2. I echo the best wishes to King Charles and to the Duchess of Rothesay, and I wish them both a speedy recovery.

Confusion about a ban on XL bully dogs in Scotland has brought dangerous dogs back into the headlines. Today, the Scottish National Party Government will finally make a statement, and I hope that it takes action. As with so many issues, however, it is only when media pressure builds that SNP ministers respond. Too often, they act on headlines rather than on the evidence.

In the previous session of Parliament, I sat on the Public Audit and Post-legislative Scrutiny Committee when it produced its “Post-legislative Scrutiny: Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010” report. The cross-party committee called for a review of the law and for a focus on irresponsible owners and breeders. The Government accepted the committee’s findings, and committed in 2019 to a review. Nearly five years on, therefore, why are we still waiting?

There was, of course, something that happened between 2020 and the current time: a global pandemic, which undoubtedly resulted in the fact that other work had to be delayed. I think that most individuals would accept that.

On the XL bully dog safeguards that the United Kingdom Government has brought in, the UK Government made the announcement without a single word of consultation with the Scottish Government. I suspect that, if I had said to Anas Sarwar at that point that we would take immediate action, he would have demanded to know what consultation we had had. It was right that Siobhian Brown took time to consult with animal welfare stakeholders and those involved in animal rehoming centres.

The Scottish Government still absolutely believes that the correct approach is not to breed XL bully dogs, but we have to be able to respond to the fact that we have seen media reports of a number of people who have brought their XL bully dogs over the border to Scotland.

We have consulted, we have taken time to engage and we will bring forward safeguards. It should be said that that is not a ban. People will still, of course, be able to have their XL bully dogs if they meet the criteria of the regulations that are brought forward.

On the stricter regime that we have in Scotland with the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 and the various notices, I am pleased that we have a strict regime, which is not available elsewhere in the UK.

I know that the First Minister is not good on the detail, but a review of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 was in the programme for government in 2021, during Covid. Therefore, I am not sure that that excuse holds any water.

In 2022 alone, victims were treated in Scotland’s hospitals a reported 7,600 times for injuries that were inflicted by dogs. Those dogs were out of control and often mistreated, or poorly trained by their owners. Many of the injuries that people sustained disfigured them for life.

Kirsteen Hobson is a postwoman in Oban. In December, she was brutally attacked by a German shepherd dog, and she sustained serious injuries to her face, leg and arm. She needed specialist plastic surgery. She will be scarred for life emotionally and physically. Nothing that the Government is announcing today would have helped her.

Five years ago, the Government promised to take action against irresponsible owners and breeders, not just an individual breed. If the Government can act on XL bully dogs, what will it take for it to protect people such as Kirsteen and many others whom it has repeatedly promised to protect?

The First Minister:

My sympathy goes to Kirsteen for the injuries that she has suffered.

We did, of course, take action on the back of the work that was done in 2019. That is why we have a really important regime of dog control notices. That is the regime that I am talking about, and it does not exist in England and Wales. If Anas Sarwar had the detail in front of him, he would know that.

Anas Sarwar would also then know that more than 1,200 active dog control notices are currently in place in Scotland. We know that XL bully dog DCNs represent 2 per cent of the DCNs that are in force.

One dog attack is, of course, one too many. We have taken a whole range of actions to protect communities as well as we possibly can. Our dog control notice regime will undoubtedly help in that regard.

We will continue to work with Police Scotland, local authorities, the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and those with other relevant interests to keep communities safe from the very small minority—we should be clear that it is a very small minority—of irresponsible dog owners who have dangerous dogs.

Some

7,600 treatments in hospitals related to dog attacks in one single year. I do not think that the First Minister should play that down, because that will be of extreme concern to families throughout the country.

Humza Yousaf was, of course, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice when the Government promised to review the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010. Still nothing has happened. People such as Kirsteen Hobson should not have to be fearful when they go to work, and parents should not have to fear for their kids when they take them to the park. The Government has a responsibility to protect people, not just to respond to bad headlines. However, too often, sadly, that is what it does. We saw that with the infection scandal at the Queen Elizabeth university hospital, we saw it last week and we see it again today with the Post Office scandal, and now we see it with XL bully dogs.

The Government must commit to stronger powers for councils and the police, and it must make it clear that the responsibility for dogs lies with owners and breeders. Does the First Minister accept that we cannot wait until another 7,000 people are harmed before the Government fixes the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010?

The First Minister:

Anas Sarwar’s third question took no account at all of the response that I gave to his previous question. That is the problem. He says that we failed to act. If he had stopped reading his pre-prepared script, he would have heard me say that we brought in a dog control notice regime. That does not exist in England and Wales. The fact that we have that in place has meant that we have more than 1,200 active dog control notices in place as we speak.

We will continue to work with Police Scotland, local authorities, the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and other relevant stakeholders to keep our communities safe. On top of that, we have established an operational working group involving local authorities, Police Scotland, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and key stakeholders to progress the work. We have also commissioned a national dog control notice database to help enforcement agencies better monitor the control of dogs.

When it comes to having to respond to the actions of the UK Government, which is what we are having to do in this case, would it not be far better if we did not always have to respond to what the UK Government does, and instead had the full powers here in Scotland?