Meeting of the Parliament [Last updated 20:21]

Meeting date: Wednesday, March 18, 2026

Official Report 416KB pdf

Greyhound Racing (Offences) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-20921, in the name of Mark Ruskell, on the Greyhound Racing (Offences) (Scotland) Bill.

As members will be aware, the Presiding Officer is required, under standing orders, to decide whether, in her view, any provision of the bill relates to a protected subject matter; that is, whether it modifies the electoral system and franchise for a Scottish parliamentary election. In the Presiding Officer’s view, no provision of the Greyhound Racing (Offences) (Scotland) Bill relates to a protected subject matter, so the bill does not require a supermajority to be passed at stage 3.

I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak button.

15:03

I am grateful that, in the busy final hours of this parliamentary session, a moment has been found to consider a law to alleviate the suffering of animals.

The true mark of a society is the way in which it treats its animals. The case against greyhound racing is plain to see. The numbers speak for themselves. Since the industry started recording figures in 2017, there have been nearly 4,000 deaths and a staggering 35,000 injuries across the United Kingdom.

The reasons for that are clear. Racing greyhounds at speeds of up to 40 miles per hour on an oval track results in catastrophic injuries and deaths. The dogs slow down as they enter the first bend, bunching together and crashing as they jostle for position. Centrifugal forces pull the dogs towards the outside of the track, resulting in crashes on the fence. Dogs break their legs, break their backs and end up paralysed and with serious head trauma. I am sickened by the images from racetracks that show deaths and injuries day in, day out on social media. It is time that that stops. Today, we have the chance to ensure that in Scotland—if the bill passes.

Even at this late stage, some members will continue to argue that regulation and licensing are the best way forward, but the injuries and deaths are happening mostly under a licensed regime. The industry has had years to reform, but it has been unwilling or unable to make changes that remove the inherent risk to the dogs that are racing. Licensed greyhound racing is simply licensed animal cruelty. As long as greyhound racing is a lawful activity, it will continue to be impossible to prevent suffering under our animal welfare laws.

I congratulate Mark Ruskell on bringing the bill to this stage in the Parliament. Should it pass, it will be groundbreaking legislation on protecting animal welfare and will improve the lives of many greyhounds. Does he agree that the ban on greyhound racing will save the lives of dogs and reduce injuries?

Yes, absolutely. I thank Clare Haughey for her relentless support for the bill, which comes from a position of experience, because the Shawfield stadium is in her constituency, and she has listened to and seen the evidence first hand. I agree with her that the only way forward is to make racing a greyhound a stand-alone offence in law. Some argue that the last remaining racetrack in Scotland, which is unlicensed, is an exception—a harmless hobby enterprise—but Thornton racetrack in Fife is no different from any other track in the UK. The dogs face the same risks, just with less oversight. There are those who want to see a resurgence of greyhound racing in Scotland. The owner of the Thornton track has stated that, if it were not for the campaign for the bill, he would be expanding and televising races to betting shops around the UK. There would be more dogs racing in more races, more dogs injured and more dogs killed.

The public do not want to see that. More than two thirds of people in Scotland want to see an end to greyhound racing. A spectacle that was invented 100 years ago is now becoming socially unacceptable. Our values have changed; times have changed. The case against greyhound racing has never been stronger, and the international consensus to end the suffering of these dogs is now unstoppable. Just yesterday, Wales voted to ban greyhound racing. Scotland cannot be left behind.

The bill would end greyhound racing on all tracks in Scotland, licensed or unlicensed. It would protect these beautiful dogs from the inherent harms of greyhound racing. I appeal to all members in the Parliament to vote for the bill at decision time tonight. I am greatly honoured to move the motion.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that the Greyhound Racing (Offences) (Scotland) Bill be passed.

15:07

As the lead minister for the bill, I thank Mark Ruskell for his constructive and collaborative approach in bringing this important bill to the Parliament. A member’s bill does not reach this stage without a significant commitment and a great deal of effort. I know how much work Mr Ruskell has put into the bill throughout its stages in this parliamentary session. I commend the hard work undertaken by the Parliament’s non-Government bills unit in supporting Mr Ruskell with the bill, as well as that of my officials, the policy officials and all the parliamentary staff in getting us to this stage. I also thank the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee for its role in hearing evidence and producing helpful recommendations at stage 1, which we considered carefully. That process led to the changes that were made at stage 2 and to the creation of a bill that puts in place safeguards for the benefit of all greyhounds.

I remind the Parliament that, when the bill was first introduced, the Government adopted a neutral position. At that stage, the proposal sought to prohibit all greyhound racing in Scotland. The bill that is now at stage 3 is more focused in scope, in that it seeks specifically to prohibit the racing of greyhounds on oval tracks. Having carefully considered the evidence, the Scottish Government considers that the bill addresses the inherent welfare risks associated with running dogs at speed on oval tracks—risks that, even with good practice, cannot be eliminated. Therefore, the Government supports the bill.

As I stated previously, previous studies have shown that an oval track design is a key factor in injuries and deaths, due to the combination of bends and the speeds at which racing dogs enter the bends, and that those risks cannot be fully mitigated. Similar concerns are echoed by animal welfare organisations and veterinary reviews, which point to thousands of recorded injuries and numerous fatalities each year linked to the racing conditions internationally. Taken together, the evidence demonstrates that greyhound racing, as currently practised on oval tracks, exposes dogs to significant risks that cannot be eliminated by other measures. That gives me confidence that the bill is a rational and proportionate measure and that there is a sufficient welfare justification for supporting it.

As Mark Ruskell said, the Welsh Senedd last night passed its bill, which will implement a complete ban on greyhound racing in Wales. That shows that the issue is being discussed not just in Scotland but in many areas of the world. However, I stress that there are points of difference between the two bills, including the fact that the Welsh bill prohibits racing on all types of track, whereas the bill that we are considering is focused on oval tracks only, in response to the particular risks that are posed by such tracks.

We are very mindful of the implications for the individuals and communities that are connected with greyhound racing in Scotland—in particular, those who are involved with the Thornton track in Fife. I do not doubt the dedication and devotion of those people to their dogs, but the evidence shows the welfare case for banning racing on oval tracks. That is why we support the bill.

Deputy Presiding Officer, members’ bills such as this can—as you well know—achieve a great deal in the Parliament when people work together on important matters for the benefit of Scotland’s people, communities and, in this case, greyhounds.

I note that there is a lot of public support for the bill. A petition to ban greyhound racing is the most-signed petition in the Parliament’s history, and the Scottish Government therefore fully supports the bill.

15:10

I recognise the commitment of any member who brings forward a member’s bill, and the significant time and resources that that takes. However, without any disrespect to Mark Ruskell, with whom I have worked on many occasions over the past 10 years, it has to be recognised that it is hard to conclude anything other than that this process has been a waste of precious parliamentary time, given that it will not improve the welfare of a single greyhound in Scotland. There is no active track nor on-going racing, yet we are being asked to pass a total ban without ever exploring the very thing that has improved welfare in England and Wales, which is licensing, robust regulation and proper oversight. The evidence has been contested throughout, and the Government has produced nothing new to justify its U-turn from calling a ban “disproportionate” to now supporting it.

Meanwhile, we read reports of a possible legal challenge to similar legislation in Wales before the ink is even dry. That should alarm anyone who cares about good governance and legislative competence.

However, what worries me most is that the bill is portrayed as advancing animal welfare while delivering absolutely nothing in practice. It is gesture politics and virtue-signalling legislation that is designed to look busy rather than make a difference. All the while, genuinely needed reforms languish.

Scotland’s animal welfare law is spread across numerous dated and disjointed acts. A future Government must grab the bull by the horns and develop a proper consolidation bill that brings together the patchwork of existing legislation into a coherent, modern framework that truly improves outcomes for animals and the people who are responsible for their care.

Instead, today, we debate a bill that does none of that. It contributes nothing to welfare and simply reinforces the impression that the Parliament has, to be frank, gone to the dogs, given that such a measure takes precedence over legislation that might make life better for man and beast in Scotland. For those reasons, we will vote against it.

15:13

I congratulate Mark Ruskell on getting his bill to this stage. I also thank the committee staff, the legislation team and those who assisted us during the bill process, as well as those who gave evidence to the committee.

I have said more than once that we have had a fragmented approach to the welfare of dogs throughout this session of Parliament. We have had a number of members’ bills, but, as Finlay Carson said, what we need is a Government bill to pull together all aspects of animal welfare and stop the confused and piecemeal approach that has been taken.

Animal welfare is a concern for us all. Many people have family pets, and we cannot allow demand for those to lead to animals being harmed.

However, the bill will do nothing to improve the welfare of any animal in Scotland. It will prevent oval greyhound racetracks from being opened, but I do not think any such track would have received planning permission had it been sought in any event.

At stage 2, I tried to see whether we could do more to enhance animal welfare through the bill, but that was not possible. Some amendments were not competent, and those that were competent did not impact on any dog.

It beggars belief that, in a Parliament that has been sitting late in the evening for weeks to pass essential legislation, we have made time for a bill that does little or nothing. I will leave my comments at that and will take up no more precious time.

15:14

I thank the many members from all parties in the Parliament who have contributed to the passage of the bill. It is a shame that they were not all able to speak this afternoon.

I give special thanks to Clare Haughey, Rona Mackay, Christine Grahame, Karen Adam and the many other members who have been relentless in advocating for the bill.

I also thank Gill Docherty and Jax Brown, who came to my office in 2019 to educate me about the dangers of greyhound racing, and whose petition to Parliament was the inspiration behind the bill. Their work at the trackside alongside others, including Gill Donn and her team, has been critical, because they built the case for an end to greyhound racing in Scotland.

Now, the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Dogs Trust, OneKind, Blue Cross and many others have joined the fight, and we have been able to link to the campaigns of Grey2K to end greyhound racing globally. Over the years, thousands have joined us on that journey. Many joined us this morning outside Parliament with their dogs, and I thank them all.

In 2015, my family rehomed an ex-racing greyhound called Bert. He sadly passed over the rainbow bridge last year. He was a wonderful dog. He was kind and affectionate and so patient with kids—and even with cats. However, until I started working on this campaign, I did not fully understand the trauma that Bert had endured while racing.

The physical scars were obvious—the ear tattoos and the broken leg that constantly made him lame—but it was his mental trauma that we struggled with at the beginning. He could not sleep at night without a light on because he had been raised on a puppy farm. His separation anxiety was awful. He was scared of vans and loud noises from his days of kennelling and being shipped around the country to races.

It is only through love that these dogs heal from their years spent in an exploitative industry. Reading through the consultation responses to my bill, I learned about dozens and dozens of dogs like Bert—gentle souls who had been scarred—and the patient work of rehomers across Scotland to bring them into their lives and heal them.

For those who still ask where the evidence for a ban on greyhound racing is, I point to Bert and Bob, Sasha and Joy, Bluesy and countless other dogs who have been treated abysmally by a gambling industry that disposes of dozens of dogs every month of every year.

There is a challenge for the minister, because, although I warmly welcome his reconsideration of the evidence and his support for the bill so that it can become law, it must be only the first step. There will still be dogs who are kennelled and trained in Scotland and raced across the border when the bill becomes law.

It is for Westminster to end greyhound racing in England. There are passionate champions who will fight for that in Parliament, including the Green Party’s newly elected MP, Hannah Spencer. However, the Welsh Government, which had its Prohibition of Greyhound Racing (Wales) Bill passed in the Senedd last night, has pledged to end the suffering of Welsh greyhounds that continue to be raced over its border. I call on the Scottish Government and the minister to follow that lead and ensure that no dog is left behind in Scotland.

Finally, I thank my parliamentary team, past and present, who have been outstanding, and the Parliament’s non-Government bills unit for its professional and dedicated support, which has got me to this point. I also thank the minister and his officials for some constructive engagement throughout the passage of the bill.

Tonight, Scotland can ban greyhound racing for good. We will be a better, more compassionate country for that. Let us do this for the dogs. Let us pass the Greyhound Racing (Offences) (Scotland) Bill.

That concludes consideration of the Greyhound Racing (Offences) (Scotland) Bill at stage 3.