Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Official Report 751KB pdf

---

Topical Question Time

---

Renewable Energy (Pentland Firth)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what benefits the recently announced development in the Pentland Firth of the largest tidal array in Europe will bring to the marine renewable energy industry. (S4T-00448)

This is a significant milestone for the marine industry in Scotland and sends a positive message to the wider supply chain. MeyGen is working closely with Highland Council and Highlands and Islands Enterprise to maximise the local content of the project, having committed to investing in local businesses and skills. We are already seeing benefits as a result of MeyGen’s activities. The company has spent £1 million in the Highlands since 2010, recruited staff locally, and taken part in a successful supply chain networking event in Thurso, which was attended by 40 businesses.

I welcome the benefits of such tidal projects, but does the minister share my concerns that the benefits of wave and tidal technologies may not be fully realised until the matter of disproportionate grid connection charges for island generators is addressed and unless a suitable contracts for difference strike price for wave and tidal generators is set?

Mike MacKenzie is absolutely correct that if all the islands—the Western Isles and the Orkney and Shetland islands—are to achieve their enormous potential, there must be the right support for them, and the evidence suggests that that means three island CFDs. In addition, it is essential that we properly incentivise the wave and tidal sector, as Mike MacKenzie rightly argues. That is at the very top of my priorities. I welcome the Department of Energy and Climate Change consultation that will be published on 18 September, but we believe that the proposals need to be improved if we are to realise the enormous potential that the islands have to offer for renewable energy.

How quickly does the minister envisage the roll-out of further projects in the Pentland Firth site taking place? Does he believe that there is now potential for exporting this home-grown technology to other parts of the world?

I understand that the first stage in the MeyGen project will be to assemble the offices that it requires onshore in Caithness. Possibly next year or the year after that—depending on things such as the weather and the rate of progress—there will be an initial phase in which up to six turbines will be placed in the water.

On the nature of those schemes, the important thing is to demonstrate their efficacy and to learn from the real-life experience of trying them in the extremely testing conditions of the Pentland Firth and Orkney waters. However, we expect that, as Scotland is currently in the lead and there are several other projects, with due encouragement and support from the Scottish Government, the local authorities, the Crown Estate and the United Kingdom Government, many other projects should follow apace. To respond to the question, I confirm that we expect that the technologies that are developed in Scotland can be exported throughout the world in due course.

The news is most welcome for my constituency as the next step in offshore renewables development. What benefits can MeyGen bring from the development in the long term once the arrays have, we hope, proved a success? Could it lead to more jobs in, for example, a data centre, which could provide a lot of sustainable work for many more people in Caithness than the construction phase?

I acknowledge Rob Gibson’s campaigning on the issue. Indeed, he has probably been campaigning since before some members of the Parliament were born—although not Alex Johnstone, I have to say.

Rob Gibson has made a serious point. The project is huge: it is the biggest tidal project in Europe. It has been consented in Scotland, and it has enormous potential to generate jobs and opportunities in Caithness, in particular in Scrabster, where the Scottish Government has invested approximately £20 million in a new deepwater quay. The port of Scrabster has now signed a memorandum of understanding with MeyGen to ensure that Scrabster is the location for the deployment and maintenance of the project’s initial phase. Highlands and Islands Enterprise has estimated that the project will create up to 100 jobs for the assembly, deployment and maintenance of the six turbines, the bulk of which will be in the Highlands and Caithness.

I will be happy to meet Mr Gibson to discuss with him the data centre idea.

---

Dangerous Dogs

2. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to prevent attacks by dangerous dogs. (S4T-00452)

I am aware of weekend reports of a dog attack on an eight-year-old girl in Dundee. The local constituency MSP, Shona Robison, has already raised the matter with me and I appreciate the concerns that have been raised. I am sure that the Parliament’s sympathies go to the girl and her family as she recovers from her ordeal. There is obviously an on-going police investigation.

More generally, we are clear that owning a dog brings certain responsibilities, and irresponsible dog owners who allow their dogs to be out of control should be subject to appropriate controls and sanctions. That is why, in 2010, the Parliament extended the criminal law so that a dog could not be dangerously out of control in either a public or a private place. The extension to include private places means that an owner must be responsible for their dog at all times and in all places. The Parliament also gave local authorities new powers to require the microchipping of out-of-control dogs through the creation of the dog control notice regime for use by officers who are authorised by local authorities.

More recently, I attended the Justice Committee last week to seek its approval for increased penalties to be available to our courts when they deal with cases involving dangerously out-of-control dogs.

The cabinet secretary talks about appropriate controls and sanctions, but those come after the attack. He talks about dog control notices, but is he aware that Angus Council, in my region, has issued only one such notice since the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 came into force, and Dundee City Council, in whose area the attack took place at the weekend, has issued none? Does the cabinet secretary plan to review the 2010 act to see exactly how effective it is?

No. What we seek to do is to build on the 2010 act. Indeed, those south of the border are currently seeking to do that. I pay tribute to Christine Grahame, who was instrumental in bringing the act in.

We realise that changes have to be made because of court decisions down south, and that is being addressed. As I said, I appeared at the Justice Committee to support the legislative consent motion so that we can ensure that the actions and character of the owner are taken into account as well as dealing with matters relating to guide dogs and assistance dogs, where additional measures are clearly required. We have a good basis in the 2010 act, and that is recognised by those south of the border who now seek to replicate it, but we have to be ever vigilant.

With regard to the particular matters relating to Dundee and Angus, it is for local authorities to decide to whom to issue a dog control notice. Having been involved in the debate when the bill went through the Parliament, I am conscious that it is a question of deed, not breed and that the overwhelming majority of dog owners are responsible. It is the minority that are irresponsible who have to be targeted and dealt with.

There are frequent dangerous dog attacks that the 2010 act is not preventing, and most of them are on children. They include the attack in Dundee at the weekend and a vicious attack in Arbroath this summer. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is now time to consider preventative measures such as muzzling and leads, because the sanctions that his Government has put in force are just not working?

The member was not in the Parliament in 2010, but the whole purpose of the dog control notice is so that a council can decide whether to insist on microchipping, muzzling or a variety of other measures. This is a matter on which we have to encourage local authorities. If Ms Marra is unhappy with the attitudes and actions of the local authorities, she should raise the matter with them. I believe that we have a sound basis in law that we are seeking to build on, and indeed it is an approach that is being followed south of the border.

I am sure that the cabinet secretary shares my concern about any attack on a child or indeed any person. Does he also share my concern about the increasing attacks on guide dogs and assistance dogs? Will he confirm what the latest position is regarding the LCM on the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill and say whether there will be an amendment from the Scottish Government to make such an attack an aggregated offence?

The purpose of my appearing at the Justice Committee was to move support for the LCM to ensure that, with the changes that are being made south of the border, which replicate our 2010 act, matters that are not currently provided for in Scotland—particularly the point that Dennis Robertson made about assistance dogs—will be covered. It is entirely unacceptable that these dogs should be subject to attacks. We have to ensure that the legislation provides for that, and I assure the member that we have sought to include the matter. The timescale is now, to some extent, subject to matters south of the border, but I will be happy to keep him advised as matters progress.

A number of people who are involved in the dog rescue sector have put it to me that there are many dangerous feral dogs as a result of indiscriminate breeding of animals, particularly in socially rented properties. People have expressed concern that, in time, there will be a very serious or fatal attack. I raised the issue of indiscriminate breeding of dogs in a members’ business debate last week. Will the cabinet secretary liaise with the environment and housing ministers and arrange a cross-party meeting between ministers and interested MSPs to discuss the issue?

I am always happy to take members’ comments on board. We have been working closely across the Government—my colleague Paul Wheelhouse responded to last week’s debate.

I think that we can say that it is a minority of dog owners who allow their dogs to behave in the manner that has been described. The maxim in the 2010 act was deed, not breed. I am sad to say that sometimes the issue is not the animal but the owner. To some extent, that is a matter not for legislation with regard to animals but for action against individuals. I am more than happy to engage with Ms Milne on the matter.

I thank the cabinet secretary for his references to the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010—the bill proposal was initiated by Alex Neil and continued by me.

As the cabinet secretary knows, there have been more than 1,000 investigations in the period of just more than a year since the 2010 act came into force. However, Jenny Marra has a point. The act is not well enough publicised, to ensure that there is intervention at an early stage, before a dog gets to the point at which it is dangerous. Does the Government have plans to publicise the act? Can it help in any way in that regard?

We seek to work with local authority partners, given that they must deal on the front line with many of the matters that we are considering. I meet the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities regularly, and when I next do so I will be more than happy to take on board the positions of Ms Marra and Ms Grahame and point out to Harry McGuigan and others who deal with community safety that there is some dissatisfaction in the Parliament—although not necessarily among Government ministers. I am also more than happy to take on board the views of Ms Grahame and Ms Milne on how we further publicise the 2010 act.

We are talking about a small minority, but there have been incidents, as Ms Marra said, which are tragic and can have fatal consequences. It is therefore appropriate that everyone, at every level, should do everything that they can do. I think that we have a sufficient legislative base. That base is being built on, and we need to ensure that the theory behind the legislation is implemented in practice.