The UK Forest Standard (UKFS) defines the requirements and guidelines on how to practice Sustainable Forest Management in the UK, and ensures the protection of water, soil and biodiversity. It also promotes the benefit of low-impact harvesting to protect sensitive sites. Approval for a felling permission from Scottish Forestry is subject to planned operations being UKFS compliant on the specific site.

Those applying for a felling permission can decide which UKFS compliant harvesting option they use. They may choose to use horse logging, where it supports their management objectives, and contributes to the delivery of the approved grant scheme option. There is no financial support offered for different harvesting methods in the grant scheme. Scottish Government have not specifically assessed the benefits of an expansion in use of horse logging.

The Forestry Grant Scheme has committed £69.8 million of support, in the period 2021-22 to 2024-25, for native woodland creation and native woodland management. £64.6 million of this funding has been provided to create new native woodland, with £5.2 million provided for the management of native woodland. The annual breakdown of this funding is show in the following table.

The Forestry Grant Scheme has committed the following sums, in each complete financial year since 2021-22, for the natural regeneration of native woodlands and invasive species control.

The Scottish Statutory Instrument for the commencement for the removal of the requirement for local authorities to gain Ministerial consent before transferring funds to HRA came into force 12 January 2026.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2025/408/made

It will be for individual councils to set their policy on the transfer and use of contributions from the General Fund to the Housing Revenue Account.

The Chief Finance Officer, as the proper (section 95) officer with responsibility for managing the financial affairs of the authority, must be satisfied that the transfer and use of contributions from the General Fund to the Housing Revenue Account is prudent, affordable and sustainable.

The criteria used in the evidence report gate check process for Local Development Plans are set out in relevant legislation and Scottish Government guidance. These include the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, the Town and Country Planning (Development Planning) (Scotland) Regulations 2023, National Planning Framework 4 (February 2023), and the Scottish Government’s Local Development Planning Guidance (May 2023).

Each gate check submission is different and the reporter’s role is to consider the evidence before them. As a result, whilst each reporter undertakes the gate check assessment using the same criteria, some differences in the content of decision reports/letters are to be expected.

In relation to assessing proposed housing land targets, the guidance advises that the appointed reporter is expected to consider whether there is sufficient information to establish the indicative Local Housing Land Requirement (LHLR), and whether the evidence provided is presented in a transparent and understandable way.

Pages 62–64 of the LDP guidance outline the types of evidence that planning authorities may wish to present when proposing an indicative LHLR. This can include:

• Minimum All-Tenure Housing Land Requirements (MATHLR) set out in National Planning Framework 4;
• Any more recent Housing Needs and Demand Assessment (HNDA);
• The Local Housing Strategy;
• Evidence on ineffective stock or windfall assumptions; and
• Any other up-to-date evidence or policy considerations.

The reporter considers the sufficiency and clarity of the methodology and figures used, as well as any stakeholder comments, rather than applying any fixed weighting to individual criteria. Where the evidence is not sufficient or clearly explained, the return of the evidence report to the authority allows issues to be addressed before decisions are taken on housing land allocation in the proposed plan.

The Scottish Government has received a range of feedback from planning authorities on the clarity and consistency of the evidence report gate check process for Local Development Plans. Planning authorities have raised concerns which have been shared directly with Planning Officials and me, about perceived contradictions and a lack of clarity in the various sources of guidance. Planning authorities are unclear what constitutes sufficient evidence which causes uncertainty and makes evidence report preparation more resource intensive and time-consuming than expected. These issues were highlighted both through ongoing engagement with Heads of Planning Scotland (HOPS) and in discussions with individual councils.

I took part in the gate check summit on 8 December, during which planning authorities reiterated these concerns and noted that aspects of guidance produced by PARD and the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA) appeared unclear or inconsistent. This feedback has informed subsequent work to produce updated and clearer guidance for authorities, and I continue to engage with Planning Officials on this matter.

From the DPEA perspective, having a small, dedicated team of reporters contributes to consistency in assessments. DPEA has also adapted the format of gate check reports and letters to improve clarity and focus on key issues. Pre-submission meetings have been offered to all authorities which allow those working on evidence reports to seek guidance on matters of uncertainty. Additionally, follow-up meetings have been held with authorities after the return of evidence reports to support understanding and next steps.

The following table lists the 12 insufficient evidence reports that have been returned to date.

As per my answer to your question S6W-39465 on 29 July 2025. The welfare of fish at the time of slaughter is assured by the requirement at Article 3.1 of retained Council Regulation (EC) 1099/2009 that ‘animals shall be spared any avoidable pain, distress or suffering during their killing and related operations.

We are satisfied that existing legislation and the guidance developed in partnership with the industry and NGO’s provides robust protection for the welfare of farmed fish at time of slaughter and have no current plans to consult on further legislation.

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.

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-43010 on 27 January 2026. 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.

The Scottish Government does not hold a centrally maintained dataset specifically identifying developments as data centres within the planning system.

Planning applications are submitted, assessed and determined by planning authorities, and information on the type, scale and energy demand of proposals is recorded through local authority planning registers and associated supporting documentation.

The Scottish Government engages with planning authorities, the energy sector and wider stakeholders to understand emerging development trends, including those associated with digital infrastructure and data centres.