In response to my recent parliamentary question, in which I highlighted the criminality associated with e-bike use, the minister stated:

“Police Scotland is keeping its approach to the illegal use of e-bikes and e-scooters under review.”—[Official Report, 17 September 2025; c 18.]

That does not help the victims of crime; it brings no confidence to communities that are plagued by these thieves; and neither does it say that we are serious about cracking down on the criminals or the antisocial behaviour associated with the use of e-bikes. I am respectful of the answer that the minister has just provided to Mr Doris, but will the Scottish Government finally provide the resources, guidance and training that Police Scotland needs to allow it to crack down on this sort of crime?

Thank you. Minister, as you heard in the declarations of interest, there are a number of issues in relation to the period of time when you are allowed to sit as a councillor and as an MSP. It is recommended that salaries be given up. There are different mechanisms for doing that with regard to providing transparency. As I said, my salary was taken at source. In Ms Roddick’s case, it was her decision to transfer her salary. How would you manage such situations? I am aware that there were councillors who took their councillor salary as well as their MSP salary while they held dual mandates. Do you want to comment on that?

I know.

I am thinking about the other end of things with His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, when we have to complete our self-assessment tax returns, which are complicated. I assume that we will figure out a way to make it clear how we are to reflect all of that when we declare our various—

Apologies, Emma.

I will comment briefly on the back of Mr Mountain’s questions about when councillors have additional responsibilities. We should be mindful of that, because a leader’s allowance on top of a councillor’s allowance, certainly in the City of Edinburgh Council, can be a substantial remuneration. How we manage that should certainly be on our radar going forward.

Yes, that is agreeable. As I said, I was fortunate that the City of Edinburgh Council had a mechanism that allowed me to nominate two charities to send the money to. This might not be a matter for this committee, but how does the pensions element work? How are those concerns squared off?

No, we would not.

I was in a similar position in that, until May 2022, I was a councillor in the City of Edinburgh Council, for the Pentland Hills ward. I was fortunate that the council had a mechanism to allow my salary to go directly to local charities so that it never came to my bank account.

As a dog owner, I am pleased to close the debate for the Conservatives. Alfie makes my life complete. Since we brought him home in February three years ago, I have become a bit of a convert. However, I am gutted that, as yet, he has only been second in the Holyrood dog of the year competition—my partner Alasdair nearly sent him back home.

The theft of a dog is one of the most traumatic things that can happen to an owner. However, the law currently considers it in the same way as it would the theft of an inanimate object, which, given what we have heard today, is not fair.

Maurice Golden’s bill seeks to take into account the welfare impact of a dog theft on both the owner and the dog, to act as a deterrent by introducing much harsher penalties for those who are found guilty of an offence, and to enable more accurate data recording to take place to help to identify areas for further interventions. As we have heard, the bill also seeks to bring Scotland into line with England and Northern Ireland, where the UK Pet Abduction Act 2024 provides for the emotional impact on owners to be considered as part of sentencing. In our general election manifesto, we committed to better protecting dogs against theft, and we highlighted how much we are committed to animal welfare.

Maurice Golden spoke about how interested he is in the principles of justice and about how losing a dog to theft compounds the sense of trauma. It was good to hear from the convener of the lead committee for consideration of the bill that the stage 1 report was balanced, rigorous and fair, and that there was unanimous support for its recommendations. We also heard how open Maurice Golden is to working with everyone to refine the bill further at stage 2.

It was disappointing to hear that the Scottish Government has offered only conditional support for the bill, in that it wants to remove the provisions on victim statements and the requirement for the Government to publish an annual report on the operation of the legislation. That was related to resource issues. However, the Government is committed to delivering a reporting component in whatever way that might be possible.

We also heard about the significance of providing for an aggravation in relation to the theft of an assistance dog, given the impact on the lives of people who rely on assistance dogs.

It was good to hear from the convener of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee that dogs are more than property and how important it is to have a stand-alone offence of dog theft.

I turn to Jamie Halcro Johnston’s comments. I am delighted to hear that Buster was rehomed after his award-winning appearance at Holyrood dog of the year. He also spoke about something that is not often mentioned in Parliament, which is how often abducted dogs can go on to face really horrific cruelty.

Rhoda Grant wants the Government to provide a more comprehensive piece of legislation, and Mark Ruskell spoke about how inadequate the current legal framework is.

I was not quite sure what was coming next from Mr Leonard. I thought that we were going to be in floods of tears as he was building up to his comments about the unconditional love that has come to him in his later life, now that he knows about the benefits of dog ownership and the importance of compassion and decency. I was getting my tissues out over here.

We have had some great stories, including the one about Beetle and Ruby. The social media content and news of the campaign to find those two Border terriers made it up to Edinburgh, so I am very aware of that.

We know that the bill has overwhelming support from the public and from all the organisations concerned, and it has been great to hear cross-party support from across the chamber this afternoon. I am delighted. We need to accept that the current law fails to consider the emotional value that a dog brings, and that we need to support owners and deter thieves. My colleague Maurice Golden’s bill addresses those issues by introducing a statutory offence.

Scottish Conservatives will be delighted to support the bill as it moves forward from stage 1.