Chamber and committees

That was our understanding of the way in which the regime is functioning at the moment. One of the reasons for implementing the database is to make enforcement easier in cases in which someone is issued with a dog control notice in, say, Fife, but they then move to Lanarkshire. We think that the enforcement process will be easier for local authorities and, we hope, for Police Scotland.

Yes, it is their responsibility. They are the proper person to notify the new local authority that they have moved there and to give their new address.

Yes.

I would say that that was in the past year and a half.

We have had quite a lot of engagement with local authorities and other stakeholders. The committee might be aware that the Scottish Government leads a working group on dog control and dangerous dogs, which covers the other part of the legislation—the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. That group has lots of members, including COSLA, the Scottish Community Safety Network, a victims’ voice—we thought that it was important to have that—the National Dog Warden Association and Police Scotland.

I think that the convener asked about whether local authorities have raised issues and what we have done to work through those. I can think of a couple of things that came up.

There have been issues relating to the migration of data. The populations of local authority areas vary, so I guess that it makes sense that there is variation in that some give out very large numbers of DCNs and others give out quite tiny numbers of them. There was some concern about pressure on local authorities to migrate that data on to the database. We are working with them, as the Improvement Service is, to make sure that we are not putting undue pressure on them but, equally, to ensure that we get the data on there so that we can start to use it. We think that we have sufficient time in the roll-out plan to make sure that that happens in a timely fashion.

The other issue was costs to do with developing the database—the set-up costs and the running costs. The Scottish Government has funded the set-up costs, and it has agreed to fund the running of the database for the first two years. We are in on-going discussions with stakeholders about what might be called a fair funding model and how that will go. Further discussions are under way on that.

I ask Jim Wilson to give a bit of the flavour of the engagement that we have done with local authorities.

I respect the view of Alcohol Focus Scotland, but I am not sure that that level of data is necessary to help us to assess the effectiveness of minimum unit pricing. We have in place data gathering to enable monitoring and evaluation of minimum unit pricing. More generally, that information on alcohol sales is available across Scotland.

I take the member’s point. There are likely to be some commercial sensitivities in obtaining the information that he has described at a local level, but once I have looked into the issue further, I will be happy to write to him with more information.

Data on alcohol sales in Scotland is available through the Public Health Scotland annual publication, “Monitoring and Evaluating Scotland’s Alcohol Strategy”. That data from 2020 shows that the amount of alcohol that is sold per adult drinker in Scotland has fallen to its lowest level for the past 20 years.

The day-to-day administration of the alcohol licensing system in Scotland is the responsibility of the independent licensing boards. Operational decisions about specific requirements that fall on licensed premises, such as the data that should be ingathered to help to inform the development of each licensing board’s statement of licensing policies, is a matter for each individual licensing board to take a view on, based on the needs of its own locality.

A public consultation based on Esther Roberton’s recommendations from her independent review of legal services regulation was published on 1 October and will run until 24 December 2021. We have also published a summary consultation, which is designed to allow participants without detailed knowledge of the current framework of regulation to share their views on and priorities for legal services regulation reform. In parallel, we are undertaking a series of consultation focus groups to increase the opportunity for the public to respond to the consultation in part or in whole.

Details of the consultation have been shared on the Scottish Government’s Twitter page, and we continue to engage with stakeholder networks, such as Citizens Advice Scotland, Scottish Women’s Aid and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, to amplify and promote the consultation to ensure that we reach as wide an audience as possible.

The consultation is available on the Scottish Government website, if anyone is interested and wants to respond to it.

I agree. I think that a strong response from consumers and those with lived experience will be very important as ministers consider the reform of legal services regulation. I am clear that the future framework should place consumer interests at its heart.

I assure the member that the Scottish Government is actively encouraging consumers to participate in the consultation. We engaged early with the SLCC consumer panel to seek its advice on how to do that. I call on all consumers with an interest to participate in the consultation that I mentioned in my previous answer.

I would be very happy to meet the member to discuss the matter in more detail.

I am aware that Emma Harper’s Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) (Scotland) Act 2021 came into force at the weekend. I pay tribute to her and to all who were involved in making that important legislation a reality. The Scottish Government worked with Police Scotland and others to help arrange the commencement of the legislation.

More generally, Police Scotland is a valued member of the Scottish Government-led dog control and dangerous dogs working group. Work carried out by the group includes a review of the control of dogs joint protocol agreement between Police Scotland and local authorities, as well as the establishment of a national dog control database, which will assist enforcement of dog control measures.

I am pleased to confirm that officials have worked closely with stakeholders to assist with the development of guidance that has been prepared for private vets on what should happen if a live dog is seized by the police and presented to a private vet for examination. I should stress that we think that that is unlikely to be a frequent occurrence. The guidance has been discussed in detail with Police Scotland and with veterinary organisations, including the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and the British Veterinary Association, and with the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

The guidance is close to agreement and it will be published on the Scottish Government website by the end of November.