 I want to update the Parliament on the Scottish Government's work to improve animal welfare. This government is absolutely committed to the highest possible standards of welfare for all of our animals, whether they are domesticated, farmed or wild. Since becoming minister with responsibility for animal health and welfare, I have met a range of key organisations and individuals, and I am really heartened and impressed by their commitment to this. On a personal level, that is an area that I care passionately about. That is why we invest £20 million annually in supporting animal health and welfare and employ a highly skilled and qualified workforce led by Scotland's chief veterinary officer. Our work is supported by expert independent advice on farmed animals through the UK Farm Animal Welfare Committee. We recognise the need for similar independent, impartial expert advice on issues relating to domestic and wild animal welfare. That is why we committed, in this programme for government, to establish a Scottish Animal Welfare Commission. Work is now under way to establish this commission. It is necessary that secondary legislation be developed to describe the precise remit and function of the new body. While that work is on-going, we will soon begin a process to recruit members to an interim commission, given the need and importance of that expert advice. We will shortly launch a consultation on a bill to amend our overarching legislation for animals under human control, the Animal Health and Welfare Scotland Act 2006. Our proposals for amendment will include increasing the maximum available penalties for the most serious animal cruelty offences, including offences against police and other service animals, known as fins law, which quite rightly attract public concern. I know that that is a particular issue that Liam Kerr has raised. That would allow for imprisonment of up to five years, rather than the maximum 12 months currently available. We will also create fixed penalty notices for lesser offences in future secondary legislation, freeing local authority inspectors time to focus on the most serious cases. We will consult on permitting inspection bodies to rehome or sell on animals that they have taken into their possession to protect their welfare, much more quickly and efficiently than they are able to at present. That would allow them to make best use of their resources and avoid animals being held in limbo, waiting for the outcome of court cases, which can often last for many months. I know that that is a very significant problem for local authorities and the Scottish SPCA, discouraging them using their power to take animals into their possession. That was one of the key new features of the 2006 act, and it is crucial that it is able to use that power effectively. While 86 per cent of abattoirs already deploy CCTV in some form to record the treatment of live animals and, in excess of 99 per cent of all animals slaughtered in 2016-17, covered by some configuration of CCTV, we wanted to explore the potential to make that mandatory. I am today publishing the responses to our consultation, which show that 94.9 per cent of respondents support moving to mandatory CCTV recording and over 90 per cent support the retention of CCTV images for 90 days with unrestricted access to be given to properly authorised officers. Those majorities were supported by abattoir operators, vets and the livestock industry. I can confirm that this year we will bring forward legislation to require that CCTV record all areas of slaughterhouses where live animals are present to aid those in forcing welfare legislation. In 2017, research that we commissioned indicated how we could alert potential buyers to the serious animal welfare and health problems associated with illegally sourced puppies. Last year we funded an innovative and heart-hitting public awareness campaign on social media, cinema screens and local radio to reach potential buyers that we know are difficult to reach by other media platforms and channels. We worked closely with all the main dog welfare charities in designing that campaign, which aimed to direct anyone thinking about buying a puppy to a website hosted by the Scottish SPCA for more detailed advice. That campaign attracted wide coverage in the run up to the Christmas holiday period. Further data on the success of that campaign will be made available after it has been collected, but we already know that it has been highly effective in increasing the number of visits to the Scottish SPCA website and the calls to their helpline by 130 per cent. Because of the success of the campaign so far, we are already making plans for a follow-up campaign later this year to reinforce the message even further and expect that to have a significant effect on changing the behaviour of buyers that drives the illegal trade. I really want to take this opportunity to thank Emma Harper MSP for her tireless work in campaigning on this issue. In November, we consulted on the registration and licensing of animal sanctuaries and re-homing agencies and we now intend to introduce legislation on that. That will introduce a modern licensing scheme to protect animals, which will also benefit those caring for them, some of whom may unfortunately take on too many animals to provide the right care. As with other animal-related activities, local authorities will be the licensing authority for premises in their areas. However, we recognise the additional burden that this places on them and, as such, we will seek to reduce that by establishing a role for independent inspection and accreditation from nationally recognised bodies. The public consultation on dog, cat and rabbit breeding closed at the end of November and I can tell Parliament that the responses will be published by the end of this month. As with the regulation of animal sanctuaries, we aim to reduce the burden on the regulators and find a role for independently accredited bodies in inspection and hope to introduce legislation later this year. We will also use the legislation to discourage the breeding of dogs, cats and rabbits with a predisposition for genetic conditions, leading to health complications and poor on-going welfare. I would also like to mention Jeremy Balfour's proposed member's bill on improving the licensing of pet shops. We are committed to giving effect to his proposals in this parliamentary term and I would like to thank him for his work on this to date, which we will build upon as we develop our detailed proposals. On fox hunting, we consulted on Lord Bonamy's recommendations last year and published the independent consultation analysis report before summer recess. Since then, I have made it a priority to not only make sure that I was familiar with all the aspects of this complex issue but also to speak to all the key stakeholders on all sides of this debate. Consecently, despite the ban on hunting introduced by the protection of Wild Mammals Scotland Act 2002, it is clear to me that there remains considerable public concern about fox hunting in Scotland and doubts about the operability of the legislation as it currently stands. I believe that Parliament should therefore be given the opportunity to consider the reform of the 2002 act in the interests of furthering the welfare of wild animals. I plan to bring forward a bill to deal with this and other wildlife and welfare issues during the course of the current Parliament. In addition to progressing the majority of Lord Bonamy's recommendations, the bill will, as is already the case in England and Wales, seek to limit the number of dogs that can be deployed against wild mammals to two. It is important that we do not undermine the need for legitimate pest control, particularly in upland areas, so I intend to explore the possibility of a new licensing scheme that could enable the use of more than two dogs where it is deemed necessary. The bill will also contain provision to discourage the establishment in Scotland of the practice known as trail hunting, as that poses significant risks for wild mammals. The issue here is that, even with the best of intentions, there appears to be too high a risk that hounds following a trail will be diverted on the scent of a live fox and will pursue and possibly kill that animal. We will, of course, consult on the draft bill in due course. I am aware that there are many across this chamber who take a keen interest in this and who have campaigned strongly on this and have raised it a number of times in this chamber. Colin Smyth, Christine Grahame and, of course, Alison Johnstone, who I know is working on a member's bill in relation to fox hunting, we stand ready to co-operate and work constructively on the important issue. In the meantime, for those recommendations from the Bonomy review, which do not require primary legislation, members will wish to be aware that we intend to press forward with the code of practice on hunting and the hunt monitoring arrangements that were proposed by Lord Bonomy and introduce those measures as soon as we can. We have already agreed a code of practice with stakeholders. It is important that we are able to assure the public that we are doing everything that we can to ensure the highest standards of animal welfare and adherence to the law. There is quite rightly always strong cross-party interest and public concern about animal welfare matters. I want to reassure the chamber that I take this aspect of my portfolio interests seriously, the issues that I care deeply about, and I am determined that we continue to not only maintain but improve animal welfare standards. I have set out this Government's commitment to a range of measures, including to update existing legislation and to introduce new legislation where it is needed. That will ensure that we provide strong foundations and clear and serious powers and responsibilities to all who breed, keep and care for animals. I look forward to engaging with members and parties across the chamber and listening to different perspectives to help to shame and frame legislative proposals that command confidence and achieve consensus where it can be found. We have a strong track record in Scotland of caring for animals that we keep in all circumstances and for a wild fauna too. However, where there is more to do to challenge and change attitudes and behaviour, we must do so. Most people respect and value animals in their homes, in their businesses and in the wild. I want to do all that I can with your support to ensure that the expectations on people are clear and we are necessary and forcible. My aim is for everyone to uphold the highest possible standards of welfare for all animals. We move now to questions. I encourage those who wish to ask a question and who have not already done so to press their request to speak buttons, and I call Maurice Golden. I thank the minister for early sight of the statement. The Scottish Conservatives are committed to the highest standards of animal welfare, and I welcome the substantive points that are made in the statement. We are committed to protecting animals and are clear that those who abuse and inflict cruelty on animals should be punished in accordance with the law. As the minister has recognised in her statement, Scottish Conservatives at MSPs have worked tirelessly to promote animal welfare, such as the introduction of Finslaw, increasing sentences for the worst forms of animal cruelty to five years, improving licensing of pet shops and the compulsory use of CCTV in abattoirs. We are pleased that the Scottish Government has agreed to implement the Scottish Conservative proposals and will work with the Government to ensure that they are delivered. We will continue to campaign in areas that we wish the Scottish Government to go further on, such as an effective ban on the use of electric shock callers for dogs. Will the minister commit to producing an implementation plan for the proposals outlined in her statement by Easter recess so that our animals receive the protection that they deserve as soon as possible? I thank Maurice Golden for his comments. I would be keen to work with him as well as work with other parties across the chamber, because I see those issues as animal welfare. I do not see them as being about party politics, so I am keen to work with him and the member as well as other members across the chamber in achieving that. Obviously, there are a number of issues that I outlined today, which a lot of that we would be hoping to implement this year. I do not know whether there are specific proposals in that that the member would like to see in any sort of implementation plan. Obviously, in terms of legislation and our introduction of legislation, a lot of that is heavily dependent on the outcome of Brexit. As many people in this chamber will know, particularly if they sit on the environment and the rural committees, those two areas in particular are very heavily affected by Brexit legislation, so we have to deal with that. That is why I cannot give definitive timescales on a lot of that, but I hope that we would be able to introduce it this year. I would be more than happy to arrange a meeting with the member where we could discuss that in more detail. Colin Smyth, to be followed by Mark Ruskell. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you to Mary Gougeon for advance sight of her statement. I also refer members to the voluntary part of my register of interests as a member of the league against cruel sports. There is much within Mary Gougeon's statement that Labour warmly welcomes from pressing ahead with tougher sentences for animal cruelty offences to proper regulation of pet shops animal sanctuaries and rehoming agencies. On the specific issue, however, of fox hunting, it is clear that there are loopholes in the existing legislation, and hunts have gone out of their way to ride roughshod over the law both in spirit and in letter. The measures to progress that the Lord Barnaby recommendations to prevent trailhunting and being established and to limit the number of dogs to two that can be deployed against wild animals are therefore a welcome step forward. Presiding Officer, you cannot license cruelty, so I am concerned that any proposal to introduce a licensing scheme that would enable more than two dogs to be used in hunting and a lack of proposals around the use of mounted hunts. Does the minister agree that three years after the Barnaby review was announced, it is time for the Government to get on with consigning the barbaric practice of fox hunting to the history books once and for all by bringing forward legislation that ensures that 2018 will be the last box-and-day hunt that we ever see? I thank the member for his question. As I just outlined in the previous question, in terms of timescales, I realise how important an issue this is. That is why I specifically took the time to carefully consider this, to make sure that we get the proposals right when they are introduced. I would aim to do that with any of those pieces of legislation. They are all vitally important, and I want us to be able to do that as soon as is practically possible. Given where we are with Brexit, I cannot give a definitive timescale on that yet, but this is a priority for me, and it is something that I want to see done. The member mentioned mounted hunts in particular. This is not an issue about whether someone taking part in hunting activity is on a horse or not, because we are concerned with the welfare of the hunted species. In any event, a ban on the use of horses during hunts is likely to raise issues with European convention on human rights. I am aware that the member also raised concerns about potential loopholes. Licensing is inferring that licensing could potentially be a loophole in that. I want to categorically assure everyone in this chamber today that the reason that we have come forward with the proposals as they are at the moment is that we are specifically trying to tackle any potential loopholes that are perceived to be in the legislation at the moment. When it comes to the introduction of the two-dog limit, we have seen how that has been implemented in England and Wales. We have seen what has happened as a result of that, with the growth of trail hunting too. That is why we are proposing the actions that I mentioned in my statement today. We want to close any potential loopholes that are there. Licensing is something that will potentially be considered where there is a legitimate pest control. Again, that is at the very early stages. We do not know what that scheme might look like, but I know that there are specific issues, particularly in the uplands of Scotland. I want to emphasise that that is about closing loopholes and not about creating any new ones. Mark Ruskell will be followed by Mike Rumbles. I declare an interest as an honorary member of the British Veterinary Association. There is much to welcome in this statement. It shows that the Government has learned from the debacle over tail docking. It is clear that the Government is listening to the Greens and other members in this Parliament in bringing forward primary legislation. However, there are gaps in this statement, particularly in the licensing and performance animals and the poor conditions that we see in the horse racing and greyhound racing industries, the need to update farm animal welfare codes and the need for an urgent new definition of animal sentience. Are those issues that the Government is open to dealing with as part of what could be a landmark piece of primary legislation if we get it right? I give that assurance to Mark Ruskell. Given the scale of some of the issues that I have had to look at since assuming this portfolio, I hope that he can appreciate and understand, as other members in the chamber. I hope that there have been an incredible number of issues to try to tackle and deal with. I have wanted to take the time to make sure that I do that as well as I possibly can and to properly inform myself of all those issues, because I think that that is vitally important. I have said a number of times in this chamber that I am more than happy to work with anyone in this chamber on any of the proposals that we bring forward. Again, that is not about party politics, it is about doing the right thing and about improving animal welfare. Wherever those issues come up, I am more than happy to discuss that with Mr Ruskell and the other member across the chamber. Mike Rumbles will be followed by Rona Mackay. The Liberal Democrats specifically want to see a ban on the third-party sale of dogs and a ban on the sale of dogs under eight weeks of age. Will those measures be included in the forthcoming legislation? I thank Mark Ruskell for that question. I recently held a meeting with Vet Mark Abraham, who has been leading the campaign for banning third-party sales of puppies, which is also known as Lucy's law. I am aware that those proposals are currently being considered elsewhere in the UK, and it is an issue that I am looking at here, too. However, I want to emphasise to the chamber that my officials have recently contacted all local authorities in Scotland to consider how big an issue that is for us here, to see how many licences had been issued for sale of animals. We had two thirds of local authorities in Scotland respond, and none had reported having issued licences. I do not believe that that is as big an issue for us as what it may be across the rest of the UK, but I do not want Mr Rumbles or anybody else across the chamber to think that I am not actively considering it as an issue and something that we could take action on. I assure him that that is something that we are actively considering and could potentially look at. Rona Mackay to be followed by Finlay Carson. I really welcome the minister's announcement to bringing forward legislation on fox hunting, and I acknowledge the minister's point that any action on fox hunting should not undermine legitimate pest control. Can the minister expand a bit further on that? Thank you. This is just a point that I would want to emphasise again, as I heard back to my previous response to Colin Smyth, that this is not about the creation of a loophole but rather the possibility of a regulation that looks at a potential exemption. In tandem with the new code of practice and the hunt monitoring arrangements, we aim to ensure compliance and encourage transparency. It is important to know that licensing may prove to be an important protection to ensure that legitimate pest control is not inadvertently caught by legal restrictions. Again, we recognise that this is important for farmers, particularly in the upland areas of Scotland. That is something that we will potentially look at and consider, because there are particular circumstances there. However, licensing is not about creating a loophole. It is about tightening up the legislation that we have in Scotland and making sure that there are not any loopholes there. Finlay Carson, to be followed by Gail Ross. I welcome the minister's announcement to amend the current legislation, particularly to increase the maximum sentences available and permitting inspection bodies to rehome and sell on animals. Can the minister give us assurance that the establishment of a commission, whilst I recognise the need to get it right, will not in any way prolong the introduction of much-needed legislation? In particular, in the case of livestock worrying, will she look as a matter of urgency at how current legislative powers can be maximised to reduce the alarming rate in sheep worrying? I thank Finlay Carson for that question, because livestock worrying is an issue that I know is being looked at carefully by Emma Harper, who is looking at introducing a member's bill in relation to that, because it is such a vitally important issue. I would also say that it is something that the Government is looking to launch a survey on over the coming months as well. It is a vitally important issue. Any work that we do on that or any work that could be taken forward would not be affected by the establishment of the Animal Welfare Commission. I completely understand the need and urgency for it, and to be honest, we and the Scottish Government would be keen to have that established as soon as is feasibly possible. That is why we want to look at setting up an interim commission, because while we wait on the changes to the secondary legislation that is being made, it is vitally important that we have independent expert advice on hand when it comes to issues that relate to domestic and wild animals. I also emphasise that we seek advice from the Farm Animal Welfare Committee that operates across the UK, so we do not want to duplicate the advice that they can offer, and we would look to supplement that with whatever we create in Scotland. However, there is a need for that advice and the expert independent advice, and we are keen to establish that as soon as it is possible. I thank the minister for his very welcome statement. I note from the CCTV and Abattoirs report that the responses from veterinary and animal welfare groups see that as additional to vets being on site, but some Abattoirs find the regulation quite restrictive and that is due to get worse after Brexit, given that so many vets are EU nationals. Is there a possibility for the CCTV to be used to allow vets to remotely monitor proceedings instead of having to be physically present to enable more premises to stay open and therefore reduce the distances that animals have to travel? Ross, for that question, because it does highlight a very particular problem that we could well face if there is a problem with EU citizens and their rights to live and work in Scotland in light of Brexit. That issue is particularly acute when it comes to the vets who work in our Abattoirs because 98 per cent of them are EU citizens, so that is potentially a huge problem that we could face. The Scottish Government is taking as much action as we can. We welcome EU citizens to live and work here. In relation to the impact that the CCTV would have, I suppose that we would not want to see that as the fact that we want to take that to be seen as we do not need vets in Abattoirs or to replace that because we would want to see that in terms of improving animal welfare and supplementing having vets already on site. We would see it as a compliment to current physical monitoring and controls, but it is something that we will keep under review. Claudia Beamish, to be followed by Stuart McMillan. While the statement is welcome, can the minister tell the chamber what the Scottish Government intends to do about consulting on banning snaring and hair curls and banning trophy hunting, as well as already raised shock collars? Following on from the previous question, how will the Scottish Government ensure that there are more Abattoir facilities and assist CCTV installation in micro-Abattoirs? I think that there are quite a few questions within that one question. If I do miss any of them, I hope that Claudia Beamish would be happy to write to Claudia Beamish with more information or to arrange a meeting with her to discuss a lot of those issues in more detail. In relation to mountain hares, that is subject to the Gricemere management review, which is due to report in the spring. We will see the outcome of that over the coming few months. In relation to snaring, that is not something that I have actively looked at as part of the statement. Obviously, we have had a lot of issues to look at as part of this portfolio that I wanted to update the chamber on today, so that is not something that I have considered in the portfolio so far. However, there is a review into snaring every five years. That is required by section 11f of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Scottish natural heritage review, the most recent one, confirmed that the legislative changes made to snaring in 2011 have reduced the number of reported incidents of snaring-related offences, and that the administration procedure seems to be working satisfactorily. Again, if there are more issues, I would be more than happy to engage with the member on those. I welcome the commitment to consulting the animal health and welfare of Scotland Act 2006. However, will the minister consider proposals to open up the possibility of resuspectively considering new evidence irrespective of the length of time that has lapsed since the crime was committed, as was asked for in the ground telegraph justice for pets petition that was submitted in 2015? I thank Stuart McMillan for that question. Of course, that is something that I would be happy to consider and it is something that I would be willing to discuss with my officials and keep Mr McMillan informed. Peter Chapman, to be followed by Ruth Maguire. Presiding Officer, I remind members of my legislative interest as a farmer. I welcome the introduction of mandatory CCTV coverage in abattoirs. Many slaughterhouses have already some CCTV coverage, but is it the minister's expectation that that will need to be more extensive and cover more areas in the abattoir in the future? Given that we on these benches have supported mobile abattoirs for the islands, can the minister advise if the Government will provide any financial support for the installation of CCTV in micro and mobile abattoir? I would like to thank Peter Chapman for that question. As I mentioned in my statement, I mean that he is already right. If there was a voluntary, we were encouraging abattoirs voluntarily to install CCTV. 86 per cent of abattoirs currently have that installed. As I also said in the statement, 99 per cent of animals in 2016-17 were covered by some sort of CCTV, so it shows that we are almost there. When it comes to any sort of support that would be available, that is something that we are investigating at the moment, but it would be compulsory for all abattoirs to have CCTV coverage. In relation to mobile abattoirs as well, that is an issue that has been raised a number of times in this chamber when we have discussed live animal exploitation, for example, and the opportunities that could potentially exist there. There could well be opportunities there, and I think that that is something that could be explored. Ruth Maguire to be followed by Pauline McNeill. Minister for all her work on this and the statement, I particularly welcome the increased sentencing options available for those who abuse animals. The minister may have seen footage from an infamous boxing day hunt of a huntsman abusing his own horse. Would she agree with me that the authorities should be vigilant and that anyone who takes pleasure or sport from the torture of one animal is for the watching and that this abusive behaviour might not be confined to one species? The Scottish Government is grateful for the animal welfare work that is carried out by local authority and Scottish SPCA inspectors under the animal health and welfare Scotland Act 2006 and, of course, Police Scotland too. I would emphasise that all forms of animal abuse are wrong and, of course, I would encourage anyone who witnesses any sort of torture or animal abuse to report that to the relevant authorities. Pauline McNeill to be followed by Christine Grahame. I have been quite convinced that we should have a ban on electric shock collars for dogs and other animals and I welcome the minister's statement in that regard. However, I wonder if I could pass her further. At what level of priority does the minister intend to give the answer in the forthcoming Parliament? I thought that the answer that she gave to Maurice Golden was a little bit vague and I would like to press her a bit further on what level of priority she will give it. In relation to the timing of some of the pieces that I have mentioned in my statement today, as I mentioned in previous answers, Brexit is the overhanging issue here, which has an absolutely huge impact on the portfolio. That will, of course, affect any of the and affect the timing of the pieces of legislation that we plan to bring forward, but this is my job. Animal health and welfare is my portfolio, as I said in my statement to you. It is something that I care deeply and passionately about. I would, of course, want to see all the measures that I have talked about today implemented as soon as possible, but a lot of that depends on what happens over the next few months and how big an impact we are going to see in Scotland. As much to welcome in this statement, and I know the minister means what she says about animal welfare, however, on fox hunting and the reference to pest control and the use of more than two dogs, can the minister advise the chamber, if she considers the beclw hunt, to be one of the vestiges of a privileged class pursuing a cruel sport, or an example of a voluntary pest control organisation that may apply for pest control licence? I would just simply reiterate what I have talked about earlier in the chamber. Again, this is not about creating any potential loopholes. Again, I am willing to work with anybody across the chamber to make sure that, when those proposals come forward, that we get them right and we have a lot in Scotland that is strong and tightens up what we already have. I mean, we had a number of recommendations from the Bonomy Review, the vast majority of which we intend to implement, which would see the strengthening and tightening of the laws that we have at the moment. As I said in a previous question, we have seen what has happened in England and Wales in the measures that they have introduced there. That is why we plan to go further than the legislation that currently exists across the UK at the moment. Again, this is not about creating loopholes. Liam Kerr and Alison Johnstone have still wanted to ask a question. I am delighted to hear that the minister confirmed that Finne's law is progressing. Can she give me any firm indications of timescales? Is it absolutely vital that this gets on the statute book without delay? I thank the member for that question. I know that this is an issue that he has campaigned on and one that is very important to him. It is, of course, important to the Government. I am in a position to say that, in relation to Finne's law and the amendments that we would be making to the annual health and welfare act of 2006, we will be launching a consultation over the coming weeks. I imagine that that consultation will have been published by the end of this month. We will then aim to progress that from there. Again, in terms of definitive timescales, that is something that I cannot disclose at this current moment in time. Alison Johnstone Thank you. I welcome the minister's intent to improve the protection of Wild Mammals Act 2020. I look forward to working with her to deliver a real ban on fox hunting in Scotland. Will the minister confirm that she will consider the removal of the multiple exceptions to the offence, which provides opportunities for exploitation for those who continually and deliberately offend, as noted in the Bonomy review? Although I appreciate the comments that the minister has made about the Grouse management review, does the minister agree that the legislation could provide much needed protection for Scotland's hares, both mountain and brown? I think that we really have to wait and see what comes out of the Grouse management review before I can make any further comment on that. In terms of looking at the Bonomy recommendations, absolutely, we would be committed to, as I say, implementing the vast majority of the recommendations that were proposed by Lord Bonomy. I know that Alison Johnstone has done a lot of work in the preparation of her member's bill on fox hunting, and I fully intend to work closely with her and others across the chamber. Again, if we are going to do this piece of legislation, I want us to do it right and put proposals in place that will strengthen and improve animal welfare legislation in Scotland. Thank you very much to members and the minister that concludes our statement on improving animal welfare. We will move on to the next item of business on the life sciences in a few moments. We will give members and the minister a chance to change seats.