Chamber and committees

We are supposed to be discussing the order in front of us.

Will you confirm that the first that the Scottish Government knew of a United Kingdom Government proposal for an XL bully dog ban was via the BBC News website on 15 September? Is that correct?

Does the Scottish Government believe that that type of notification is consistent with the intergovernmental frameworks that are supposed to operate between the four Administrations of the United Kingdom?

Does that highlight a fundamental lack of respect for the role of the Scottish Government and the legislative responsibilities of the Scottish Parliament?

I find it very strange that the proposal was announced on 15 September and the first formal written notification to the Scottish Government advising of a ban was on 29 September. That was 14 days after the proposal appeared on the BBC News website. Is that an indication of respectful behaviour by the United Kingdom Government?

I will pursue you further on that, Mr Wilson. I assume that, in advance of the announcement on 15 September, you regularly and assiduously considered the type of activity that you have just placed on the record, and that officials in the Scottish Government and ministers explored the ideal regime for dog control in Scotland and considered it in dialogue with DEFRA officials.

My final question is on the Scottish Government’s current position and, in essence, the lack of clarity that arises out of the legislation that has been enacted in England and Wales, which creates a problem in Scotland. Is that a fair representation of the challenge that the Scottish Government faces, given the fact that Mr Wilson has just placed on the record that there has been regular work to ensure that the dog control regime in Scotland is as appropriate and robust as it can be, subject, of course, to further legislative change? Has the necessity of the order coming to the Scottish Government been precipitated by the lack of clarity that the legislation that has been implemented in England and Wales has created?

I am grateful to the minister for indicating another example of a lack of respect from the United Kingdom Government and a lack of obligation to pursue the intergovernmental arrangements that the Scottish Parliament has been assured are in operation, but which clearly have not in any shape or form been respected on this issue. Is that a fair summary?

I can clearly understand from Mr Wilson’s contribution that there has been detailed Scottish Government official engagement on many of the questions relating to dog control. After that public announcement and inappropriate intergovernmental communication from the United Kingdom Government, the Scottish Government sought to understand the implications of the legislation for Scotland and determine whether there would be loopholes or whether the existing dog control legislation in Scotland would suffice. Is that a fair summary of what went on between 15 September and 14 December, when I think there was the formal response to the Scottish Government, which gave information that might have allowed it to form an informed view on whether there were loopholes?

Have further implementation issues arisen in England and Wales as a consequence of the way that the UK Government has handled the matter?