Chamber and committees

On that point, if we are doing anything further in relation to changes of this sort, I will endeavour to make sure that the committee is well aware of all the work that is going behind the scenes. I cannot promise that that will be done, but I will certainly endeavour to ensure that that happens.

In terms of how the process functions, from the Parliament’s point of view, if you have a code, you have to go through the entire process, so you do not have the flexibility and nimbleness to be able to respond quickly. As you can see, the code was set in 2009. It is now 2026 and a lot of changes have happened over the intervening period, which is why the guidance was developed in the first place. I take the point that you are making, but the guidance gives us more flexibility to get the kind of welfare changes that we want to see in place more quickly.

With regard to the consultation with those who are involved, I think that I made it quite clear in my opening statement that the proposal has been developed in full conjunction with the sector. The sector itself wants to be held to the highest standards of animal welfare. There is nothing being hidden here. There is nothing that is not being done to benefit the animals that we are trying to protect.

I take the point that you are making, but the point of what we propose is to ensure that we are nimble in our ability to put protections or guidance in place as quickly as we can.

I have gently asked that the administrative error does not happen again.

Simon Girling will be able to answer that question better than me, as he has had more contact with people in relation to the instrument.

As I said, neither the code nor the guidance is a legal requirement, so the position is exactly the same. Grant McLarty will correct me if I am wrong, but the position is exactly the same whether it is in guidance or a code. If there is a prosecution because somebody is not looking after the welfare of their animals, the decision about what to do will be for the court, whether it refers to a code or to guidance.

Again, I ask Simon Girling to comment on that.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer—I mean convener. It has been a while since I was here. Thank you for taking time to consider this instrument.

On 25 August, the Scottish Government published comprehensive new guidance on the welfare of equids, which is now available on the Scottish Government website. The guidance replaces the 2009 “Code of Practice for the Welfare of Equidae”, and revocation of the 2009 code is sought in order to avoid confusion and to ensure that owners of equids are following the most up-to-date advice and management practices. We published the new guidance because animal welfare knowledge, equid-friendly management practices and science have moved on considerably since 2009. Research has deepened our understanding of equid behaviour, mental wellbeing and what equids need in order to experience not just a life worth living but a genuinely good life.

The new guidance reflects the modern evidence base and ensures that owners and keepers can access clear, current advice that is aligned with best practice. Its development was a collaborative exercise between the Scottish Government and the Scottish equid sector, and it incorporates the latest expertise from leading veterinarians, allied professionals and equid specialists, as well as expertise that simply did not exist in its current form in 2009. The new guidance sets out core principles that are based on the evolutionary needs of equids, recognising that horses, donkeys and their hybrids require social bonds, freedom of movement, appropriate safe forage and the opportunity to express their natural behaviours. The guidance provides practical advice to all those responsible for equids, with the aim of ensuring that they experience a good life that is worth living at every stage.

The Government has introduced guidance instead of a replacement code because, as we have seen, the research base and expertise evolve and statutory guidance can adapt quickly when evidence, best practice and legal requirements that improve the welfare of equids change. What is considered to be good practice in the area of animal welfare is constantly changing, and it is important that the information issued and requirements made by the Government are kept up to date. I highlight to the committee that the replacement of a code of practice with statutory guidance has occurred previously in relation to meat chickens in 2019, laying hens and pullets in 2020 and pigs in 2023, so this is not a new approach.

The existing code was made under section 37 of the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, whereas the legal basis for the recently published guidance is section 38 of the same act. It is worth clarifying that, regardless of whether it is presented as a code or as guidance, the content of these documents is advisory in nature and neither a code nor a guidance document contains legal requirements. However, just like the code that it is intended to replace, the guidance provides recommendations for compliance with animal welfare laws, and it may prove useful to the courts in the context of criminal prosecutions. The guidance may be particularly relevant in the context of establishing whether liability arises under section 19 the 2006 act, in relation to the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to animals, or section 24, in relation to the offence of failing to take reasonable steps to

“ensure that the needs of an animal are met by the standard required by good practice”

That is a really important line.

Accordingly, the guidance may be used by courts in the same way as a court may choose to use a code of practice. The new guidance represents a significant step forward in supporting Scotland’s equid sector to meet both its legal obligations and higher aspirations for animal welfare, and I am very grateful to the sector for the key role that it played in the development of the guidance.

I appreciate that we have limited time, so I will close my remarks and take any questions that the committee might have.

The important thing to remember is that neither the guidance nor the code has legal effect. The legal effect comes when the court deals with a prosecution. The line that I highlighted to you in the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 concerning the offence of failing to take reasonable steps to

“ensure that the needs of an animal are met by the standard required by good practice”

is the relevant one, along with the wording in section 19 on the offence of causing unnecessary suffering to animals. Those are the bits that the courts will use to decide where they go with any prosecution that is put in front of them—it is up to the courts to decide.