Chamber and committees

I will touch on a point about the limit on the number of dogs. Last week, the committee heard that, when people use a pack of dogs on foot, between 90 and 95 per cent of the foxes are shot. There is a massive difference between that and the figure of between 20 and 40 per cent. The only difference is whether people are on motorbikes or horses.

The issue is supposed to be exceptions to the rule. I have not heard of an example—not one—in which two dogs is the most appropriate number for controlling or flushing. That suggests that, any time at all, when someone wants to use dogs for flushing, they will have to apply for a licence. That will not be an exception; that will be the rule. That suggests that two dogs is an arbitrary limit that has no scientific basis whatsoever; it is a limit that will prevent the use of packs.

It is more about the League Against Cruel Sports than it is about a league against cruel pest control. We have heard, again and again, that this is not about more effective and less cruel pest control, but about preventing people who are mounted on horseback from hunting with packs. We need to get back to what the bill is all about, which is animal welfare. I cannot understand why the rule would be for two dogs when there is no evidence to suggest that that is the best way to flush foxes to guns.

No—he said that it does not happen. Unless I misunderstood him, he suggested that there is no evidence that anyone is using two dogs to flush foxes to guns. Perhaps he could clarify that, if I have misunderstood.

Can we have a question, please?

But the fee is per consignment—it is not an overall fee. Why would the cost per consignment be less?

As there are no further questions, we will move on to consideration of the instruments. First, do members have any comments on the consent notification? If not, do we agree with the Scottish Government’s decision to consent to the provision that is set out in the notification being included in UK rather than Scottish subordinate legislation?

Members indicated agreement.

We now move to formal consideration of the motion to approve the instrument. I invite the minister to move motion S6M-04876.

Motion moved,

That the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee recommends that the Plant Health (Fees) (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) Regulations 2022 [draft] be approved.—[Lorna Slater]

Motion agreed to.

We will now take evidence on the Hunting with Dogs (Scotland) Bill. I welcome our first panel of witnesses, who will focus on animal welfare perspectives. Attending remotely are Pete Goddard from the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission—substituting for Libby Anderson, who is not able to be with us—and Robbie Marsland from the League Against Cruel Sports. In the room, we have Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn from the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and Kirsty Jenkins from OneKind.

We have a series of questions that will probably take us up to around 11 o’clock. I will kick off. What are the witnesses’ overall views on the bill?

Thank you. We move to questions on sections 1 and 2 of the bill, which cover offences.

No, Jim. Please desist.

Certainly.