Chamber and committees

Convener, I have read out the wrong motion. I will revise what I said. I apologise for that mistake

Motion moved,

That the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee recommends that the Code of Practice for the Welfare of Pigs (Revocation) (Scotland) Notice 2023 be approved.

Motion agreed to.

I do not have a further opening statement to make. I think that I included everything in my original statement.

The purpose of the draft Welfare of Farmed Animals (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2024 is to amend the Welfare of Farmed Animals (Scotland) Regulations 2010 to put a statutory duty on persons who are responsible for looking after farmed pigs to be acquainted with our new guidance for the welfare of pigs. Among other things, the 2010 regulations require that persons who are responsible for farmed animals be acquainted with any relevant animal welfare guidance and have access to that guidance while attending to such animals. Non-compliance with those requirements is an offence.

Each time a new guidance document is published or revised, reference to that new document must be added to the definition of animal welfare guidance in the 2010 regulations. The draft regulations before the committee do just that. The new guidance for the welfare of pigs was published in November last year. The purpose of the draft regulations is simply to add the new pigs guidance to the definition of animal welfare guidance in the 2010 regulations. The purpose of the revocation notice that is being considered today is simply to revoke the existing but outdated code of practice for the welfare of pigs.

The combined effect of the notice and the regulations will be that the old pigs code of practice will no longer be in force and that the requirements that had been in force in relation to that code will now apply in relation to the new pigs guidance.

I am happy to take any questions that members have.

Yes.

Two sets of guidance notes—those on the welfare of meat chickens and those on the welfare of laying hens—have been part of the same process. The committee will have had a letter from me that set out the reasons for the change. We have moved from a code of practice to guidance because guidance can be published, revised and updated very quickly. As you will appreciate, when it comes to animal welfare issues—especially those to do with farmed animals—it is quite a fast-moving scene. We can receive recommendations from bodies such as the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission that we think need to be applied.

The guidance in question is available for people who work with farmed animals so that they can ensure that the welfare of those animals is as good as it can be. The accommodation of such animals and the conditions in which they must be housed are examples of what the guidance covers.

Hugh Dignon has just said that fewer than 2,000—

Yes—that is the data that we have. If there is any data beyond or below that at a granular level, I will provide it to the committee. However, I go back to what we have just been saying: there is no way of knowing these things, because there is no recording mechanism and it is not legally incumbent on anybody to report what animal was caught in a snare, when it happened and what was done with it.

It has not put that to me as being an issue.

As Mr Carson knows, in the same way as we do not tend to have codes of practice as part of the text of a bill, we would not have a working protocol or arrangement between two bodies that were affected by the legislation in the bill itself. The SSPCA and Police Scotland are already working together on it, but the protocol will not form part of the bill.

I can certainly follow that up with Ms Burgess afterwards. Forgive me, but I am focusing on snaring today.