Chamber and committees

Can I get some clarity on that, convener?

Just for the record, I say that I also support that, but I think that we need to find a workable and practical solution to ensure that the bill is not just a catch-all, if you know what I mean.

Okay—that is fantastic.

Convener, do you want me to conclude my questions in one go rather than coming back in later? My next question is relevant.

I have managed to get some words down to help us both understand what I am trying to say about sections 7 and 8 on exceptions before we leave this particular area.

The section 7 exemption and the consequential section 8 licence for environmental benefit are limited to where the activity is part of a scheme. I would like to know what constitutes a scheme for those purposes and why that limitation has been included. Land managers manage foxes for a variety of purposes, including to protect vulnerable species. Would that activity count as a scheme?

I asked Police Scotland about deprivation orders and the seizing of vehicles, horses and quad bikes. That also speaks to my point about financial resources for Police Scotland. They do not have facilities for keeping hounds. They have dog kennels, but they cannot keep horses. I do not think that we are talking about many quad bikes, but it is important for the minister to recognise that there could be financial implications.

I do not have the financial memorandum in front of me, but I am sure that it says that the bill does not create any additional resource implications for bodies or stakeholders.

We will check on that.

I go back to the point about consultation, because it is important to get feedback from stakeholders and practitioners. In the evidence that we have heard, a number of witnesses from the rural sector said that they are part of a working group of rural stakeholders. Have you had the opportunity to meet the group and hear about how those people who represent land managers and farmers can be part of the process?

Yes, but how can you prove that animal welfare can be improved by using dogs to flush one animal for an environmental reason or a predation reason?

I am just very concerned. My gut instinct is that we should have had a separate piece of legislation on hare coursing. As somebody who has been a witness to it, with people getting away, I feel very passionately about the fact that they are not being caught. Police Scotland talked about that last week. We are taking other activities in the countryside that are very acceptable rural pursuits, bringing hare coursing into that and trying to make a system work that can ensure that we prosecute more of the people who do that awful thing but are not getting caught. Wrapping it all together means that there is a very difficult line to tread.

Are you considering the possibility of allowing an appeal process?