Seòmar agus comataidhean

Okay, but we have only a few weeks left before that date. There we go. I hope that the bus fare cap does get delivered.

Just before you move on, I will say that the timescales are important, because the quicker we can make changes that have an evidence base showing that lives will be saved, the quicker we can save lives. That is an important point.

I will continue in that vein. In the plans that you expect local authorities to come up with—particularly those of urban local authorities, which will need to have a target in mind for traffic reduction—what kind of measures will you support? Will you support traffic demand management measures? How would the Scottish Government respond if a council came to it with a form of congestion charging or workplace parking charging and said, “We want to do this. Can you support us, help us to explain the benefits and help us with modelling it?”

I do not mean to interrupt, but I am sure that a lot of that detail will be in the climate change plan. My concern is that the Government as a whole has made decisions not to accept CCC advice on a number of matters, such as livestock production. The cabinet secretary with responsibility for net zero has said that the transport sector will be picking up the slack. We understand that the megatonne of emissions for which plans are currently missing in the CCP will—ostensibly—be picked up by transport. I am trying to understand how that gap will be filled by transport plans if demand management is not rolled out quickly enough. Will we see that in the climate change plan? Will transport plans step in to address the deliberate policy decisions that the Government has made not to take action in some areas because it thinks that transport will pick up the slack?

I acknowledge the hard work and effort that Maurice Golden, his team and stakeholders have put into getting the bill to this stage. It is not to be underestimated.

Animal charities have spent many years calling for dog theft to be a specific offence in Scotland, because the current legal framework is felt to be inadequate. As we have heard, the current framework classes pets merely as property, which means that the theft of a pet has the same legal standing as the theft of personal property, such as a phone or a television. However, the theft of a pet is a fundamentally different crime, because pets are members of our families. Although the theft of a TV is distressing, it does not come with the same feelings of anxiety or grief that are felt with the theft of a beloved pet.

There is an even more significant impact if assistance dogs are stolen, as that can have a life-altering impact on those who rely on them, and that potential for heightened harm is not accounted for in the current law. The Greens therefore support the proposal in the bill to make the theft of an assistance dog an aggravated offence, which will reflect the more serious impact that that has on the owner. To ensure that that specific principle covers all dogs who provide assistance and support, we agree that a relevant amendment should be lodged at stage 2, as outlined by the minister in her most recent correspondence with the committee. I look forward to that amendment being lodged and to other amendments that would widen the definition further to other working dogs.

As the Dogs Trust highlights, the current legal framework disregards the sentience of dogs and the importance of the human-canine bond. It puts a greater emphasis on financial value than on the emotional value of dogs—it treats them merely as commodities. With only one in five dogs reported stolen being returned to their families, and a chronic underreporting of dog thefts, it is clear that there is a case for change through legislation.

Although the bill is rooted in good intentions, and the Greens are content to support its general principles at stage 1, some areas should be addressed as it progresses. In particular, we note that, currently, dog theft is covered in common law. Although we know that it is not a perfect system, we need to be absolutely clear that the bill will make a tangible difference. In the committee, witnesses repeatedly expressed the view that a stand-alone statutory offence would not necessarily be an effective deterrent to dog theft in Scotland, as the proposed penalties are similar to those that are already outlined in common law.

South of the border, since the introduction of the Pet Abduction Act 2024, the number of dogs reported stolen has dropped by 21 per cent, although whether that is a direct result of the bill is unclear, especially when we factor in the data collection issues around dog theft.

If the intention of the Parliament is to align with the 2024 act, the bill needs to be broadened to include cats and other animals that are typically kept as pets. Charities including Cats Protection and Blue Cross have called for that. The bonds between owners and their pet cats and the feelings of anxiety and distress if they are stolen are not different from those of dog owners, and they also deserve access to justice if they are victims of theft.

I am aware that a number of other members’ bills in this session of Parliament relate to dogs. With hindsight, it might have been better if, as Rhoda Grant outlined, the Government had introduced a consolidating bill to bring together different aspects of animal law. However, we are where we are.

In the months to come, I hope that a shared legacy of members in this session will be a significant improvement in the lives of dogs in Scotland, and I hope that the bill can play a part in that.

To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with residents in Tillicoultry who were evacuated from their homes two years ago when reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete was discovered. (S6O-05022)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

I would have liked the cabinet secretary to have reflected on the core theme of this debate, which is electrification. We have heard from a number of members that electrification can unlock the opportunities for freight and for passenger rail, and it can transform what the Highland main line does. Instead of having diesel locomotives chugging at 20mph up Drumochter pass, we can have something that is truly modern.

Will the cabinet secretary say a little more about where electrification of the Highland main line sits in the Government’s wider programme of electrification and decarbonisation of the entire rail network? Are we going to get that?

The owners of the flats in Tillicoultry feel bitterly let down by Clackmannanshire Council, and it is very important that they are heard. They were given barely two hours’ notice before they were evacuated from their homes by the council. In the two years since then, none of them have been allowed to re-enter their homes. Residents’ remaining possessions will probably be bulldozed into the ground along with the flats. That is a brutal way to treat people who have lost their homes. What can the cabinet secretary do to help residents to get their remaining possessions back? Will the cabinet secretary join me in meeting residents in Tillicoultry?

I very much welcome the minister to his new role, but I point out to him that a number of members across the chamber have written to him about the proposed closure of the Alloa campus of Forth Valley College—a move that would be devastating for the community. Will he commit to coming to Alloa to meet us, unions and others who are concerned about the closure, and to work on a cross-party basis to ensure that the college can remain open to serve the community for generations to come?