Diolch, Llywydd. Paragraph 9 of the Schedule sets out the powers of inspection, search and seizure available to an inspector when exercising a power of entry. An inspector cannot seize a wild animal, but may, for example, examine it or take samples. But it's very unlikely that these powers will be needed. Inspectors are already working with the same powers in other legislation. They're not novel, and they mirror powers already in place in the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and the Wild Animals in Circuses Act 2019 in England, and the Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses (Scotland) Act 2018—both contain similar powers.

Paragraph 8 of the Schedule provides that inspectors may take onto the premises other persons and such equipment and materials as the inspector considers to be appropriate to assist in their duties. The other people could include specialists, for example, a zoological specialist to help identify animals, or a veterinary surgeon. A veterinary surgeon would be required to take a sample from an animal only if the sampling is considered to be a practice of veterinary surgery, as defined by the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966. There are exemptions, but taking a sample of blood, for example, for DNA testing to determine if an animal is of a species commonly domesticated in the British islands or not would have to be carried out by a veterinary surgeon.

Paragraph 10 of the Schedule provides that any person brought onto the premises by the inspector is able to exercise the inspector's powers under paragraph 9, provided they are under the inspector's supervision. A veterinary surgeon accompanying an inspector could, under supervision, take samples from an animal for identification purposes. So, it follows that the proposal to specify that only a suitably trained person or a veterinary surgeon may examine, measure, test or take a sample from an animal, and the associated regulation-making powers, are unnecessary and unjustified. So I ask Members to reject these amendments, which are entirely unnecessary. Diolch.