The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-18077, in the name of Jim Fairlie, on the legislative consent motion for the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation.
21:15
Despite the lateness of the evening, I am pleased to be leading for the Scottish Government in this discussion of a positive legislative consent memorandum that will give effect in Scotland to the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill.
It is regrettable that the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee feels that it has not had the time to fully consider the LCM relating to the bill. I emphasise that the Scottish Government has no role in the timetabling of UK bills. We recognise the concerns of the committee members in relation to their workloads and their ability to scrutinise legislative instruments as well as to undertake the other aspects of their roles. We understand that, just as ministers require detailed preparation, co-ordination and time to consider legislative instruments in order to ensure that high-quality contributions are made to parliamentary committees, committee members require the same in order to ensure that they can properly scrutinise items.
At every step, the Government acted promptly and constructively. No meeting was cancelled, no deadline was missed and no information was withheld. In the interests of time, I am happy for members to reach out to me in writing, and I can provide timelines and copies of the letters relating to the bill that I sent to the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee and the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, as well as correspondence with Baroness Hayman in which we obtained clarification and assurances from the UK Government on some of the proposals in the bill.
The Rural Affairs and Islands Committee has raised the fact that the Welsh Government lodged its LCM on 21 May. However, as is my responsibility, before confirming support for the bill’s extension to Scotland, I considered it necessary to obtain clarification and assurances from the UK Government regarding some of its proposals, in order to protect this Parliament’s right to scrutinise any legislation that is put before the chamber. That took time. I wrote to the UK Government on 28 March but did not receive a response until 13 May, a situation over which I had no control. However, from my point of view, it was essential that I got that response in order to protect the rights of this Parliament. It is my view that the Scottish Government has given as much notice as possible to the Scottish Parliament.
The bill will make provision for, and in connection with, the restricting of the importation and non-commercial movement of dogs, cats and ferrets from third countries, on the grounds of animal welfare. Puppies are frequently imported when they are underage and unvaccinated, with fraudulent paperwork, and they are then transported and sold to unsuspecting buyers in Great Britain by dealers who are illegally posing as home breeders. The measures in the bill have been strongly called for by many of the main animal welfare organisations, and the Scottish Government supports their introduction.
Let me be clear that, if the Scottish Parliament does not grant legislative consent to the bill, it is highly likely that Scotland will inadvertently enable routes for increased puppy smuggling. That is why the Scottish Government supports the bill and believes that granting legislative consent is the right decision at this time.
I appreciate that it is late, so I will not take up a lot of time. The minister will be aware that I have done a lot of work over the years on the issue of puppies coming through the port of Cairnryan. Will the legislative consent motion help to address that issue? We have been trying to take action on it for many years.
I will come to that issue as I go through my comments.
In the interests of pragmatism, the Scottish Government is working with other UK Administrations to improve the welfare of animals in this area. The changes that are proposed in the bill address matters around animal welfare that are of significant public concern and are within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and require primary legislation in order to be given effect. Those are areas where consistent changes to the legislation in all Administrations of the United Kingdom at the same time will be beneficial.
Given the freedom of movement of dogs, cats and ferrets within Great Britain, effecting the bill in Scotland will aid the enforcement of import requirements by avoiding attempts to circumvent controls in one country by utilising points of entry in another. The bill provides an opportunity to have consistent control over such imports and to assist enforcement agencies to ensure that such unnecessary movements can no longer take place.
However, the Scottish Government fully recognises that, for the measures in the bill to be successful, they must be introduced consistently across Great Britain. Consistent legislative measures across GB will also greatly assist when it comes to the interpretation and enforcement of new controls. A co-ordinated GB-wide approach in tackling the issues that are covered by the bill is widely supported and welcomed by many key stakeholders.
The bill was amended in committee, including in relation to provisions that were contained in the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill, to which legislative consent was given by the Scottish Parliament in January 2022, but which the UK Government did not proceed with.
I am strongly of the view that allowing the UK Parliament to legislate for all GB Administrations in this area is the most timely, efficient and effective way to achieve the important changes that are proposed.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the relevant provisions of the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 16 October 2024, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and alter the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers, should be considered by the UK Parliament.
21:21
The Covid pandemic highlighted an already well-known issue relating to the legal import of dogs, cats and ferrets into the UK. During the pandemic, such imports rose by nearly 60 per cent as demand for puppies rose considerably. More noticeably, the pandemic highlighted the fact that the problem that exists with legal entry routes for animals such as dogs and cats brings with it a significant risk to welfare.
As I understand it, a single individual can import five puppies or kittens non-commercially into the UK. In theory, that would enable five individuals in a single vehicle to import 25 puppies or kittens with minimal border checks. The RSPCA and Cats Protection have both highlighted that such non-commercial imports have been a significant concern for years and have served as a major route for the entry of illegal puppies and kittens into Great Britain.
The bill will crack down on puppy and kitten smuggling by closing loopholes that have been exploited by unscrupulous commercial traders. It will ban the import of puppies and kittens under six months, as well as the import of dogs and cats that are mutilated or heavily pregnant. It will also address the current abuse of non-commercial rules that compromises animal welfare and biosecurity by making it more difficult and less profitable for traders to fraudulently import animals for sale under the guise of owners who are travelling with their own pets.
The Scottish Conservatives welcome the bill and the closing of those loopholes, and we strongly support the motion. However, I impress on the minister the concerns that were raised earlier by my colleague Finlay Carson, which the minister has just touched on. The truncated period that has been provided to the Parliament for consideration of the LCM has had an impact on parliamentary scrutiny.
I think that Tim Eagle is about to come on to the point of principle that Finlay Carson raised earlier today. There should have been more time for the bill to be scrutinised by the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee, of which Finlay Carson is the convener. Although I have no concerns about the bill, which originated from my Liberal Democrat MP colleague Danny Chambers, and notwithstanding what the minister has just said, does Tim Eagle agree that, in the future, committees must be given more time to fulfil their role in effectively scrutinising legislation?
I absolutely agree with Beatrice Wishart. I want to be careful, because my colleague Finlay Carson made a good point on the issue earlier. The bill is a really important piece of legislation and I hope that the whole Parliament can get behind it. However, as I said, the truncated period that the Scottish National Party Government has given the Parliament to consider the LCM has had an effect on parliamentary scrutiny. Regardless of whether we agree with the content of the bill, it is only right and fair that the processes for which this building was built are allowed the time that they need. It is a scar on what is a good LCM that, in this instance, that has not occurred.
21:24
The UK Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill proposes to make puppy and kitten smuggling more difficult by banning the import of puppies and kittens under six months, and it seeks to improve animal welfare by banning the import of cats and dogs that have been mutilated or that are heavily pregnant.
It will also close loopholes and make it more difficult for illegal traders who pose as pet owners travelling with their animals to import animals. We have all heard stories of people being duped into buying pets that have been illegally imported. Those animals are seldom in good health, have not been inoculated and have often been removed from their mothers when they were too young. When a breed is sought after, those animals can be really expensive to buy, making it a lucrative trade for criminals. Sadly, there is even more cost for buyers and more vet fees for sick animals. In the worst-case scenario, those pets might die because their illness cannot be treated.
The Cats Protection briefing told us that 4 per cent of all cats that were purchased in a one-year period were bought from abroad, which possibly reflects the increase in demand for specific breeds. Although 4 per cent does not seem very much, it equates to 65,000 cats.
In this Parliament, members’ bills are looking at dog sales and dog theft, indicating that the trade in dogs is problematic and attractive to criminals. All those bills are worthy, but, if we are being honest, the issue needs a more comprehensive approach than that piecemeal one. The Government should consider consolidating legislation to ensure that the law can deal with the illegal trade of pets. However, the UK bill will make it more difficult to illegally import animals and make the trade less lucrative, which is a positive outcome. That will help to improve animal welfare and protect buyers from purchasing animals that have not been bred properly and might have been subject to cruelty and neglect.
Although the LCM is to be welcomed, there are concerns about the process surrounding it and the lack of time that we have had to deal with it, which has meant that the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee was not able to scrutinise the legislation. The Scottish Government, rather than providing an explanation of why that was or offering reassurance that it would ensure that it did not happen again, has become defensive and dismissive. Doubling down on that tonight is really not helpful.
I refute the fact that the Government has become defensive. I say to the member that what we are doing is laying out the facts as they happened for us as well as for the committee.
I do not believe that the facts that have been laid out explain why the LCM came so late to our committee. If we are to carry out our role as parliamentarians, we must scrutinise all legislation, no matter how well meaning. We need to find a better way of processing this type of legislation, to allow the Parliament to carry out that role properly. I hope that the Scottish Government will now take on board the committee’s concerns and take steps to deal with the matter, to ensure that it never happens again.
That does not alter the fact that the legislation provides the opportunity to improve animal welfare and discourage the illegal trade in animals. I therefore urge the Parliament to support it.
21:27
Presiding Officer, I declare an interest as convener of the cross-party group on animal welfare and thank you for allowing me this short contribution.
I speak in support of the LCM, which flows from a UK private member’s bill setting out, inter alia, to crack down on the illegal puppy trade. Serious organised crime is often at the root of that cruel trade of smuggling animals from disreputable sources, including puppy factory farms, because, as well as misery for the animal, there are big bucks to be made—thousands of pounds for a puppy. In passing, I also welcome the extension of the legislation to kittens.
The UK private member’s bill echoes my attempts, in my recent Welfare of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2025, to at least put a dent in this dreadful trafficking. The UK bill also sets out, as some have said, to end the mutilation of these companion animals by cropping ears and docking tails, which is done—and painfully at that—to fit in with fashion. I am sure that we all find those actions abhorrent.
I hope that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will now take the opportunity to accelerate the establishment of a UK-wide microchipping database of dogs—an issue that I have long pursued—which would provide traceability and be another significant component in ending this miserable trade.
I again thank the Presiding Officer and urge members to support the LCM.
21:29
Improving the lives of Scotland’s animals is something that I am strongly committed to, and I have been pleased that, over the past few years, this Government has been able to deliver or support many groundbreaking and innovative improvements in that area.
As for the timings, regardless of the speeches that were made by Tim Eagle and Rhoda Grant, the Scottish Government has not missed a single deadline but was subjected to delays in the UK Government’s process.
Many of us have been appalled by the conditions in which too many dogs, cats and ferrets have been brought into the country by unscrupulous actors. The health and welfare of those animals is often shockingly poor. They are usually purchased by well-intentioned donors who then find themselves caring for sick animals and saddled with high vet bills or, worse, incurably ill pets who have to be euthanised, causing much distress. As the Parliament knows, I have been just as susceptible to the entreaty of a family who fell in love with an animal that came from a suspect background, and I know all too well the upset that arose when that pet had to be put down.
These issues have been a concern for welfare groups and the Government for some time. However, it has always been clear that GB-wide action was needed to avoid the backdoor entry of sick and mutilated animals into the country. The Government had indicated support for the bill on the two previous occasions that it was proposed in the UK Parliament, and we were extremely disappointed that it failed due to upheaval in the UK Government at that time. We are therefore pleased that the bill has been introduced again and we strongly urge members to support it and to allow a UK-wide approach to tackling this horrendous trade, which perpetuates an industry of poor-welfare companion animals.
Legislative consent processes such as this show what we can achieve when Parliaments and Governments work together on a cause of common concern and interest for, and to the benefit of, Scotland’s people, communities and, in this case, animals. I reiterate that the bill respects devolved competence. However, if we were in an independent country, we would not need this LCM.
I urge members to back the motion and grant legislative consent to the relevant clauses in the bill.
That concludes the debate on the legislative consent motion for the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill, which is UK legislation.