Seòmar agus comataidhean

[Made a request to intervene.]

I honestly do not know the answer to this question. As I understand it, a victim impact statement does not do anything to the sentencing at the end of the day. I know that the provision was taken out of the bill, but is it generally the case that such statements have nothing to do with sentencing?

I think that Richard—oh, I have forgotten his other name.

I say to Sue Webber that the Government did the right thing. It consulted and, more important, it listened. Having experienced decades of driving on roads in the Borders and Midlothian—for example, the twisting A7 and A701 roads—I am pleased that the Scottish Government is not pursuing the 50mph speed limit.

The cabinet secretary will be aware of the welcome introduction of variable limits—for example, a limit of 40mph on the approach to a village that reduces to 20mph as vehicles pass through the village. Does she agree that reducing the national speed limit might have caused more problems than it would have solved—for example, by causing even more unsafe overtaking—and that, as all drivers should know, the 60mph limit is a limit, not a recommendation?

I am delighted to speak in this debate in support of my colleague Maurice Golden’s bill, and not only because I was the additional member in charge of the bill—that is a smart title but, to be honest, I was not actually required to do anything. I know how much determination is needed to introduce a member’s bill, having successfully introduced two of my own.

During the early stages of the bill, the Law Society of Scotland stated:

“Theft is already an offence under the common law, defined as ‘to appropriate moveable, corporeal things belonging to another person, without the consent of that person, where the accused knows that those things belongs to another and intends to deprive the owner of their use permanently, indefinitely or (in certain circumstances) temporarily’. This offence can be used to prosecute dog theft incidents.”

For balance, I will also quote the Law Society’s comments that

“Judges in Scotland have the tools to assess and sanction appropriately dog theft offences, considering the harm that such behaviours may cause to the animal’s welfare and the dog’s owners and family.”

I recall from my days in practice as a solicitor that, when a relationship broke down, although issues with the monetary assets could be resolved, there was often a fight about the family dog, and there were even circumstances in which the family dog was used in a coercive manner.

The rub is the concept of a dog as a “corporeal thing”. It may break our hearts to have a valuable or sentimental piece of property stolen but, in my book, that by no means equates to having a family dog stolen. We have moved a long way from viewing animals—including pets—as property.

There is also specific reference in the bill to “assistance dogs” and “helper” dogs. The heartbreak may be the same or be of a more professional nature if those dogs are stolen, so that classification is important. I welcome the penalties and the aggravation that would be introduced if it is a helper dog, which helps children and adults in their daily lives, that is stolen. Helper dogs can also be used to detect drug smuggling and explosives, and can possibly alert individuals to the presence of cancer. Therefore, an aggravation of the crime in those circumstances—and that is by no means an exhaustive list—would be very welcome.

I appreciate that the possibility of recording dog theft as a specific crime may offer challenges, but those are not insurmountable—I will leave it at that.

I will conclude my speech with a few words about my very late dog of 40 years ago, Roostie—my delightful, kindly Irish setter. She let the cat sleep on top of her—for her body warmth, not his. My sons, who are now fathers themselves, used her as a pillow for comfort as well as for fun. She dragged us out for walks in the pouring rain and we felt the better for it. She was never—ever—property or a “corporeal thing.” Her impact on my life can be measured by the fact that, 40 years on, she is keen in my memories. She taught my sons how to behave and respect her, just as she taught me how to be a good and responsible owner. The reciprocated love and affection of a dog is invaluable.

I will briefly parachute in another point: the festive season is not the time to buy a dog or a puppy, and, when people buy a dog or a puppy, they should do so only from a reputable source.

Going back to my script, I also agree that it would be a good idea in the next parliamentary session to introduce a consolidation bill on all laws that relate to dogs.

On that note, again, I congratulate Maurice Golden. As a postscript, I say that I know that the member is not seeking re-election. He will be a great loss to this place.

I beg your pardon, Mr Leonard, I was distracted.

Richard Leonard seemed to be confused about that issue—

I, too, congratulate Liz Smith. I know the work that is needed for a member’s bill. It involves testing the member’s commitment and dealing with obstacles that are put in their way—they just have to navigate their way round them. I did, just as Liz Smith has done, and I can assure everyone that that does not apply just to Opposition members’ bills. Such bills are very personal and close to the member’s heart—as this one is.

I heard the member in charge of the bill on the radio, referring to more and more children finding traditional education a challenge and saying that outdoor activities can be fun in themselves but also therapeutic. I quite agree. Even before Covid disrupted young people’s educational and social experiences, that generation already had challenges that I did not have in my long-lost youth. Their emotional and mental wellbeing is taking a hammering.

In my youth—yes, Mr Rennie, I did have one—there was little telly and no internet; there were just a few parked cars on the street, which became our ad hoc playground. We were exercising outdoors without knowing it. When we were exhausting my late mother’s patience, her mantra—“Go outside: the fresh air will do you good”—turned out to be true.

Introducing the requirement in schools is right and timely, particularly—but not only—because of the explosion in the number of children with additional support needs.

The member in charge will recall that, in the stage 1 debate, I supported the principle of the bill but caveated my support on the issue of funding, so I am heartened to hear the exchanges today on that.

In the stage 1 debate, I referenced the Broomlee outdoor education centre near West Linton, which I have visited on several occasions. It provides residential outdoor experiences for young people—life-changing experiences in the outdoors for children facing the pressures and anxiety of a post-lockdown world, coupled with the difficulties of a cost of living crisis, given that most of them are from less well-off areas.

At the time of that debate, the centre manager, Richard Gerrish, wrote to me. He said:

“This issue is clearly very close to our hearts ... because we have witnessed first-hand the ever-increasing numbers of children from economically disadvantaged areas who are missing out on these valuable experiences”.

I have abbreviated what he said. Much of what the centre provides is reflected in the bill, and I could see Broomlee providing just such experiences.

Many moons ago, as a working-class child, my first time away from my parents was with the girl guides, camping at North Berwick. Later, as a teenager, I went on a fortnight’s retreat to Iona. They were invaluable experiences, so blame the girl guides and Iona for the way I am today.

Finally—other members have said this, but I am not just saying it because they have said it—Liz Smith’s retiral next year will, of course, be a loss to the Parliament, as I also said about Maurice Golden. They are both MSPs whom I value in this Parliament. However, I really must not make a habit of saying such things.

Will the member give way on that point?

Will the member give way?

The First Minister will be aware of the significant financial pressures in the voluntary sector, with inflationary energy and food costs and, of course, increased national insurance payments. That increase in national insurance will cost the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals an extra £400,000 a year, which has led to it having to look for voluntary redundancies. Does the First Minister share my concern that the Scottish SPCA will have to cut its services at the very time—after the festive season—when there will be an upsurge in demand as unwanted pets, given as Christmas presents, are rejected and abandoned when the novelty wears off?

I declare an interest as convener of the cross-party group on animal welfare.

I, too, congratulate Keith Brown on securing this debate. Having confessed previously and publicly that sport, either as a participant or fan, is not in my DNA, colleagues might wonder—or perhaps not—why I have opted to speak in this debate. My motivation was that there appeared to be not one woman down to speak, and I thought that I had better step in, so I welcome the company of Carol Mochan. Even the sport-immune Christine Grahame cheered at the Scotland team securing that elusive place in the world cup, and doing it with such style, so here I am.

At first, it seemed that defeat was going to be snatched from the jaws of victory, which is so often the way of things with a Scotland team, but then—wow—those two extraordinary goals. The team played with heart and determination as well as flair. I will come to what that means for youth football but, first, I will say that I have been here before. I embraced Ally’s army during the 1978 world cup. Then, it was about panache, style and razzamatazz and not so much about skill. We were all full to the brim with the overrated and oversold expectations of the charismatic Ally MacLeod—bless him.

I repeat that today’s squad have heart and determination as well as skills. Their impact on the younger generations will be hugely positive.

Penicuik Athletic Football Club has been part of the town since 1888, built on volunteers, families and local sponsors. Penicuik Athletic Youth Football Club now runs more than 20 boys and girls teams—from the tiny early touches for four and five-year-olds through to the teenagers—so hundreds of young people are growing up active and confident. Football also gives them a place to belong.

It is not just about boys football anymore; girls football in Penicuik is booming, with dedicated squads in multiple age groups, matching the national picture, where female participation is now at a record high.

Arniston Rangers Youth Football Club in Gorebridge has some 300 youngsters between the ages of 2 and 16 playing. The number is growing rapidly each year given Gorebridge’s ever-expanding population, mostly of young families. There are games for many age groups, with Gore Glen being a great place to watch football each weekend. There is a girls section, with teams playing across age groups.