Chamber and committees

You have made quite a distinction today, minister, about regulated versus unregulated tracks. We have a regulated track in Scotland, at Shawfield, although it has not been open for a number of years, and we have the unregulated track in Thornton. What is the difference in track design and inherent risk to dogs that are racing at Thornton and those racing at Shawfield? Is there a difference between the tracks?

It has operated as a racing track.

But it is a track that is in existence and we have figures for injuries and deaths when there was racing there and they are slightly higher than the average across Great Britain. What is the difference in the inherent risk? If you are a dog and you are racing at Thornton, what is the difference in the risk of leg breaks or other injuries that could be life threatening? What is the difference between racing at Thornton compared to racing at a GBGB track elsewhere in the UK or at Shawfield?

Where is your evidence for that in stats and figures?

There are limits. We no longer send children up chimneys to clean them because there is an inherent risk in that.

I think you know that that is not what I am saying.

I think that you said at the outset that you are not persuaded by the argument that the petitioners have brought forward and this committee has been considering for some time now.

You said that you were not persuaded at this point and that you did not feel that the proposal was proportionate. That was your starting point. Where does public opinion sit within this? We have spoken at length about the small number of people who own and race dogs at Thornton, but public opinion is strongly behind a ban on greyhound racing, which is what the petitioners want. The petition itself was the most signed petition in the 25-year history of the Scottish Parliament. Where do you think public opinions sits?

To go back to the legislation that was passed in the previous session of Parliament, which prohibited the performance, display and exhibition of wild animals in travelling circuses, at that time—and I think Mr Voas will know more about this, given that he worked on the Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses (Scotland) Bill—there were not any wild animals in travelling circuses in Scotland, or there were very few. Arguably, as there were not many animals involved in that, it probably was not the biggest animal welfare issue in Scotland at the time, but there was strong public support for a ban on the use of wild animals in travelling circuses and, to give the Government its due, it moved forward on that legislation, which was considered by the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee and passed by Parliament. What do you think about public opinion? Does that have any bearing with this Government?

It is there, yes.

Are dogs raced differently at Thornton compared to Shawfield? Are they raced at different speeds? What is the difference in inherent risk if the tracks are the same?