Official Report 1201KB pdf
Members will be aware that the Presiding Officer is required, under standing orders, to decide whether, in her view, any provision of a bill relates to a protected subject matter—that is, whether it modifies the electoral system and franchise for Scottish parliamentary elections. In the Presiding Officer’s view, no provision of the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill relates to a protected subject matter; therefore, the bill does not require a supermajority to be passed at stage 3.
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-16120, in the name of Christine Grahame, on the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill at stage 3. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak button. I call Christine Grahame to speak to and move the motion.
17:23
At first, I was a wee bit discombobulated that a debate that should have focused on the acquisition of a puppy or a dog turned into a debate on shock collars. I request here and now that there be draft regulations proposing a ban, as was recommended by the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission almost two years ago. I request that those regulations be laid before a committee and be considered during the current parliamentary session. I suggest that members across the parties who agree with me that there should simply be a proper, thorough debate on actual regulations—whether or not they agree with a ban—get together and formally request that. I hope that that assuages the concerns of Ross Greer and anybody else who thinks that I am letting the matter go.
This is my last session in a Parliament of which I have been a member for almost 27 years.
Will the member give way?
Of course. The member has let me in so often that I have to.
I absolutely agree with the course of action that Christine Grahame suggests. I stress that I absolutely respect the huge amount of effort that she has put in over many years of leading debates on these issues, and I would never suggest otherwise.
At the risk of turning this into a love-in, I say yes to that. I hope that the member and everyone else in the chamber considers what I said, because the Parliament should have a say in things, not just the Government.
Let us turn to the purpose of the bill. Seven years ago, I saw the growth in the supply of puppies and dogs for purchase online on Gumtree and from puppy factory farms, and I thought about what could be done to reduce that. I decided that, if supply was the issue, the current legislation and policing were not having sufficient impact and that I should perhaps tackle demand, which I hoped would have an effect on supply.
We all know that there has been a surge in the level of dog ownership across Scotland and that it was exacerbated by Covid. Combined with the lack of an informed approach among the public to buying a dog—which I understand—that has also led to a rise in unscrupulous breeding and to casual and impulsive though well-meaning purchases. It is therefore more urgent to ensure that those who are thinking of getting a puppy or dog do so in an informed way.
My bill will require the Scottish Government to produce a code of practice that is to be used before someone acquires a puppy or dog—I stress “before”—and to educate prospective dog owners to make them pause—I do not mean to pun there—and reflect before taking on a puppy or dog. I would hope that that would reduce online acquisition. After all, we are talking about a sentient individual, not a fancy watch or a handbag.
The animal welfare issues, emotional distress, massive vet fees and high mortality rates that come about as a result of illegal puppy farming and the buying of dogs that people cannot care for have been well established. The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has estimated that the illegal puppy trade is worth £13 million a year in Scotland. The Dogs Trust has highlighted the huge rise in problems that have arisen from people buying dogs that they cannot properly look after. Abandonment rates are rising.
This week, the Edinburgh Dog and Cat Home had too many dogs. One of them, Susan, a black lab-staffie cross, was abandoned on the streets at four years of age. She is boisterous but loving and friendly and she needs a home. I hope that this helps her and the others to find one. If anyone is thinking about getting a puppy or dog, why not try a rescue centre first?
Calls to the SSPCA helpline about giving up pets have quadrupled. Costs, vet care and inappropriate living conditions are cited as common reasons. A recent survey found that only 29 per cent of people considered cost when they got their pet.
Awareness of the signs of unscrupulous breeding is low. A report by the People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals found that only 43 per cent of dog owners know that a puppy should be seen with its mother. The SSPCA highlighted that 65 per cent of owners found their pets online, and there is £2.5 million of associated fraud. That is serious crime and big business in the criminal fraternity.
According to Government-commissioned research, 20 per cent of puppies bought online fall ill or die within a year. The Dogs Trust’s submission to my bill talks about
“educating and providing prospective dog owners with the tools to purchase or rehome a dog more responsibly, and to identify and avoid unscrupulous breeding practices.”
I agree with that. That is the crux of what the bill seeks to achieve—to change the behaviours of the public and to prevent many of the problems that I have highlighted. It is not punitive; it is meant to be educational and to change behaviours.
The code should also be short and easily understood. It will ensure that anyone who is buying a dog will reflect on questions such as “Do you have the right home environment?” and “Is it the right type of dog for you?” as part of the certification. Following that, the person who is handing over the puppy or dog and the person who is receiving it will be required to acknowledge that they have considered the issues raised in the code, with a certificate being issued that is to be kept throughout the dog’s lifetime.
That certificate is based on a process that is followed in France, where, since 2022, a certificate has been required when someone buys a dog or any of a number of other animals. Both my certificate and the French certificate require the provider to sign the certificate, which gives the supplier the responsibility of ensuring that the acquirer has gone through all the necessary steps in the checklist of questions that are contained in the certificate. I applaud Mike Flynn, the newly and recently retired senior inspector of the SSPCA, because the idea for the certificate was his. I call it the terms and conditions.
I look forward to the rest of the debate.
Thank you, Ms Grahame.
I call the minister, Jim Fairlie. You have up to four minutes.
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am very pleased to lead for the Scottish Government in this stage 3 debate—
Minister, I am terribly sorry but could you resume your seat for a second?
Ms Grahame, I do not believe that you moved the motion. Can you do so formally, please?
I was going to move it in my closing speech, but I am happy to do it now if it makes everybody content.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill be passed.
Thank you very much. I call the minister, Jim Fairlie.
17:30
I am pleased to lead for the Scottish Government in this stage 3 debate as we play our part in passing this important legislation that will do much to protect the welfare of dogs across Scotland.
I thank Christine Grahame for her constructive and collaborative approach to introducing the bill to Parliament. A member’s bill does not reach this stage without significant commitment and a great deal of effort. I know how much work Christine has put into the bill throughout its various stages, in both this session and the previous parliamentary session. The contribution that she just made clearly confirms how hard she has worked on the bill. Furthermore, I take this opportunity to commend Christine’s efforts throughout her time in Parliament to make Scotland a much better place for animals to live in. Her tenacity and tireless efforts to improve animal welfare will long be remembered by us all.
I commend the hard work undertaken by the Parliament’s non-Government bills unit to support Christine with the bill, and by my officials, who have helped to shape the bill into its current format. I also thank the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee for the role that it played in hearing evidence and in producing helpful recommendations at stage 1. We considered those recommendations carefully, and they led to the changes that were made at stage 2 to create a bill that was undoubtedly improved and that will improve the welfare of dogs across Scotland.
There are many serious concerns about the low-welfare puppy trade and the increasingly sophisticated ways in which the unscrupulous criminals behind the trade can fraudulently pass themselves off as legitimate breeders. I acknowledge the on-going hard work of the Scottish SPCA and other agencies across the UK, which continue to collaborate to combat the lucrative low-welfare pet trade by sharing information and taking enforcement action against the criminals who are involved. I am sure that many of us are aware of the Scottish SPCA’s hard-hitting Christmas campaign on the issue, and I commend it for putting focus on the matter at such an important time of the year.
The Scottish Government has supported that work. In recent years, it has made significant improvements to legislation on dog breeding and pet sales as well as, in previous years, funding campaigns to increase public awareness of the risks. The Scottish Government is committed to setting the highest standards for animal welfare. We want to do everything in our power to educate breeders, sellers, owners and prospective owners on how to meet a dog’s needs and how to make the right choices when they are acquiring a dog. We believe that the bill will support the work in that area. We want to encourage the public to take more responsibility when they are considering taking on a dog and to understand how to source dogs responsibly. That is why I support the intentions behind the bill.
I look forward to hearing the debate. I remind everyone that, as a result of members working collaboratively through the legislative process, we have a bill before us that is worthy of Christine Grahame’s hard work. I hope that members pass it unanimously.
17:33
I congratulate Christine Grahame on the bill and on its reaching stage 3. It means that we have the opportunity to encourage more responsible pet ownership and to tackle the illegal puppy trade.
Ultimately, it is the demand for dogs that gives unscrupulous breeders, dealers and smugglers the chance to exploit the public—especially since the indicators point to much of the public being dangerously unaware of what to look out for.
For example, according to the Kennel Club’s research, more than a quarter of potential dog owners spend less than a day researching their decision to get a dog. Meanwhile, the “PDSA Animal Wellbeing Report 2023” shows that less than half of dog owners are aware that puppies should be seen alongside their mother.
On the supply side, the Scottish SPCA is doing tremendous work to disrupt that £13 million-a-year trade, and we can help it by addressing the demand side—educating the public and encouraging them on best practice. That is what the bill seeks to do through a new code of practice on acquiring and transferring dogs. The questions that it poses will be a way to make sellers consider their legal obligations and prospective dog owners think about the responsibility that they are taking on, such as whether they can provide for a dog and how it will fit into their lives.
I want the code to work, which is why I lodged amendments to improve it, such as widening the pool of people that ministers should consult before drawing it up. I also lodged amendments to strengthen the contents of the code, with more precise language on dog breeds and types, as not all types are registered breeds, and I proposed the requirement for buyers to check that the dog has been microchipped, and for that to be included in the bill’s proposed certificate. I thank members who supported my amendments.
On electric shock collars, as members know, I have long campaigned for those cruel devices to be banned, so I am sympathetic to the Greens’ amendment on that. However, it was lodged at a very late stage in a bill that was never intended to accommodate it, and without proper stakeholder consultation. That is why, ultimately, there was a real risk that the amendment would not deliver what it was intended to deliver, or that it would have unintended consequences. We have been down that road before, when I forced the Scottish National Party to promise a ban on shock collars. It has not delivered that ban, although I believe that ministers should be reporting on the matter in the coming weeks and, in my view, that will be a better opportunity to take forward an evidence-based case for a ban that can stick.
I close with a final plea to the Scottish Government. The provisions in the bill can help to improve dog welfare, but only if they are properly communicated to the public. Ministers must provide proper resources to ensure that that happens.
17:36
I congratulate Christine Grahame on introducing this member’s bill. Throughout her career, she has fought to improve animal welfare, and the bill is testament to that. I thank all those who helped to bring the bill to the Parliament and who gave evidence. The frustration, as always with a member’s bill, is that the levers that are available to the Government are not available to members. There are many things that we would have liked to have seen in the bill that are not there.
The bill will give prospective buyers a pause, so that they can reflect on the issues that are in the code. For reasonable, law-abiding people, that may lead them to change their mind on dog ownership or, indeed, on whether the breed of dog that they are seeking to own is practical for them, but will it stop them buying from puppy farmers? Few would chose to do that, but will they step back if they are faced with a seller who does not appear to be legitimate? As happens now, they might not. I do not think that the certificate would be enough to dissuade them.
We all know of people who, in good faith, have sought to buy a dog, and when it became clear that they were not buying from a reputable breeder, most will admit that they bought the dog regardless. The alternative would have been for them to leave the dog in the ownership of a seller who obviously did not care about the dog’s welfare, and they could not bring themselves to do that. There are many sad stories of people who acquire dogs in that way, paying dearly for their pet and paying yet again for the vet fees to try to restore their animal’s health. I hope that the publicity campaign on the bill encourages people to walk away from those sales. Although that appears to be cruel in the short term, it is the only way to stop the illegal puppy trade.
At stage 2, there were a number of amendments on microchipping registers. At the time, the Scottish Government undertook to work with the UK Government on the issue, because it was preferable to have a UK-wide microchipping register. There are a number of privately administered registers, and it is not always clear to a buyer whether a dog has indeed been microchipped, and the registers can be complex to update. It would be helpful to have a UK-wide register that would allow people to check the previous ownership of their pet. A single register would also make it easier to find puppy farmers and put them out of business. I know that that is not as simple as it sounds, given the number of private companies that are involved. However, I would welcome an update on progress and possible solutions when the minister sums up.
The bill is worthy, but, like every member’s bill, it is restricted because it does not have the power of the Government behind it. I urge the Government to look at the issues that were raised during the bill’s passage and to consider providing solutions to protect animal welfare and to stop the illegal trade in puppies.
17:40
I, too, congratulate Christine Grahame on her work in bringing the bill to Parliament. The bill is a testament to her tireless dedication to championing the welfare of animals in this Parliament.
As stakeholders have noted, there has been a rise in the impulse purchasing of dogs in recent years. That surge in demand has driven an increase in puppies being bred, sometimes in the most appalling conditions. Because dog breeding is a multimillion-pound industry, it attracts those who wish to exploit people for profit. During evidence taking, the committee heard about the trade’s links to organised crime. Increasing public awareness of the illegal side of the trade is an important step in ending puppy farming and in fostering responsible dog ownership. The bill aims to achieve exactly that, and I am pleased that it has reached the final stage.
The SSPCA is on the front line of caring for animals that have been neglected and abused in the boom of the low-welfare puppy trade, and it has rescued more than 260 puppies from the illegal trade since 2020. During our scrutiny of the bill, the committee heard evidence that it can be hard to spot puppies that have been raised in poor conditions. Indeed, I have spoken previously about constituents in my region who discovered, to their horror, that their rental property had been used as a front to sell puppies that had been raised in pitiful conditions. Unsuspecting buyers did not know that the sellers did not live at the property.
With the bill’s passing, there will now be important safeguards in place to prompt prospective owners to consider what contact information a breeder or seller has provided, how old the puppy or dog is and its health records. To some, those may sound like obvious steps, but, with puppies in high demand, unscrupulous sellers can rush people into a quick decision, particularly when puppies are sold online.
The important role that vets play in addressing the problem has also been made clear. Like the SSPCA, vets see at first hand the impacts of low-welfare breeding and the stress that that causes to dogs as well as to their owners. I am pleased that the minister has taken on board my suggestion that the code of practice asks prospective owners to register with a vet as soon as they prepare to welcome their new dog home. I hope that more puppies being brought to a vet early on will mean that hidden health problems can be addressed early and that the alarm will be raised if illegal breeding is suspected.
My Green colleague Ross Greer has used the bill as an opportunity to press for a ban on aversive training tools, such as electric shock collars and prong collars. The British Veterinary Association considers shock collars to cause significant welfare harms to dogs, and the SSPCA describes them as
“a cruel and counterproductive practice”.
Instead, those bodies stress the need for reward-based training methods.
Calls to ban such devices have previously garnered support across the chamber. As we have heard today, that support has not gone away—there is still a passion for us to move in that direction—so it is deeply disappointing that Parliament has not seized the opportunity today to put a ban on such cruel training tools into law. However, I am grateful to Christine Grahame for her constructive proposal that the Government brings draft regulations to the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee during this parliamentary session, so that we can bring a ban forward.
17:44
Christine Grahame has shown dedication and determination in her efforts to bring her bill to the Parliament. I, too, pay tribute to her hard work in advocating for action to improve dog welfare. I thank the organisations that shared their expertise when giving evidence to the committee and for providing briefings on the bill.
As other members have mentioned, figures from the SSPCA show that, in the past five years, the organisation has conducted more than 690 investigations into the puppy trade and rescued more than 260 puppies. It is clear that action is needed.
The bill aims to improve dog welfare in Scotland through measures focusing on the demand side. Keeping a pet dog is a major responsibility. When people purchase dogs without the necessary research—through carelessness or lack of knowledge—they can end up purchasing dogs from puppy farms. The Covid lockdowns saw rises in dog ownership and a subsequent increase in the low-welfare puppy trade, in which dogs are bred for profit, with no consideration for welfare. The bill is therefore a timely intervention.
Under the bill, the Scottish ministers must make a code of practice to be followed by people who want a dog to keep as a pet, as well as by people who are selling or giving away a dog. Under the code, potential individual owners will be asked to consider whether their situation is suited to owning a dog and whether they will be able to provide for the dog’s needs throughout its life.
The aim of the code is to establish a more responsible and informed approach to acquiring and owning a dog, which should make considered purchases from reputable breeders the norm, resulting in fewer dogs suffering in the low-welfare trade. Buying a puppy from the back of a van in a supermarket car park, without seeing the conditions in which it and its mother were housed, is not a responsible and informed approach.
The bill requires the Scottish ministers to be responsible for ensuring public awareness and understanding of the code. For the bill to be successful, it is essential that awareness is as widespread as possible. The Scottish ministers should consider how best to publicise the code among harder-to-reach groups and how to ensure not only that people are aware of the code but that they put it into practice.
During the committee’s scrutiny of the bill, there was discussion about microchipping and the complexities of the current set-up—there are multiple databases. The Scottish Government expressed its openness to working with the rest of the UK in a four-nations approach to create a single database. Although that is outside the scope of the bill, I look forward to updates from the Scottish Government on discussions with counterparts in the rest of the UK on that important issue.
Before I conclude, I will comment on shock collars and other aversive training methods. As I stated when debating Ross Greer’s amendments, I have previously called for the Scottish Government to ban shock collars, because they compromise dog welfare and can, in some cases, result in behavioural problems. Although the bill is not the vehicle for such a ban, it is time for the Scottish Government to act on that issue. A ban could go hand in hand with the provisions of the bill to improve dog welfare.
I once again offer my congratulations to Christine Grahame. I look forward to the implementation of the bill and hope that it will have a positive impact on dog welfare in Scotland.
17:48
Reflections from colleagues this afternoon show the strength of support that there is among all parties to improve animal welfare, which has been good to hear.
Following the vote on the bill, work will begin on drafting the code of practice. Its success in increasing responsible dog ownership will depend in large part on the steps that are taken to make the public aware of the code before they bring home a new dog. We have heard from Maurice Golden, Rhoda Grant and Beatrice Wishart about the need to ensure that promotion is adequately resourced. The minister has given assurances this afternoon that a campaign will be developed, alongside co-ordinated activity with Scotland’s main animal welfare organisations. I will pay close attention to how that work progresses, as—I am sure—will fellow committee members.
The Scottish Greens are fully committed to delivering animal welfare improvements through the Parliament. From banning the use of cruel snare traps and ensuring stronger protection for raptors to introducing new powers for SSPCA officers to investigate wildlife crime, we have used our voice in the Parliament to secure strong protections for our fellow creatures.
Of course, my colleague Mark Ruskell is working on his proposed member’s bill. Many members have lent their support to his proposed prohibition of greyhound racing (Scotland) bill, and I hope that that will be the next piece of legislation that the Parliament passes to improve the welfare of dogs.
Christine Grahame should be rightly proud of bringing us to this point in making a marked improvement in how we care for our animals in Scotland. [Interruption.]
Could you please resume your seat for a second, Ms Burgess?
This is a UK Government storm alert warning for storm Éowyn. I think that it will last for about 20 to 30 seconds. I suspend the meeting.
17:50 Meeting suspended.
Thank you for your patience, members. I have no idea whether there will be a further iteration of the UK Government’s alert siren. However, for the moment, we will try to make progress.
I apologise to Ms Burgess for interrupting her speech. Please continue.
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will go back a little.
Christine Grahame should be rightly proud of bringing us to this point in making a marked improvement in how we care for our animals in Scotland.
In closing, I encourage members to extend the compassion that has been shown today for pets or companion animals to other animals. Our farm animals must be cared for to the highest standards across their entire lives—[Interruption.]
Please resume your seat, Ms Burgess.
I think that we will need to suspend for another few minutes. Apologies, Ms Burgess.
17:53 Meeting suspended.
Thank you, colleagues. I call Ariane Burgess to resume.
Our farm animals must be cared for to the highest standard throughout their entire lives, and not deemed worthy of less welfare than our pets. There can also be no more excuses for the illegal persecution of the iconic birds of prey in our countryside. The welfare of our marine life is also often forgotten but, from fish, dolphins and whales to the smallest creatures in the sea, all need protection.
The bill is an important step towards ensuring a high level of welfare for all animals, so, again, I am really appreciative of Christine Grahame for her work on the bill, and for all her work during her time in Parliament to address the welfare of animals and to give them a voice.
17:58
I begin by paying tribute to Christine Grahame for her long-standing commitment to animal welfare, of which her bill is the latest example. It has been a privilege to be her deputy on the cross-party group on animal welfare, and I look forward to continued work with her.
We must prevent impulse purchasing of pups and young dogs and tackle public demand. I believe that Christine Grahame’s bill will help to do that. Where there is demand, there is also a trade in which rogue dealers seek to make a profit at the expense of animal welfare. Last year, at the port of Cairnryan in my region, a large number of puppies were found in an appalling condition, confined in cardboard boxes under a lorry and without any food or water. Those poor pups suffered appalling health issues but, thankfully, due to the efforts of the SSPCA, they all survived and have since been rehomed.
Although Christine Grahame’s bill, in its final form, will have a positive impact, a number of amendments that were before us today could and should have strengthened the legislation further.
I strongly support the prohibition of electric shock collars and other harmful tools to train or control dogs. The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission and practically all animal welfare charities have raised concerns about those devices and have called over a long period of time for their prohibition. The Dogs Trust has rightly said that
“Shock collars are unnecessary and cruel”.
It is therefore disappointing that Conservative, SNP and Liberal Democrat MSPs joined forces to vote down amendments on them, and that a number of members made it clear that they are against a ban.
This afternoon, we have heard comments from members right across the chamber about the importance of this place getting legislation right and making sure that it is robust. That is the reason why many members did not vote for the amendments. We want to get it right: it is not about not agreeing with the principles in general.
I believe that we have missed an opportunity today, because we could and should have acted. In particular—[Interruption.] I do not know whether Edward Mountain is seeking to intervene, but I appreciate that some Conservative members are against a ban.
If we really wanted to legislate properly, the proposals could have been discussed at stage 1 or amendments on them could have been lodged at stage 2. Subverting the Parliament by slipping them in at stage 3 without discussing them properly has brought this Parliament and the committees into disrepute. Does the member not agree?
I appreciate that Edward Mountain is against a ban, but there is complete confusion about what the Conservative position is on this particular issue. [Interruption.] Mr Mountain can intervene again if he wants to, or he can maybe let me finish.
When the amendments were discussed today, we heard a call on the Government to make it clear that it will bring forward an opportunity for Parliament to vote on a ban. Sadly, we heard no commitment whatsoever from the Government to deliver a ban in the future. It is clear to me that the minister does not support a ban, and today he unilaterally dumped the Scottish Government’s long-standing support for a ban. SNP members and others who claim to support a ban need to wake up to that reality. The minister was given an opportunity to give a commitment on the record that the Scottish Government would bring forward an opportunity to vote for a ban, but he failed to do so. My concern is that today’s amendments were the only chance that we will have to address the matter, although I hope that I am wrong and that we will return to it in the future.
Animal welfare charities proposed, ahead of today’s debate, other measures that could help to promote the welfare of dogs. There is the issue of flat-faced breeds, which I raised at stage 1—
Please conclude, Mr Smyth.
—and members raised a number of other issues.
Animal welfare must always be a high priority in legislation. Animals cannot speak for themselves. We must be their voice to protect them from harm, and there is so much more work still to be done. [Interruption.]
18:02
I am happy to speak loudly during any further alerts, so do not worry, Presiding Officer. As there is a weather warning, I will try to be quick so that we can all get home.
I add my tributes and those of my party to Christine Grahame for her tireless campaigning on the matter over the past six years, and for all the work that she has done to bring her bill to stage 3. As Rhoda Grant did, I congratulate the non-Government bills unit and the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee and its clerks for all their work on the bill. I thank all the stakeholders, groups and individuals who responded to the consultation and supported the bill throughout its scrutiny stages.
I fully support the aims of the bill, which will bring about a cultural shift in the way that puppies and dogs are bought, sold and given away. I agree with the Kennel Club’s support for the bill because it will complement the current regulatory environment, which places all the emphasis on the breeder.
I also note that the Scottish SPCA agrees that we need to challenge buyers and change the pathway so that they take more responsibility. We have been told horror stories about irresponsible, neglectful and rogue dog breeding—something that was turbocharged by the increase in puppy purchases during and after Covid—and my hope is that the bill will bring help in resolving those issues.
I do not disagree with Ross Greer’s point about shock collars. I remember learning that they are not the right way back in 1997, when I did an animal care course. That was many years ago. However, I also agree with my colleague Finlay Carson that there is maybe another way of doing this. I hope that the minister will bring forward more information on that in the future, once the next report comes out.
I agree with Rhoda Grant and Ariane Burgess about getting rid of the illegal puppy trade. We need to raise awareness among our population about that.
I know well that dogs can give comfort and support when they are well looked after. I am a collie man through and through, and I am most delighted when I am outside with Rosie, my sheepdog. I also have a golden retriever, who I would love to compliment, but she spends her entire life sitting on my sofa.
In the spirit of the bill, I ask everyone who is thinking of getting a dog to first study the Scottish SPCA’s checklist. It is crucial to carefully research the potential breeder and not to buy online or from someone if it is not possible to check where a puppy has been bred.
I and the Scottish Conservatives are delighted to support the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill. Again, I warmly congratulate Christine Grahame on all her work in bringing the bill to its conclusion.
18:05
It is very fitting that we are starting 2025 considering a member’s bill that has strong cross-party support, that addresses a matter that is of serious concern to everyone with an interest in animal welfare, and which, specifically, improves the welfare of dogs.
Notwithstanding the issues that we have debated on shock collars—I will address those—I am strongly committed to improving the lives of Scotland’s animals and I am pleased that, during the past few years, the Government has been able to deliver many groundbreaking and innovative improvements in that area. There is, of course, always more that can be done, and we have signalled clearly our commitment to further improvements in the future.
At stage 2, committee members raised the issue of microchipping. I reiterate that we are working with other devolved Administrations to develop a single point-of-search facility for UK microchipping databases, which will enable authorities to more easily trace the owners of microchipped pets. We will continue to press the UK Government on that, and I will add urgency to those requests.
I hope that the publicity around today’s debate will encourage the Scottish public to take more responsibility when people are considering taking on a dog, and that it will ensure that they do proper research on how to source one responsibly. There are undoubtedly many interrelated issues regarding responsible breeding and access to and acquiring of pups and dogs, and there must be a commitment to care of the dog throughout its whole life. The bill does not attempt to solve all those issues, but it raises the importance of behaviour change in tackling many of them. That will take time, engagement with educational resources and effective public awareness.
I acknowledge the concerns around e-collars that Ross Greer raised, and the public interest in the issue. However, I reiterate my earlier points that there are two reviews of e-collars, which are expected to report in the near future, and those will allow the Scottish Government to carefully consider the recommendations from both reports before deciding how to proceed. That will respect the parliamentary process and allow proper scrutiny of the issues. However, I make a commitment to Ross Greer and other members that I will not kick that issue into the long grass.
I once again commend Christine Grahame for all her hard work and her dogged determination in getting the bill to this stage. She asked for a short code that is in plain English, and she asked to be able to ensure that people understand their responsibility. That will be for the people who bring the code together, but I encourage consideration of all of the points that Christine Grahame has raised. Members’ bills such as this show what we can achieve when the Parliament and the Government work together on a cause that is of common concern for the benefit of Scotland’s people, its communities and, in this case, its animals.
The Scottish Government therefore fully supports the bill. Once again, I urge the entire Parliament to vote in favour of Christine Grahame’s bill, which will recognise her enormous efforts throughout her career. I hope that she is proud of the work that she has done, but more important is that the bill is for the betterment of the welfare of dogs in Scotland.
18:08
I thank members for bearing with me on this long day. I repeat that it has taken seven years to get here, but I hope that the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill will today become law.
First, I thank all the organisations and individuals who contributed to the process. I thank the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, which did not go easy on me, for its rigorous scrutiny; the Scottish Government, for being prepared to negotiate with this difficult back bencher; members who have supported me from start to finish and engaged with the bill today, and who have lodged some very helpful amendments; and, most of all, the staff of the non-Government bills unit, who have helped me so much and have survived my idiosyncrasies, which tested their professionalism. Finally, I thank my excellent staff—team Christine—for not only their work on the bill but the support that they provide for me day in, day out.
I make it clear—and I repeat—that I unequivocally support a ban on the use of shock collars in line with the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission’s recommendation of April 2023. I heard what the minister had to say, but the Scottish Government has dodged the issue for far too long. Once those reports are in, I look forward to draft regulations being produced for scrutiny by the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, and ultimately by the Parliament. Ross Greer’s amendments have pushed that argument forward. The bill was not the place for them, but he brought the issues forward, and I hope that we will now make progress.
This is my last session in Parliament. By the time that I have finished—and Parliament will be finished with me—I will have been here for 27 years. Before then, I hope to see at least scrutiny of a ban on shock collars being used in Scotland.
I will be brief, but I want to highlight the need for a stand-alone code, when a code already exists for dog owners. That is the point—the current code is for existing dog owners. It is 36 pages long; I call it “War and Peace”. Perhaps that is unfair, but my code should fit on one side of A4, and—as the minister indicated—it will contain clear and uncluttered language.
Finally, I turn to the certificate, which has to be produced if it is “reasonably” requested by animal welfare agencies where they have concerns about a dog’s welfare. That document, which is signed by both the person who is transferring the dog and the new owner, indicates that both the previous and new owners have fully considered the questions in the code.
The code is not punitive—it is there to assist and educate. With the passage of my bill, I hope that we will avoid the current situation in which abandoned and discarded puppies and dogs fill the kennels of the rescue centres, and ensure that owner and dog have a happy and rewarding relationship in the years ahead. I had such a relationship with my late dog, Roostie, who was a wonderful, kindly Irish setter who, to this day—40 years after her death—I remember with fondness.
Once again, I stress that I hope that the bill is a small step in reducing the impulse buying of puppies or dogs, which so often lines the pockets of the criminal fraternity. In so doing, I hope that, when the time is right, for the right reasons and in the right place, with the right dog and the right person, a relationship will develop between dog and person that will only enhance that person’s life.
I know that I have already said this, but I want to say it again: I move that the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill be passed. [Applause.]
That concludes the debate on the Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill at stage 3.
Air adhart
Decision Time