Seòmar agus comataidhean

Will the member take an intervention?

I very much share the member’s annoyance that people cannot get through to a GP and can contact them only by phone, but does he accept that it is the private practice that is causing that and not the NHS at large?

I very much share the member’s annoyance that people cannot get through to a GP and can contact them only by phone, but does he accept that it is the private practice that is causing that and not the NHS at large?

I congratulate my colleague Clare Adamson on securing the debate.

From Shetland to the Scottish Borders, not one part of Scotland voted leave—not one single council area. However, that is the union for you, and that is democracy for you: it is part of the “union bonus.”

Even in England, 53 per cent of voters voted leave and 47 per cent voted remain, so even south of the border the vote was nip and tuck. There was no 60 per cent requirement, as is sometimes called for when there is a vote that affects the unwritten British constitution. Remember that, when it comes to a referendum on Scottish independence.

We now know that the British public was sold a pup. In fact, they were sold several pups, including the side of a bus showing the “Boris bonus” of £350 million a week for the NHS; cutting of immigration, although the majority of migrants were and are legal migrants; cutting of red tape for businesses and farmers; no border down the Irish Sea; reclaiming our seas; and the world waiting eagerly for our trade. It was all “oven ready”.

How did that go? The £350 million was not so much “oven ready” as it was a Boris porky pie. Immigration, both legal and illegal, has increased since Brexit. Indeed, leaving the EU has made co-operation with EU countries more difficult. As for increases in red tape, just ask businesses, farmers and the horticultural sector. There are special rules for trade between Éire, which is still in the EU, and Northern Ireland, which remains in the EU in all but name. As for trade bonuses, there are none.

The NFU Scotland overwhelmingly backed a remain vote because it knew what was coming if we left. The Confederation of British Industry was one of the most vocal opponents of Brexit, and stated that it would

“dent the economy and knock living standards.”

Then again, what do they know? Billions of pounds have been lost to the UK economy to date.

The loss of free movement in the workforce had immediate impacts on the NHS, the care sector, horticulture and hospitality—just for starters—all of which have affected my constituency.

What got the Brexit vote through by the skin of its teeth were allegations about damaging immigration. As for Boris Johnson’s yellow brick road, we know what Dorothy found at the end of that: a wee man masquerading as a great wizard. Boris Johnson, Donald Trump or Nigel Farage? Take your pick.

Some who were once forceful and vocal defenders of the EU now say that that ship has sailed. To continue the metaphor, I point out that a ship can change course, especially if the sea is stormy and you can see that rocks lie ahead.

Of course, the UK will not change course, but Scotland can do so as an independent nation. Let us have no nonsense about it taking decades to rejoin, or—worse—that we would not be welcome. Our laws are aligned with the EU. We are a rich nation that produces energy, food and drink. Our history with Europe differs from that of England. My goodness—the first language of Mary, Queen of Scots was French. That fact is handy for pub quizzes. However, I digress.

In the dismal years of “Trumpland” ahead, we need an EU that is both politically and economically strong, and we need not to be consigned to watch in painful embarrassment as the UK Prime Minister genuflects to Trump out of desperation to avoid tariffs. Indeed, “embarrassment” is not a strong enough word—it is more of a public humiliation.

We can change course. Scotland would and will rejoin the EU with those 27 other nations. Believe you me—rejoining the EU cannot come soon enough.

I, too, offer my condolences and thank all the emergency services.

Storm damage has left many people in need of urgent repairs, in many cases to roofing. I have no doubt that most roofers are decent, but there are unscrupulous opportunists who will prey on the elderly, especially those living alone, which is something that I experienced this weekend as an elderly person who lives alone. Thankfully, I saw through someone whom I consider to have been, at best, not trustworthy. Will the cabinet secretary take the opportunity to alert all who might be vulnerable and desperate for repairs but who do not already know a tradesman, and to advise them to be wary and, if possible, check with friends and neighbours before they part with any cash?

As Ross Greer knows, I cannot support his amendments 12, 13, 14, 17 and 18, but I thoroughly support the sentiment and motivation behind them. For more than a decade, I have campaigned for a ban on the use of shock collars. Before Ross Greer came to the Parliament, I held an event at which I encouraged MSPs to try a shock collar on their wrists. Few did, and some got really upset, because shock collars deliver different levels of pain and the reaction depends on the dog. Therefore, I will take no lessons from anyone in here—not a single person—about my commitment to a ban on shock collars. My call for a ban remains.

I thank everyone for speaking in the debate. However, as a legislator—not with my political hat on but as a legislator—I have to ask this: is what has been proposed the way to introduce a ban with a robust and enforceable legal framework, and has that been tested through our established parliamentary processes, as Edward Mountain said?

To say that I am hiding behind process is not correct . Process is essential—

I support Maurice Golden’s amendments, which make it clear that the consultation on the code should include—as rightly it should—representatives of buyers and sellers. I support and welcome that.

However, I make a plea to the Scottish Government that the code does not turn into what I call “War and Peace”, like the existing code for owners who already have dogs, but instead is short and, importantly, will be read. People are buying puppies and dogs on Gumtree, from puppy farms and sometimes out of the back of vans, so there is a scale and urgency to the issue, which is why I do not want the process to be overwhelmed by an extended consultation. It is urgent that the code is published, and that the certificate and code are in operation as quickly as possible. The bill has already been consulted on in depth with key stakeholders.

As Ross Greer knows, I cannot support his amendments 12, 13, 14, 17 and 18, but I thoroughly support the sentiment and motivation behind them. For more than a decade, I have campaigned for a ban on the use of shock collars. Before Ross Greer came to the Parliament, I held an event at which I encouraged MSPs to try a shock collar on their wrists. Few did, and some got really upset, because shock collars deliver different levels of pain and the reaction depends on the dog. Therefore, I will take no lessons from anyone in here—not a single person—about my commitment to a ban on shock collars. My call for a ban remains.

I thank everyone for speaking in the debate. However, as a legislator—not with my political hat on but as a legislator—I have to ask this: is what has been proposed the way to introduce a ban with a robust and enforceable legal framework, and has that been tested through our established parliamentary processes, as Edward Mountain said?

To say that I am hiding behind process is not correct. Process is essential—

I, too, support these amendments from Maurice Golden—members will think that he and I are in cahoots—because they align with my policy intention in relation to microchipping and they complement the code and the certification process.

The amendments also provide me with the opportunity to set out my long-held support for microchipping and to make a plea for accelerated progress—I quite agree with Rhoda Grant on this—towards a UK-wide database, or databases that communicate with each other. We should keep up gentle pressure on the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which can accelerate the process.

I do not know—I am just going to check.

All the debate about shock collars has made me a bit dizzy, but I will finish.

I move amendment 1.