Chamber and committees

I asked the question because we are hearing evidence from all sorts of people who are going to be affected by the bill, and we heard last week about some of its possible unintended consequences. It might be useful to look at that evidence if you have time, because it was interesting.

I will press you on a specific area. You say in your report that, if there are fewer than two dogs when flushing, that

“could seriously compromise effective pest control”

in the countryside. How might that observation, which you made in your review of the 2002 act, have a bearing on or lend weight to the argument about the two-dog limit in the bill?

It is good for the committee to understand the difference between various methods of control with dogs. Are you saying that, from a scientific or evidence-based stance, you still agree with what you concluded about the compromising of effective pest control? At last week’s meeting, Ian Duncan Millar spoke about his experience of foot packs. I cannot remember how many dogs he said that he used, but it might have been 30.

I would like to clarify something, too. Lord Bonomy, you said that alternative forms of predator control should be available. One alternative form, which is relevant to Ariane Burgess’s point, is shooting combined with the use of dogs—lamping, in other words. That can have welfare implications because, if there is not a good line of sight and there is good cover at night time, there is a chance that a fox could be wounded. I am not sure whether I can ask you this but, from your point of view, is one method better than another in terms of welfare?

Okay. Thank you.

I want to follow up what Mr Richards said. You said that you would get back to the committee on a non-native species that is a risk to agriculture. Given all the new competences that we may have for controlling non-native species on the uplands—for example, controlling bracken with Asulam for tick populations—it is important that such products do not affect the spread of ticks, for example.

This is really difficult to articulate, but the main issue that we are considering is how to have a workable and practical way of controlling predators that protects livestock and ensures the highest possible level of animal welfare. Based on the changes that will be made and on what you said previously, could there be any problems relating to the welfare of foxes?

We have been given sight of your review, which mentions an issue with animal welfare if fewer than two dogs are used.

Yes.

I want to pick up on what you said in your opening statement about the legal status of a Scotland-born 16-year-old affecting their ability to access services in England. What do you mean by that? Is that specifically about education?

I have a succession of quick-fire questions. How many people who use your services seek to obtain a GRC? Do you keep that data?

In fairness, it is important that I ask the other witnesses whether they have any opinions about the interim Cass review. Should the bill be paused until the review has been published?