Seòmar agus comataidhean

I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the debate. I am aware that much of my contribution might repeat what others have said, but I do not care.

I thank OneKind, Blue Cross, Dogs Trust and the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for their briefings. They all support a complete ban on greyhound racing in Scotland.

Yesterday, in discussion about the debate with another member, I was asked whether I have ever attended a greyhound racing meeting. In fact, I have, although it was many moons ago. It was at Powderhall stadium in Edinburgh, which has long since been demolished and redeveloped for housing. The floodlights gave it glamour; the dogs charged out after the rabbit decoy and it was all very exciting. However, that was a long time ago and life, times and the way in which we look at the value and worth of our animals have moved on. These days, we are aware of the toll that racing takes on the dogs, and not all owners and tracks put the welfare of the dogs at the centre. Despite the work of the Greyhound Board of Great Britain, too many dogs have been drugged, injured or put down. As has been mentioned, there are particular concerns about unlicensed tracks.

The cross-party group on animal welfare, which I chair, has had the chief executive of the GBGB before it, and the issue of welfare of greyhounds was raised with him. Although he appeared genuinely to want to tighten up on the welfare of greyhounds, there are still too many deaths and injuries. I have read the GBGB 2022 strategy. It claims that greyhound racing is “a welfare-centric sport”, and talks about a “long-term strategy” for the dogs, a “lifelong commitment” to their wellbeing and maximisation of rehoming. However, it is too late and out of time.

The GBGB reported that across the UK, between 2017 and 2020, more than 1,000 dogs died or were euthanised and there were 1,800 injuries. As others have said, at Shawfield, which is the only Scottish licensed track, during the same period there were 197 injuries and 15 deaths. That is too many injuries and too many deaths. There should not have been any.

According to the GBGB, in 2021, in excess of 18,000 licensed greyhounds were eligible for its licensed tracks, with additional greyhound racing on so-called independent tracks, for which there are no recorded figures. I think that many people who are listening to this debate will be surprised—to put it mildly—that there are unlicensed tracks. The only one in Scotland is in Thornton in Fife. It is unregulated and there is no record of veterinary facilities at the site. Incidentally, the only available data that I could dig out for Thornton race track is from the owner, who commented that only one in 10 dogs is injured. That is a 10 per cent injury rate, so the use of the word “only” is hardly appropriate. In addition to the injuries, there is evidence of doping, poor welfare conditions and there being no vet in attendance.

As for a dog’s destiny at the end of its career—if I can use the word “career”—it can be varied. According to the GBGB, some are unsuitable for rehoming and are euthanised—which means that they are put to death. Others might be rehomed. I have seen a few round Holyrood park, so somebody must be organising rehoming here, which I commend.

I also once saw for myself, when driving down the A7 just past Gorebridge, a confused and terrified greyhound loose at the side of the road. I reported it to the SSPCA, as did others who had seen it. My hunch was that it had been dumped and left to its fate, either to be killed by a car or, perhaps, to be lucky enough to be reported by someone. Leaving it there was callous and indefensible behaviour.

Once greyhound racing was a working man’s sport that was favoured particularly in mining communities, but we have moved on in respect of the way that we view animals. We have regard for their sentience, therefore we have a deeper responsibility for our demands on them—as pets, or for so-called sport or entertainment. I therefore support the banning of greyhound racing in Scotland, but in a phased manner, with the caveat that we must protect the animals that are already being bred or used for racing, so that they are given better lives.

Again, I commend the member for bringing the debate to the chamber. I hope that the Scottish Welfare Commission moves a step further and bans not just unlicensed tracks, but the one remaining licensed track, which fortunately, for the time being, is de facto not in use. Presiding Officer, you have been very tolerant.

I will be brief. The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission, which has been tasked by the Government with dealing with all these issues, has said that it wants a ban on greyhound racing at unlicensed tracks. Does the minister have any timeline for when it might come out with a view on licensed tracks and, therefore, an outright ban?

To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with NHS Borders. (S6O-01424)

Will the cabinet secretary join me in congratulating all staff at NHS Borders on the recent announcement that 100 per cent of patients who were diagnosed with cancer were treated within the Scottish Government target of 31 days, and almost 97 per cent of eligible patients who were given an urgent suspicion of cancer referral received their first treatment within the Scottish Government’s 62-day target? That is excellent work on the part of the staff at NHS Borders.

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is, regarding the impact in Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale, to United Kingdom Government announcements regarding support for people facing poverty as a result of the rising cost of living and inflationary energy costs. (S6O-01405)

Since lodging my question, as the cabinet secretary said, the pressures on my constituents have been compounded by the terrifying economic policies of Liz Truss, with the value of the pound plummeting—which adds more cost to all imports, including food—and interest rates skyrocketing. Does the cabinet secretary therefore share my additional concerns for my rural constituents, who were already paying prices that are higher than those in urban areas?

To ask the First Minister what provision the Scottish Government is making to cope with the anticipated pressures on the NHS this winter. (S6F-01394)

The disastrous economic policies of Liz Truss—the lady has indicated that she is not for turning—pile even more pressure on folk who face terrifying energy bills. The pound is tumbling in value against the dollar and the euro, so every import, including food, becomes even more costly. Spiralling interest rates will increase credit card and mortgage payments. It is an economic tsunami, except for bankers and the rich.

Does the First Minister agree that there can be no doubt that pressures on our health services will increase as a direct result of those policies? Will she consider including in discussions for her winter planning for the health service agencies such as mortgage companies, social landlords in the rented sector and Citizens Advice Scotland, which will also be on the front line and might help to prevent some of the damage that is being done to our nation’s health?

As a preliminary, let me record my huge admiration for all who work in whatever capacity in the health and care sectors. Nothing brought home to me how much theirs is a vocation than their commitment during that two-year-long pandemic. The pandemic is where I will start.

Throughout the UK in the devolved health services and beyond, to Europe, the pressures, the wearing of personal protective equipment and the restrictions dramatically disrupted the usual business of our GP surgeries and hospitals. The aftermath of that situation is seen in the delays and in our playing catch-up with treatment.

I recall Borders general hospital dividing itself into two treatment areas—one for people with Covid, and the other for emergency treatments. I recall how the chief executive, along with colleagues, had to learn to adapt to that fast-evolving, global virus.

Other health treatments were postponed of necessity. Access to GP services was, and remains to this day, limited. To this day, of necessity, our GP and ambulance staff and staff in our hospitals are still taking precautionary Covid protections, which all add to delays.

Those years caused a backlog in treatments. Of course, delays in individual cases are dreadful—I have heard about them myself—but we must put them in the extraordinary context of the pandemic. I had never known a pandemic previously but, apparently it is yesterday’s news for the Opposition. It is not, and that context is fundamental. I say to Ms Mochan that the pandemic is not an excuse, but an explanation—there is world of difference.

The Conservative motion does not mention that, yet the continuing impacts of the pandemic—the fact that protections are still required; that staff in the health and care sectors are still having to take sick leave because they contract Covid; that ambulance drivers not only require the Covid protections but must sanitise their ambulances after each patient journey; that wards require extra cleaning; that GPs are limiting face-to-face consultations; and that even dentistry is trying to catch up—are all for the same reason: Covid is still among us.

All of that is fundamental to where we are today. The root cause, as of now, is the necessary postponements when Covid was at its height, the catching up that needs to be done and the continuing protections. That is corroborated by the fact that the positions in the English NHS and the Welsh NHS are worse, although I take no pleasure in saying that, because each individual—rightly—is a priority for treatment, wherever they live.

However, the NHS is working through the situation and, as in “normal times”, certain treatments and certain emergencies must take priority. I say to Jackie Baillie that, today, NHS Borders confirmed that 100 per cent of patients in the Borders who are diagnosed with cancer receive their treatment within the Scottish Government’s target period of 31 days, and that almost 97 per cent of eligible patients who are given an urgent suspicion of cancer referral have received their first treatment within the Scottish Government’s 62-day target period.

I am in my final minute.

Therefore, I commend NHS Borders.

The motion does not even dip its toe into the waters of Brexit, as a consequence of which we lost staff in the health sector and especially the care sector. That brings me to the need for us to have some honesty in this debate. Let us have more light and less heat. All Governments have struggled with the pandemic in the health and care sectors, from the early lockdown days until now. The fact that vaccines have to be delivered on a mass scale places a huge demand on NHS services.

The problems of Covid and Brexit have now been compounded by reckless Truss economic policies, which will impact on the health, the wellbeing and the safety of people in Scotland. There has been not a whisper about any of that from the Tories; I wonder why.