Chamber and committees

Questions and answers

Parliamentary questions can be asked by any MSP to the Scottish Government or the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. The questions provide a means for MSPs to get factual and statistical information.

Written questions must be answered within 10 working days (20 working days during recess)
Other questions such as Topical, Portfolio, General and First Minister's Question Times are taken in the Chamber

Urgent Questions aren't included in the Question and Answers search. There is a SPICe fact sheet listing Urgent and emergency questions.

Find out more about parliamentary questions

Filter your results Hide all filters

Displaying 1417 questions Show Answers

Order by |

Question reference: S6W-27558

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 May 2024
Current Status: Answer expected on 31 May 2024

To ask the Scottish Government, further to the answer to question S6W-22282 by Lorna Slater on 14 November 2023, whether it will provide an update on which local authorities have contracts in place to comply with the delayed ban on biodegradable municipal waste to landfill.

Question reference: S6O-03453

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 May 2024
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 22 May 2024

To ask the Scottish Government what elements it has identified that led to it not meeting its household recycling targets in 2013 and 2020.

Question reference: S6W-26629

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 10 April 2024
Current Status: Answered by Mairi McAllan on 25 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the concerns raised by stakeholders in the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee evidence session on 16 January 2024 regarding the effectiveness of environmental governance, and to the recommendation made by the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland proposing the establishment of a specialist committee or working group to revisit the question of an environmental court or tribunal.

The Scottish Government consulted on its Report into the Effectiveness of Environmental Governance last year. The report outlines the Scottish Government’s position on maintaining the balance of parliamentary, administrative and judicial roles in decision making on environmental matters. However, the Scottish Government will continue to engage with stakeholders – including those who provided evidence to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee – on environmental governance and environmental justice.

Question reference: S6W-26527

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2024
Current Status: Answered by Maree Todd on 24 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government, further to the answer to question S6W-26076 by Maree Todd on 22 March 2024, whether it will confirm if the data provided on waiting times includes those referred to child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) for both mental health issues and neurodevelopmental issues.

As set out in the most recent Public Health Scotland (PHS) Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) waiting times quarterly publication, CAMHS is classified as multi-disciplinary teams that provide treatment and interventions for children and young people experiencing mental health problems.

Where they are awaiting an assessment for a neurodevelopmental condition such as ASD or ADHD, they may not be considered for CAMHS because they do not meet the National Referral Criteria described in the CAMHS national service specification standards. Broadly these state that if a child is presenting with mental health problems that are causing significant impact on their day-to-day lives and other approaches are not appropriate. However in some individual cases, it may be the case that patients with neurodevelopmental conditions are still reported under CAMHS as long as they fit the specification criteria.

Question reference: S6W-26630

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 02 April 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jim Fairlie on 19 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether carbon impact is a material consideration when selecting contractors to carry out restoration work funded through Peatland ACTION.

All restoration work funded through Peatland ACTION is subject to Sustainable Procurement Duty outlined in Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 . Procurement Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 (legislation.gov.uk)

Operational decisions on procuring contractors to carry out restoration work are made by respective Peatland ACTION delivery partners.

For further information on their selection criteria please contact NatureScot, Cairngorms National Park Authority, Forestry and Land Scotland, Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority or Scottish Water.

Question reference: S6W-26632

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 02 April 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jim Fairlie on 19 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government what vetting process is used when appointing delivery partners for Peatland ACTION.

All Peatland ACTION delivery partners are subject to relevant Scottish Contracts Legislation.

NatureScot managed Peatland ACTION funding on an annual basis until FY 2021-2022. In order to increase our restoration rates, the Scottish Government made the decision to directly fund selected delivery partners given their proven delivery of restoration work through the existing Peatland ACTION funding model.

This was intended to empower these delivery partners to meet the Scottish Government’s programme targets within their own systems of accountability and management, directing funding streams to the most efficient delivery channels to maximise restoration rates.

Question reference: S6W-26631

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 02 April 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jim Fairlie on 19 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide a list of (a) public, (b) private and (c) third sector delivery partners appointed for Peatland ACTION, including their appointment date.

The Peatland ACTION direct delivery partners are: Cairngorms National Park Authority, Forestry and Land Scotland, Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority, NatureScot and Scottish Water.

NatureScot managed Peatland ACTION on an annual basis until 2021 when funding was then allocated to the other Delivery Partners direct from Scottish Government.

For information on any sub-contracted delivery partners please contact the aforementioned Peatland ACTION Delivery Partners.

Question reference: S6W-26556

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 28 March 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jim Fairlie on 19 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the compulsory microchipping of pet cats.

The Scottish Government’s Code of Practice for the Welfare of Cats recommends that all cat owners should consider neutering and microchipping their pets as the best way of being reunited with their rightful owners, should they be separated.

The Scottish Animal Welfare Commission’s (SAWC) Responsible Cat Ownership Working Group is currently considering responsible cat ownership including microchipping and we will carefully consider the SAWC’s report and its recommendations once published before taking further action.

Question reference: S6W-26628

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 02 April 2024
Current Status: Answered by Siobhian Brown on 18 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the geographic coverage of police officers trained to handle dangerous dogs for the purposes of enforcing rules on XL Bully dogs.

As noted in my response to S6W-25097 on 16 February 2024, it is a matter for Police Scotland to consider the enforcement of the new safeguards in relation to XL Bully dogs and any operational issues that arise.

Every incident presented to Police Scotland is risk assessed. Incidents relating to dogs, including XL Bully dogs, follow the same process whereby the incident is assessed and then graded accordingly. This determines the response which includes working with partner agencies such as Dog Wardens and local vets where appropriate. In addition to working with partners, there are several tactical options at Police Scotland’s disposal dependent on the risk presented. This can involve the deployment of normal response officers, and/or specialist assets such as Dog Handlers, Operational Support Units, Specially Trained Officers (Taser) and Armed Response.

The Scottish Government is committed to ongoing engagement with Police Scotland, and other relevant stakeholders, in order to consider any issues, concerns, or barriers to effective implementation of the new safeguards in relation to XL Bully dogs.

The Scottish Government chairs a regular implementation forum with Police Scotland, local authorities and COSLA to collectively consider any operational/enforcement issues that arise.

All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers .

Question reference: S6W-26627

Asked by: Maurice Golden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 02 April 2024
Current Status: Answered by Siobhian Brown on 18 April 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether a veterinary surgery is regarded as a public place for the purposes of the rules regarding XL Bully dogs, and, if so, what allowances have been made to allow muzzles to be removed for the purposes of examination by a vet.

Section 10 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 defines “public place” as any street, road or other place (whether or not enclosed) to which the public have, or are permitted to have access, whether for payment or otherwise and includes the common parts of a building containing two or more separate dwellings. Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (legislation.gov.uk) .

A veterinary waiting room is likely to be considered a public place for the purposes of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as the public are permitted access. Under the conditions of the exemption, dogs must be on a lead and muzzle when in public.

A veterinary consultation room, where access is limited to veterinary staff from the practice and members of the dog’s household, is likely to be considered a private space for the purposes of the Dangerous Dogs Act. In this instance, if the dog is kept securely in the consultation room and the veterinary staff feel comfortable to do so, the muzzle may be removed.

There will be a need for business owners, including veterinary surgeries, to ensure they carefully consider the legal requirements that have been introduced in relation to XL Bully dogs.

In addition, under section 3 of the Dangerous dogs Act 1991, if any dog is dangerously out of control in any place, including all private property, the owner, or person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of a summary offence.