Chamber and committees

I am sure that the Government was listening to Jamie Brogan’s proposal.

Douglas Lumsden has questions.

In response to your comment, it is fair to say that the committee did not get sight of the bill until 5 September, so we ran the consultation on the basis of a best estimate of what would be in it. I apologise that it appeared over the summer recess, but we could not do it any earlier.

Cornilius Chikwama, my next questions are for you. Are you happy that the financial memorandum is sufficient? Do you think that the subordinate legislation that will come up with the climate change plan must be properly costed and funded, instead of just saying, “Here are some things we’d like to achieve, but we have no money to do them”?

I can tell you that Alison Leslie twitched, but Claudia Cowie put her hand up, so I will go to Claudia first and then it is over to you, Alison.

I know that Jamie Brogan wants to come in, but I will bring in Mark Ruskell with a supplementary question first, and perhaps he will get a chance to bring Jamie in, too.

I am not sure that I got a specific answer there. I am trying to see whether having everyone moving together as one big team towards one big target—which aligning with the UK carbon budgets would do—is the right thing.

We return to Monica Lennon for more questions.

Claudia Cowie, from your point of view, if we are no longer able to achieve the 2030 target, we will have to ramp up what we are doing, will we not? How will that affect what you are doing?

Before I go any further, I remind members of my entry in the members’ register of interests. I am a farmer and part of a farming partnership. I am also a dog owner and have recently registered puppies. I am an honorary member of the British Veterinary Association.

I will speak to amendment 59 and I will move it for three really good reasons, which I am sure that everyone will find easy to support. First, what I have proposed is good for dogs and their welfare. It would also allow the Government to carry out some post-legislative scrutiny, and it would help to address the issue of dog theft, which is subject to a separate bill that another member has proposed.

I am sure that I do not need to remind the minister that the rules for microchipping were introduced in 2016. Now, eight years on, we do not know whether microchipping works. There is a requirement to microchip a puppy at eight weeks, and owners are supposed to update the information when a dog is moved, an owner changes their address or telephone number, or the dog is sold or given to another owner. We are pretty sure that that does not happen across the country. There are thousands of strays every year that are not properly recorded on the database. I am sure that the minister will say that they are 12 properly accredited databases in Scotland, which he would be right about. There are 22 databases across the United Kingdom, so which database is being checked, which one is being kept up to date, and which is the proper one to use?

When we are farming, we have a simple situation: we have ScotEID, where we record our animals on a database and every animal has a passport. We know where the animals are and we know their history. Now, the Government has produced a poultry register. If you have one chicken at home that is scratching around your door, you must register it and record it on a database that the Government keeps. Everyone in the countryside is used to doing that with animals and we also do it if we have a car, because we have a responsibility to keep the V5C up to date and to record any changes.

I suggest that the Government should think carefully about its 2016 legislation and should consider whether it is working. I have asked the Government to review it and to check whether microchipping and the database are working properly and I have said that it should consult breeders, acquirers and owners of dogs as well as consulting veterinary practitioners.

I know that it is a step too far for some people, but I believe that vets should check dogs that come into their practice to ensure that they are properly microchipped and that the person who has brought the dog in is the correct owner. That might be a step too far for now, but I believe that it should come in due course.

Amendment 59 is a simple one. It puts an onus on the Government to check that the legislation that it brought in in 2016 is working correctly, is effective and is doing what it is meant to do, which is to look after the welfare of dogs. I do not see what people dislike about that, but I suspect that the minister is going to tell me.

I move amendment 59.

I do not think that I have time. I was winding up.

Databases are approved for use in Scotland. That does not mean that dogs that come in from other countries, where some of those puppy farms might be, will be on approved databases in Scotland. I will leave it there, convener, rather than boring the committee.

I press amendment 59.