Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 14 February 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 801 contributions

|

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

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.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

First Minister’s Question Time

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

The First Minister must, of course, be constrained and diplomatic and work in the interest of Scottish businesses. I understand that, but I am not so constrained. I find Donald Trump to be creepy and see his policies potentially wrecking not only the world economy but the Scottish economy.

Does the First Minister recall that, in 2019, phase 1 of Trumponomics involved using tariffs against the European Union, which impacted Scotland when a 25 per cent tariff on each bottle of malt whisky cost the industry £600 million in just 18 months? What damage does the First Minister worry would be brought to the whisky industry and others if tariffs were to continue or to be reimposed?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

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.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

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.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

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.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

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.]

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

I ask the member to ask the minister to introduce draft regulations that will be put to the committee, so that we can get a move on through the proper processes. That way, I hope that Ross Greer and I will both get to the destination that we want to get to. Perhaps we can get the minister to give a timescale for laying draft regulations—the Welsh model is there—and we can proceed on that basis.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

Will the member give way?

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

My amendments 1 to 3 add further weight to the importance of the certificate. The certificate needs to make clear to the person who is acquiring a dog the importance of the decision that they are taking and the responsibility that they are taking on.

Amendments 1 to 3, in combination with what is already in the bill, mean that the certificate needs to be kept by the person who is acquiring the dog for the whole period of ownership of the dog and be shown on request, for example to an animal welfare inspector or police officer.

A failure to produce a signed certificate can be evidential when someone is accused of animal welfare offences. The certificate must include a requirement on the acquirer to confirm that they understand why they should keep the certificate and the consequences if they cannot present it when asked to do so.

I seek assurances from the minister, during the debate that will follow these stage 3 proceedings, that the published certificate will first be short, so that people engage with it; secondly, be in plain English; and thirdly, leave an acquirer with a clear sense of the responsibility that they are signing up to in getting a dog, including by asking them to demonstrate that they fully understand all the responsibilities that are set out in the certificate.

None of that is meant to be punitive; it is meant to educate people prior to acquiring a puppy or dog.

I understand the intentions of Maurice Golden’s amendment 10. However, I submit that what is proposed is an unnecessary complication because the significance of the certificate will be clear. I have seen a draft of a certificate and I am not too unhappy about it. It makes plain the obligations of the acquirer and its status if requested by an appropriate agency, such as the SSPCA or the police—it is not for the general public—in the case of a possible animal welfare issue.

Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Bill

Meeting date: 23 January 2025

Christine Grahame

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.