basis. However racing in Great Britain is now predominantly operated commercially, governed by the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB).
It has become a marginal sport, and in Wales there is only one remaining greyhound racing track, Valley Stadium in Ystrad Mynach, which has been GBGB regulated since 2023.
More government protections for greyhound welfare in England
In Wales, no specific legislation covers the welfare of racing greyhounds. Their welfare falls under wider animal welfare legislation. The Animal Welfare Act 2006, (the 2006 Act) includes general animal welfare provisions and applies in England and Wales. It allows action to be taken where there is evidence of cruelty, or a failure to provide for an animal’s welfare needs.
Section 13 of the 2006 Act gives Welsh and UK Ministers regulation-making powers to introduce licensing schemes to promote animal welfare. While these powers have been used in England to license greyhound racing tracks through the Welfare of Racing Greyhounds Regulations 2010, they haven’t been used in Wales.
Animal welfare and ethical grounds for a ban are contested
The Welsh Government’s rationale for banning greyhound racing is based on animal welfare and ethical grounds.
It argues improving welfare standards through further government regulation/licensing wouldn’t work, and that banning racing is the best way to protect greyhounds.
In evidence to the Culture Committee, animal welfare organisations set out concerns for greyhound welfare by reference to GBGB’s data on injuries, fatalities, and retirement. The Cut the Chase Coalition stated:
GBGB’s own figures show that over 4,000 greyhounds died and over 35,000 injuries were recorded as a result of licensed greyhound racing between 2018 and 2024 [GB-wide data].
Many argued regulation wouldn’t prevent injuries and fatalities, referring to the “inherent dangers” of racing. Collisions and physiological stresses caused by the bends in the oval tracks were cited as a key issue.
Animal welfare groups emphasised that concerns extend beyond racing, to the entire lifecycle of greyhounds including: euthanasia of dogs deemed unfit to race, overbreeding, inadequate kennelling and transportation conditions, and poor post-retirement outcomes. However the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission (SAWC) stressed most academic evidence focuses on welfare at the track with a lack of studies on wider welfare issues.
Opponents of the Bill acknowledged that injuries occur, but argued welfare standards within the industry had improved significantly under GBGB’s oversight. GBGB highlighted measures like enhanced veterinary care, mandatory injury reporting, and rehoming initiatives as evidence of a commitment to greyhound welfare.
Some warned the ethical reasoning behind the Bill could logically extend to other animal activities, such as horse racing, suggesting that the proposal reflects an ideological and political position rather than a focus on animal welfare.
Several stakeholders highlighted that, as the ban is limited to racing in Wales, dogs may still be kennelled in Wales but raced in England, simply resulting in extended travel times.
The Culture Committee concludes that given the incomplete and contested evidence, the Welsh Government should have undertaken a thorough evaluation of the welfare issues, and data, to establish a robust evidence base before deciding to legislate. Some Members felt further regulation should have been part of a phased approach, before introducing a ban.
Cultural and economic impacts not fully explored
The Bill’s opponents argued the cultural and economic benefits of greyhound racing.
GBGB referred to the "historic role that greyhound racing has played as a rural activity in traditionally underserved areas". It said 85 individuals are directly or indirectly employed around Valley Stadium.
The Member in Charge of the Bill, Huw Irranca-Davies MS, told the Culture Committee the Welsh Government is “still not clear on the number of people who are actually employed at the track, as opposed to a headline figure.” He noted Companies House data showed that Valley Stadium had one employee.
Valley Stadium told the Culture Committee it had invested £2 million in upgrade works to become a regulated GBGB track. However Greyhound Rescue Wales said this claim wasn’t supported by the Stadium’s published accounts.
Sport Information Service estimated that media rights could deliver a conservative estimate of £15 million to Valley Stadium over five years, stating most of this would benefit the local community.
Industry representatives expressed concern that the economic and cultural impacts haven’t been fully explored.
The Culture Committee notes this lack of analysis and recommends the Welsh Government undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the economic and social implications of the Bill before it is brought into force.
Policy development criticised
The Member in Charge leaned on public support for the ban as a key argument behind the proposal. The Welsh Government’s 2023 consultation on the Licensing of Animal Welfare Establishments, Activities and Exhibits included two questions on greyhound racing, amongst several other animal welfare issues. Of the 1,031 responses to the question on a phased ban to racing, 64.7% supported a ban. The Culture Committee was concerned that the consultation wasn’t primarily focused on the proposed ban, and that it relied on a self-selecting methodology, vulnerable to bias. The Committee carried out its own engagement survey to gather public views; the data showed a division of opinion.
In February, a Welsh Government budget deal (announced two days after the intention to ban was announced) included a “move to ban greyhound racing in Wales”. The Culture Committee asserts that the prioritisation of this Bill has been a consequence of the budget deal “which has curtailed the normal process of policy development”, emphasising:
Evidence and consultation should precede legislation, yet the Bill was introduced without an agreed evidence base, complete impact assessments, or comprehensive public engagement.
Senedd’s Culture Committee could not agree the general principles
The Culture Committee didn’t agree a definitive position on the general principles of the Bill, citing the lack of a clear and robust evidence base.
It will be up to Members of the Senedd to consider the evidence available for the vote on 16 December which will determine if the Bill passes to the next stage of the legislative process. Watch here on Senedd TV.
More resources on the Bill are available on Senedd Research’s website.
Article by Dr Katy Orford, Senedd Research, Welsh Parliament
