Seòmar agus comataidhean

Do you feel that the data is being collected in the way it needs to be collected so that the industry can start to address the issues, obviously with input from the Scottish Government? Do you think that we have the data that we need to see how climate change is affecting the sea temperatures and impacting the aquaculture sector?

Good morning. I am interested in the interaction between farmed salmon and wild salmon populations, and the potential risks around that.

The Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee recommended that a proportionate approach should be taken to minimise that risk. The panel members have already spoken a little bit this morning about the risk from sea lice, and I am thinking about introgression of genetic material as well. John Aitchison, has a precautionary approach been applied?

The committee is aware that WildFish and the Coastal Communities Network have submitted a complaint to Environmental Standards Scotland about SEPA’s sea lice regulatory framework, which has already been touched on. Would you like to add anything about why you have submitted that complaint and what your key concerns are?

I have another question. [Interruption.] Sorry—the dog walker has just brought my dog home. You can see it walking on the back of the couch.

Does anybody want to comment on the issue of escaped farmed salmon’s interaction with the wild salmon population? It is a multifaceted situation.

I understand the distinction that needs to be made, but following on from my colleague Emma Roddick’s point, we are taking evidence in this place on breeders who have 40 dogs in kennels in Scotland and are racing them in tracks in England. The welfare of those dogs is of paramount concern to this committee and indeed the petitioners. It comes back to the 2006 act and the balancing out of what is the acceptable level of harm that may come to those dogs and what are the welfare concerns. I do not know whether you have any points to come back on.

Some of the things that I was going to ask about have already been picked up on. Could the 2021 statutory animal licensing framework be extended to include greyhound racing and could there be a licensing approach that might address some of our concerns? With my former local authority hat on, I wonder what the implications would be for local government if that were to be extended. My plea, I guess, is that Government actively looks at that matter and at ensuring that any regulations that come forward are considered by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and licensing officers and that their concerns are taken into account. Is this one of the only ways in which we can have more regulation in this area, given the crossover impact of people in Scotland racing their dogs in England?

Good morning, minister. The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission concluded that

“a dog bred for racing in Scotland currently has poorer welfare than the average of other dogs in the population.”

I want to focus on that for a little while. The report refers to how they are bred, how they are reared, trained and raced, and indeed how they are retired if they get to that point, or how they might end their lives by being put down. It also talks about the issue of wastage within the industry. Does the Scottish Government agree with the overall conclusion that dogs that are bred for greyhound racing have a poorer standard of welfare throughout their lives?

On the assertion about them being pets, I think this is where we get a bit confused about how the tracks operate in two different places. We have the issue with GBGB tracks that the animals must be kept in kennels; they cannot be part of a family set-up. I am not so sure if that works for dogs that are raced at the only track that we currently have in Scotland. I do not know whether they are able to be part of the family or whether they have to be kennelled and not kept as part of the family as a pet in order to race. That is where it gets a bit confusing for us in trying to unpick the differences between here and England.

Yes. Further to what the convener was asking about, is the Government considering extending the licensing requirements to include greyhound racing? We know that people were evenly split down the middle in the consultation, but does this approach provide us with a way of starting to address some of the issues, if indeed the member’s bill does not reach its conclusion?

Amendment 22, in my name, will make it very clear that

“the promotion and support of practices that protect and improve animal health and welfare”

are core objectives of Scottish agricultural policy. I know that there is cross-party and broad stakeholder support for ensuring that we recognise the key role of promoting and supporting animal health and welfare in the successful delivery of other objectives.

The case that there can be no high-quality food production without first ensuring that practices deliver animal health and welfare is well made and I am sure that all here support it. Some might say, however, that animal welfare matters are already covered in law elsewhere, that the issue is accepted and does not need further elaboration. That surely only highlights, in my view, how integral it must be to what we do. By including it as an objective, we are making a clear statement of the values of Scottish agriculture. If we want the world to acknowledge the provenance and high quality of our Scottish produce, we must start with being clear that the promotion and support of welfare matters deeply to us. I therefore ask the committee to support the amendment.