Labour MSP James Kelly begins the stage one debate on his member's bill, the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Repeal) (Scotland) Bill.

As its name suggests, it is seeking to repeal the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act which was passed in 2012.

Image source, Pa

The week ends with the first stage debate of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Repeal) (Scotland) Bill.

MSPs will hold their first vote on whether to repeal the controversial legislation.

All opposition parties want to scrap the legislation, which was passed with SNP votes alone in 2011 in a bid to crack down on sectarianism.

Labour's James Kelly has put forward the members' bill to have the act repealed, saying it is poorly written and unfairly targets football fans.

But ministers insist that repeal would "send entirely the wrong message".

Image source, PA

Holyrood's justice committee has endorsed the move, and it will now go to its first debate and vote in the chamber.

Should this pass - as is expected, given the opposition majority - the repeal bill will move on for further consideration at committee level before a final vote of all MSPs.

The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Ac twas passed in 2011by the then-majority Scottish government, in a bid to tackle sectarianism in the wake of that year's"shame game"Old Firm derby between Celtic and Rangers.

Roseanna Cunningham says the guidance will supplement the existing code of practice on the welfare of dogs.

It will support the work of frontline animal welfare organisations, she says.

The legislation in Wales has only led to one prosecution since it was brought in, she notes, stating it is clear there are broader issues.

Guidance on the purchase of illegally bred or imported puppies is forthcoming, the cabinet secretary confirms.

She concludes by arguing timely guidance will be an "effective, practical and immediate way" of responding to concerns surrounding the collars.

Environment Secretary Roseanna Cunningham says the formal consultation had come to no consensus on the way forward on electronic collars.

Ms Cunningham says the programme for government contained the announcement of tight control of the use of electronic collars.

The continuing concern about her original proposals led her to decide not to stick to her original plan to allow trainers to use the collars.

Image source, bbc

She says there are trainers that genuinely believe in the benefit of electronic collars.

Ms Cunningham says she has asked officials to prepare clear guidance reiterating that any physical punishment of dogs causing unnessary suffering is not acceptable in Scotland.

This includes the misuse of electronic collars, anti-bark collars and any device that squirts chemicals into a dog's face or another part of its anatomy, she says.

"The fight against electric shock collars has now been won in Scotland", says SNP MSP Ruth Maguire.

Both Scotland and Wales have concluded the collars should be banned and it is now time to turn attention to Westminster to ban their sale, she states.

Image source, bbc

Tory MSP Finlay Carson says a Defra study shows there are significant consequences of using electronic dog collars for the animals.

Mr Carson says the study also showed that positive reinforcement training works.

He says he does not believe that those that use electronic collars now don't love their dogs, in fact he says they love them as much as anyone.

However attidues have changed he says.

The Tory MSP calls for legislation to introduce a complete ban.

Green MSP Mark Ruskell says punishment when training leads to a response out of fear, which can cause other behavioural problems.

Punishment leads dogs to become less playful, he says, and less likely to learn novel training tasks.

He welcomes the guidance, saying it adds clarity.

Mr Ruskell urges the UK government to legislate to ban the sale of shock collars, arguing owners who use them will be more difficult to catch without it.

Image source, Getty Images

Initial draft guidance has already been published, external, with the ban to be introduced through guidance issued under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 in the coming months.

Draft guidance states that: "Causing unnecessary suffering is an offence under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006. This includes suffering caused by inappropriate training methods."

Once the guidance has been finalised, the courts will be able to take it into account when establishing liability in a prosecution.

Comments on the draft guidance are invited until Wednesday 14 February.

Image source, bbc

SNP MSP Ben Macpherson thanks Maurice Golden for bringing this debate and says it is great to join with colleagues to welcome the Scottish government's bold move to ban electronic dog collars

He says "This is an issue I have also been campaigning on recently."

The SNP MSP agrees with Mr Golden's general call for a ban, but could not support the wording in the motion as it states Wales have banned the sale of those collars, but only Westminster can ban the sale across the UK.

He also calls on the UK government to ban this sale.

Labour MSP Colin Smyth says the positive alternatives to shock collars are more humane and effective.

He points to evidence suggesting shock collars are counter effective.

"You cannot regulate cruelty", he says of the Scottish government's previous position before welcoming yesterday's ban announcement.

He urges the cabinet secretary to clarify whether the proposed guidance will be as effective as secondary legislation, as brought in by the Welsh government.

He pays tribute to a variety of animal charities, including One Kind, Blue Cross and the Kennel Club.