The Committee Clerk: John Blair, the Bill sponsor, gave the Committee an overview of his thinking to date on some of the evidence that the Committee has received. He focused primarily on the briefing from officials and the potential amendments that he is considering, as highlighted by the officials in their briefing.
Members raised their concerns around the issue of dog walking. DAERA officials said that it seemed to them that the issue was covered adequately. However, there are still concerns that have come in to the Committee's evidence. The Bill sponsor stated that his legal advice was not to include an exemption for dog walking specifically in the Bill. However, he said that he will consider doing anything that he can to allay concerns in that regard as the Committee proceeds with its deliberations. The emphasis is already on the person and not the dog for the Bill in general.
The Bill sponsor stated that it was clear to him that the evidence that the Committee has received shows a clear difference of opinion between those who support recreational hunting and those who do not. He is currently not minded to provide any loopholes, for example, for trail hunting.
The two-dog limit was raised and discussed again. The Bill sponsor confirmed that he would consider any amendments that were brought forward. Currently, no one has proposed any specific number of dogs for that limit to the Committee or the Bill sponsor, so the Committee will need to discuss that. No group has given a specific number of dogs.
There are still some concerns about the PSNI being the lead enforcement body and how evidence will be considered or addressed by the PSNI on whether a person is dog walking or hunting. There are also concerns from some members about the potential for vexatious claims, although the Bill sponsor said that those types of vexatious claims can apply to any type of illegal activity, not just hunting.
The issue of potential pest-control hunting and pest control was also discussed. It was said that, in some of the evidence that the Committee received, some of the hunters played down fox kills, as such, saying that they had hunted for many years and had never seen a fox killed. There was some concern about the potential for contradictory evidence, as we have seen that it is meant to be useful for pest control, so the Committee will have to look at that.
A member raised the question of whether there was any potential to narrow the opportunity in the Bill for vexatious complaints, so the Committee will also look at that.
Due to time constraints today, the Committee did not get into any specific clause considerations. That will commence next week.