Seòmar agus comataidhean

ExxonMobil and Paul Greenwood should hang their heads in shame for the way that they have treated workers today in locking people out of the workplace. It is absolutely disgraceful and shameful.

For years, I have been calling for a union-led Mossmorran just transition plan in order to secure jobs and investment in the site and to cut climate pollution. In June 2024, the Minister for Climate Action told me, in this chamber, that work would be started on a Mossmorran plan “in early 2025”. Where is the plan? There is no mention of it in the statement—there is just a blame game between Governments.

I welcome the fact that the 26-week furlough scheme has been in place since September and is supporting workers at ADL. However, I am still trying to gauge how deep the Scottish Government’s commitment is to ADL. What will happen if, at the end of that 26-week process, the orders have not come? Obviously, I hope that they will, but if not, will the Government be prepared to extend the furlough scheme?

Also, £45 million will be coming out of ScotZEB 3, and we hope that ADL will get some business on the back of that. Will that be announced before the end of the furlough scheme, which could help to give ADL some more certainty?

We have taken that approach because we believe that it is more comprehensive. We do not want to create a loophole that means that the track owner can be penalised but those who are racing the dogs, putting them in the traps and providing them are not included. It is a more thorough approach.

I have had some discussions. I have met Paul Brignal, particularly when he came to the committee, and I have received some correspondence from him. The tone of some of that correspondence is a little difficult when it comes to opening up a constructive conversation. The work that was done to look at an alternative use for the Thornton stadium and the economic impact that that could bring is a useful piece of information, but it was certainly not part of the evidence that I brought forward with the bill.

I ask Nick Hawthorne to say a little about what is in the financial memorandum about the costs of implementation of the bill and how that relates to the question.

There has been no greyhound racing in Scotland for some time and I have seen no evidence of other types of racing emerging as a result, but it would be for the Government, charities and others to continue to review whether there is any kind of displacement. I have not heard any evidence of that and I do not remember the committee hearing substantial evidence of it, but we need to be alive to the possibility.

Perhaps the provision in the bill that alters the definition of the track is the way to address that. GBGB’s comments are important, and I have considered the issue of undergrounding, which is, in part, where the provision on the definition of a track comes from. If some other form of unregulated greyhound racing emerges, the Parliament, ministers, charities and those with an interest in animal welfare would want to be alive to the impacts. At that point, there would be a case for amending the legislation, and there is a mechanism for the Government to do that using a statutory instrument.

I am not convinced that there is a case for that.

The phrase

“A track that is oval”,

which is in the bill, defines every single track that exists in Scotland, the UK and Europe. In fact, I think that only three straight tracks exist in the world, two of which are in Australia. The other one, which is in New Zealand, will close shortly because the New Zealand Government is legislating against greyhound racing. The fact is that, in the industry, the act of greyhound racing takes place on an oval track.

Is it possible that some other form of greyhound racing might emerge in the future? That is unknown, as are the welfare implications thereof; all that we know is that straight tracks do not exist at the moment.

I have been focused on the fact that the bill needs to be future proofed—I have taken the views of GBGB into account there. In case examples of other types of track racing emerge in the future, it is important that there be a provision in the bill for ministers to be able to reflect on the evidence and change the definition of the track, should that be necessary and should there be an implication in relation to the welfare of greyhounds.

What we have in the bill as drafted is proportionate and reflects the reality of greyhound racing pretty much everywhere around the world right now. Is there a risk of straight tracks emerging? These dogs run fast, so you would need a very long track, investment in a stadium and a complete reconfiguration of the way that greyhound racing operates in the UK.

When GBGB and trainers were in front of the committee some time ago, a number of questions were asked about straight tracks, and it was not clear at all that the industry might go there. However, if there is a move towards another type of racing or track configuration, the power is in the bill for the Government to take a proportionate approach, look at the evidence and propose to the Parliament through secondary legislation that that definition be changed. I note that the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee has looked at that provision in the bill for amending regulations and is content with it.

I have engaged with the SAWC. I think that it is fair to say that the SAWC sees its role as advising the Government rather than individual members, but I have certainly reflected on its previous report and its recommendations. The bill directly addresses a number of those recommendations, particularly the recommendation that the SAWC does not believe that there should be more tracks in Scotland or that tracks should reopen. That central concern is addressed in the bill.

I felt that it was important to put those powers in the bill, which makes it different from the Welsh bill. If someone committed an offence under this bill and raced dogs around a racetrack, that would raise questions about the welfare of those dogs. I believe that it is appropriate for the courts to have at their disposal the option of disqualifying somebody from working with or owning a dog, and for there to be powers of seizure in relation to that.

I will bring in Nick Hawthorne to go into where those provisions come from and how that relates to the legislation that you mention.

Yes. I have accepted the minister’s approach to amendments at stage 2. I have contacted COSLA and I have been in early discussions with the Scottish SPCA. I will look to conclude those discussions ahead of stage 2, assuming that the bill gets to stage 2.

I am mindful that there are resourcing issues, particularly for the SSPCA. The provisions in the bill relate to greyhound racing. There is one greyhound racing track in Scotland, so I do not see the enforcement provisions in the bill as being particularly onerous on inspectors or Police Scotland constables. A conversation is continuing with COSLA and the SSPCA, and I hope that we can find a way forward ahead of stage 2, if we get there.