Questions and answers

Question reference: S6W-35381

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Submitting member has a registered interest.
Date lodged: Tuesday, 04 March 2025
Current Status: Answer expected on 18 March 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to imposing a grace period in respect of the requirement to complete an approved muirburn training course, in order to avoid minimising or otherwise diluting the importance of practical muirburn training.

Question reference: S6W-34895

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 12 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Neil Gray on 4 March 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, further to its news release of 1 December 2017, 800 more GPs for Scotland, and the commitment set out in it that it would "aim to increase the number of GPs in Scotland by at least 800 over the next decade", how many GPs each NHS board will receive as a result of this.

Question reference: S6W-34896

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 12 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Neil Gray on 4 March 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, further to its news release of 1 December 2017, 800 more GPs for Scotland, and the commitment set out in it that it would "aim to increase the number of GPs in Scotland by at least 800 over the next decade", how many GPs have been permanently recruited to date, broken down by NHS board.

Question reference: S6W-35132

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 19 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Ivan McKee on 27 February 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, further to the answer to question S6W-34488 by Ivan McKee on 19 February 2025, whether it will provide the information that was requested regarding for what reason its partial island communities impact assessment (ICIA) for the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Bill did not recommend carrying out a full ICIA on the basis that the measures in the Bill were "not likely to have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities", in light of the assessment also noting that "the geographical remoteness of islands can generate a number of particular challenges".

As set out in the answer to question S6W-34488, the responsibility of undertaking a full Island communities impact assessment is on local authorities. Additionally, Local authorities have the power to charge different rates and exemptions for different geographical areas. Each local authority has a responsibility to publish assessment of the impacts of introducing a Visitor Levy, and they have a statutory requirement to consult with local communities, businesses, and the public, prior to the introduction of a Visitor Levy.

We formed an Expert Group made up of key representatives from the tourism industry and local government, chaired by Visit Scotland. The Group developed Guidance for local authorities on introducing and administering a visitor levy. Chapter 18 of guidance published October 2024 has further details of what is required of local authorities when implicating a Visitor levy Visitor Levy Guidance I VisitScotland.org.

Question reference: S6W-34582

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 27 February 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what (a) action it is taking and (b) funding it is making available to progress the reintroduction of a ferry connection from Scotland to mainland Europe.

The Scottish Government continues to support the development of our ports, and the potential for new direct freight and passenger ferry services linking Scotland to Europe.

I have personally engaged with parties interested in introducing new ferry services, and Transport Scotland officials communicate regularly with potential operators and Scotland’s main ports.

The Scottish Government and its agencies have supported a number of maritime initiatives across Scotland, including establishing a Green Freeport at Forth Ports, which includes Rosyth. This involves both seed capital funding, along with businesses locating within the ports being able to access a package of devolved and reserved tax incentives.

We will continue to engage with port operators and others to explore opportunities for new commercial ferry services, so that Scottish exporters and passengers have more direct routes to and from Europe. However, the Scottish Government cannot subsidise routes in ways which would be anti-competitive beyond considering the availability of limited start-up grant funding opportunities for freight initiatives.

Question reference: S6W-34470

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 05 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 27 February 2025

To ask the Scottish Government how many signs located along the (a) A82, (b) A828, (c) A83, (d) A835, (e) A85, (f) A86, (g) A87, (h) A887, (i) A889, (j) A9, (k) A95, (l) A96 and (m) A99 that were categorised as having a Category 1 defect did not receive a temporary or permanent repair by 6.00 am on the day following identification, in each year since 2021.

Transport Scotland’s Operating Companies are required to either repair or make safe Category 1 sign defects within 24 hours of detection. The following table provides the number of Category 1 sign related defects that were not recorded as either repaired or made safe within 24 hours.

	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025
A82	0	3	3	1	0
A828	1	1	0	0	0
A83	0	1	0	3	2
A835	0	1	0	0	0
A85	1	2	0	0	0
A86	0	0	0	0	1
A87	0	2	1	0	0
A887	0	0	0	0	0
A889	0	0	0	0	0
A9	1	6	2	0	0
A95	0	1	2	0	0
A96	1	2	0	1	0
A99	0	1	1	0	0

Question reference: S6W-34471

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 05 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 27 February 2025

To ask the Scottish Government how many signs are located along the (a) A82, (b) A828, (c) A83, (d) A835, (e) A85, (f) A86, (g) A87, (h) A887, (i) A889, (j) A9, (k) A95, (l) A96 and (m) A99, and what proportion does not meet current standards for visibility and effectiveness, broken down by Category (i) 1 and (ii) 2 defects.

Category 1 defects are defined within the term maintenance contract as those that present, or could present, an immediate hazard to trunk road users. They are typically detected during the twice weekly driven safety related inspections. Category 2 defects are defined as those which do not present an immediate hazard to road users and are typically identified during walked annual inspections.

The following table contains the number of signs on the routes requested along with the number of signs with open defects of all types as at 12 February 2025.

	Number of signs	Category 1 defects	Category 2 defects
A82	5517	17	1600
A828	971	3	87
A83	2050	9	711
A835	1033	0	239
A85	3028	2	958
A86	1545	2	339
A87	2341	3	481
A887	188	0	67
A889	289	0	153
A9	6062	18	1374
A95	1157	0	84
A96	3064	18	274
A99	430	2	63

Question reference: S6O-04386

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 26 February 2025
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 5 March 2025

To ask the Scottish Government how it monitors the ways in which local authorities engage with stakeholders regarding the implementation of the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024.

Question reference: S6W-34409

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 04 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 25 February 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what criteria is used to assess applications for the Freight Facilities Grant (FFG), and how often these criteria have been updated or revised.

Any company which wants to move freight by rail or water rather than by road and which is proposing to invest in new freight handling facilities in Scotland or re-invest in existing facilities in Scotland may apply for Freight Facilities Grant (FFG).

The amount of FFG that will be offered depends on the value of the environmental benefits of the project and the additional costs of moving freight by rail or water, determined by a financial appraisal of the project comparing the cost of the rail or water operation with the road alternative. Grants are limited to a maximum of 50% of the capital expenditure.

The key requirement for payment of grant is that Scottish Ministers must be satisfied that if the proposed facility is not provided, the freight, which would have used it, will in fact be carried by road. This means that there must be soundly based projections of the type and quantity of goods that would use the proposed facility and evidence that these goods are currently transported by road.

FFG is paid in the clear expectation that the freight facility will secure the removal of lorries from specific routes for a specific number of years. In return for FFG support, grant recipients must give a commitment to use the facility for a certain period and move a specified amount of freight through the facility.

Most facilities needed to handle or carry freight on rail or water are eligible under the criteria for FFG for example piers, rail sidings and handling equipment. Funding is limited to capital expenditure. Design and project management costs associated exclusively with the freight facility are also likely to be eligible.

Since the GB wide scheme was introduced in 1997, it has been reviewed on several occasions. These exercises were led by the Department for Transport on behalf of the UK Government with input from both the Scottish and Welsh Governments as well as stakeholders across the logistics sector. The last review was undertaken in 2018. The application criteria for the scheme remains unchanged since the scheme began.

Question reference: S6W-34410

Asked by: Tim Eagle, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 04 February 2025
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 25 February 2025

To ask the Scottish Government whether it has any plans to expand the Freight Facilities Grant (FFG) programme to include new types of projects or industries, and, if so, what these new areas of focus would be.

Tell us your views

Seòmar agus comataidhean