Chamber and committees

To my understanding, we are also seeing that the populations are of a disproportionately younger age, which suggests that there are issues relating to the suspicious disappearance of more mature adults. I stick with what I said in response to Mr Allan. We feel that the licensing scheme is necessary, because we are not seeing the significant improvement that we wanted.

For me to lodge amendments, or if people were to come to me with amendments for me to look at and decide whether we would support them, I would need to do a little bit more work so that there are no unintended consequences.

I keep coming back to the fact that I have had the bill in front of me for only a week. Between now and stage 2, I need to determine what length of licence is appropriate—what will hit the mark and is neither too long nor too short—so I cannot really make that commitment to you right now.

No. We will have to disagree on that.

The code of practice will be designed by NatureScot after the bill has been passed.

I refer you to my earlier answer in which I explained that it would be very unusual for the code of practice to be written by a minister when we have a body such as NatureScot, which will be taking forward the licensing scheme and the code of practice in consultation with, and through working together with, stakeholders.

There is nothing unusual about this at all, but I will bring in Hugh Dignon, who will probably have examples, given that the matter is in his remit.

I watched your line of questioning on the issue in a previous committee meeting. I think that it was to Professor Werritty.

I do not want to tell you what your job is, but you can have NatureScot in front of you any time you want, as can I. As the bill becomes law, the code of practice is put together and the licensing scheme is put into operation—

We are giving the SSPCA the powers to gather evidence that would assist the police.

The bill refers to

“any other body that has as one of its functions reporting, for consideration of the question of prosecution”.

In effect, the SSPCA would be gathering evidence. I get what you are getting at, though. The SSPCA is able to provide evidence, but it can already do so in a range of cases, even before it gets the proposed powers. It does so if there is, say, illegal breeding of domestic animals or concerns about the suffering of animals. It will provide evidence, should something go to court. That is what that means. Hugh Dignon might want to come in on the detail of that, if I have got it slightly wrong.