Questions and answers

Question reference: S5W-15923

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Current Status: Answered by Annabelle Ewing on 1 May 2018

To ask the Scottish Government how many (a) dogs have been destroyed and (b) owners have been convicted (i) nationally, (ii) in the Eastwood constituency and (iii) in the East Renfrewshire local authority area in each of the last five years under the (A) Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 and (B) Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010.

Information on numbers of dogs destroyed is not held centrally. The following table provides information on convictions at national level, constituency level is not held centrally. Our database shows there were no convictions in East Renfrewshire local authority for this period.

Number of people convicted under specific dog legislation, where main charge, 2012-13 to 2016-17

	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16	2016-17
DANGEROUS DOGS ACT 1991	97	86	94	78	64
CONTROL OF DOGS (SCOTLAND) ACT 2010	4	4	9	6	9
Total convicted - Scotland	101	90	103	84	73

Source: Scottish Government Criminal Proceedings database

Question reference: S5W-15970

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Current Status: Answered by Annabelle Ewing on 1 May 2018

To ask the Scottish Government how many people have been convicted in each of the last five years (a) nationally, (b) in the Eastwood constituency and (c) in the East Renfrewshire local authority area under section 54 of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 for failing to comply with a dog control notice.

The following table provides information on convictions at national level, constituency level is not held centrally. Our database shows there were no convictions in East Renfrewshire local authority for this period.

People convicted of offences under section 5 of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010, where main charge, 2012-13 to 2016-17

	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16	2016-17
Total convicted -Scotland	4	4	9	6	9

Source: Scottish Government Criminal Proceedings database

Question reference: S5W-15924

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Current Status: Answered by Annabelle Ewing on 1 May 2018

To ask the Scottish Government what analysis it has carried out of the impact of section 10 of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 in extending the scope of section 3(1) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 to cover any place, whether public or not.

Question reference: S5W-15921

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Current Status: Answered by Annabelle Ewing on 30 April 2018

To ask the Scottish Government how many dog control notices have been issued in each of the last five years (a) nationally, (b) in the Eastwood constituency and (c) in the East Renfrewshire local authority area under section 1 of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010.

The latest data is held up to the year 2015-16. Information on the number of dog control notices issued across Scotland and in the East Renfrewshire local authority is included in the following table. Information on the number of dog control notices issued in the Eastwood constituency is not held centrally.

Dog control notices issued under the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010
Year	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16
Scotland	92	147	244	277	290
East Renfrewshire	0	0	0	0	0

Question reference: S5W-15922

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Current Status: Answered by Annabelle Ewing on 30 April 2018

To ask the Scottish Government how many people have been subject (a) nationally, (b) in the Eastwood constituency and (c) in the East Renfrewshire local authority area to an order under section 9(5) of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 disqualifying them from owning or keeping a dog in each of the last five years, also broken down by the average length of order.

The requested information is provided in the table below. Information is not held broken down by either Eastwood constituency or East Renfrewshire Council level.

Number of accused people who have been disqualified from owning or keeping a dog						Average length of disqualification period (years)
Court	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2013/14	2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18
National	17	19	18	17	13	7.4	13.6	3.7	11.0	5.6
High Court	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	99.0	-
Airdrie Sheriff	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	5.0	-	-
Ayr Sheriff	1	2	1	1	-	5.0	3.3	3.0	1.0	-
Banff Sheriff	-	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	1.5
Dumbarton Sheriff	2	2	1	-	-	7.0	2.0	3.0	-	-
Dumfries Sheriff	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	3.0	-
Dundee Sheriff	1	-	1	-	-	7.0	-	10.0	-	-
Dunfermline Sheriff	1	1	-	-	-	8.0	2.0	-	-	-
Edinburgh Sheriff	1	-	-	-	1	1.0	-	-	-	3.0
Elgin Sheriff	-	1	1	-	-	-	2.0	1.0	-	-
Falkirk Sheriff	-	2	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
Forfar Sheriff	-	1	-	2	-	-	10.0	-	1.0	-
Glasgow Sheriff	2	2	2	3	2	2.0	50.0	2.0	4.3	6.0
Greenock Sheriff	2	-	1	-	1	25.0	-	3.0	-	1.0
Hamilton Sheriff	1	1	-	2	3	5.0	99.0	-	3.0	10.7
Inverness Sheriff	-	1	-	-	-	-	4.0	-	-	-
Jedburgh Sheriff	2	-	-	-	-	6.0	-	-	-	-
Kilmarnock Sheriff	-	1	2	2	1	-	3.0	3.0	5.0	5.0
Kirkcaldy Sheriff	1	-	1	-	1	5.0	-	2.0	-	5.0
Kirkcudbright Sheriff	1	-	-	-	-	0.5	-	-	-	-
Lanark Sheriff	-	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	5.0
Lerwick Sheriff	-	1	-	-	-	-	3.0	-	-	-
Livingston Sheriff	1	-	4	-	-	5.0	-	3.3	-	-
Paisley Sheriff	-	-	1	2	-	-	-	5.0	20.0	-
Perth Sheriff	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-
Peterhead Sheriff	1	2	-	-	-	10.0	7.5	-	-	-
Rothesay Sheriff	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Selkirk Sheriff	-	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	5.0
Stirling Sheriff	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	10.0	-
Stornoway Sheriff	-	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	3.0
Stranraer Sheriff	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Tain Sheriff	-	1	-	1	-	-	1.0	-	1.0	-
Dunfermline JP	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	2.0	-
Greenock JP	-	1	-	-	-	-	5.0	-	-	-
Glasgow JP	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	10.0	-	-
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service uses a live operational case management system for the processing of court business. The information held on the system is structured for these operational needs, rather than for statistical reporting or research purposes. The information provided is based on the best information available from the case management system as at 24-04-18. Data produced by the SCTS Management Information Analysis Team.

Question reference: S5W-14673

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 February 2018
Current Status: Answered by Alasdair Allan on 3 April 2018

To ask the Scottish Government whether any organisations that it funds to deliver aid abroad have reported any conduct or financial propriety issues to it.

Since 2005 the Scottish Government has received 6 reports related to financial propriety in relation to projects funded from our International Development Fund. All were fully investigated and dealt with appropriately by the organisation in question. No Scottish Government funds were lost.

As I have made clear previously, the Scottish Government is deeply concerned by the recent reports of serious misconduct within the international development and aid sector. We will not tolerate any form of human rights abuses or misconduct, wherever they take place.

We expect all partner organisations to monitor their work closely, and to be open, honest and transparent with us, especially on projects funded by the public sector.

Therefore I wrote to all international NGOs we fund to seek their assurances that they have sufficient safeguarding policies to protect vulnerable groups in place. Since 11 February 2018, and in response to this letter, four organisations have notified us of historic conduct issues. I have spoken with each of the organisations concerned, reinforcing the Scottish Government's position that we will not tolerate such behaviour, and that we expect all incidents of abuse and misconduct to reported to the appropriate authorities both here, and if the incidents occurred abroad, in that country.

In March 2018, the Scottish Government published its safeguarding policy , which sets out very clearly our expectations on standards from those we fund. We have also recently revised the terms of our Grant Offers, to ensure that any organisation we fund has safeguarding policies in place, and that they report all incidents of misconduct to the appropriate authorities both in Scotland and (if necessary) abroad.

Question reference: S5O-01955

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 21 March 2018
Current Status: Answered by Keith Brown on 28 March 2018

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact on Scotland's economy of the decision by the Office for Budget Responsibility to revise upward its UK GDP growth forecast for 2018.

The revised Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts have not changed their assessment of long term economic growth for the UK, with the OBR continuing to forecast lower growth in each of the next five years relative to 2017. Brexit remains a key risk to the economic outlook. The Scottish Fiscal Commission produce independent forecasts of the Scottish economy and they will produce their next forecasts in May.

Question reference: S5W-14672

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 February 2018
Current Status: Answered by Alasdair Allan on 16 March 2018

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether any procedures that it has in place for the oversight of publicly-funded non-governmental organisations operating abroad are sufficient to ensure that the organisations demonstrate proper conduct and financial propriety.

The Scottish Government was deeply concerned by reports of serious misconduct within parts of the aid sector and is undertaking a number of activities to seek reassurances from the sector on safeguarding policies and due process regarding any historic or ongoing investigations into reports of misconduct.

We have robust systems of regulation, a strong legal framework and a commitment to transparency.

The protection of vulnerable beneficiaries is at the top of the risk prioritisation framework used by the Scottish Charity Regulator to take swift and proportionate regulatory action.

The legal duty of all charity trustees is to act in the best interests of their charity. This includes ensuring appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures are in place.

Legally, all charities must act with due care and diligence. For all charities, this means making sure that where they are working with vulnerable children and adults, they have the appropriate policies and procedures in place to make sure that these people are kept safe.

I have written to all international NGOs receiving funding from the International Development Fund to seek discussions on their safeguarding policies to protect vulnerable groups and we will review all funding applications going forward. We are also in regular dialogue with the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator and the UK Government on their own activity on these matters.

I attended a meeting with Scotland-based international NGOs in Edinburgh on 28 February, and opened a discussion on safeguarding and how improvements could be made was held. The Scottish Government also took part in discussions at the Safeguarding Summit on 5 March 2018 which was co-hosted by the Charity Commission and UK Government’s Department for International Development, and involved UK international development charities, regulatory bodies, government and independent safeguarding experts. The outcome of these discussions on how to improve safeguarding within charities and by staff abroad, and to commit to concrete steps that will ensure effective safeguarding in the sector, will inform decisions on how we continue to take this matter forward.

In the event of any alleged incident, we would work with the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) or the relevant body in any investigation, and act on its findings. We have not been contacted by OSCR in relation to allegations of abuse by organisations funded by the Scottish Government to work overseas.

Question reference: S5W-14671

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 February 2018
Current Status: Answered by Alasdair Allan on 15 March 2018

To ask the Scottish Government what procedures it has in place for the oversight of publicly-funded non-governmental organisations operating abroad.

All of the Scottish Government's international development work undergoes rigorous monitoring and evaluation procedures. The same monitoring and evaluation processes are applied to projects funded under the International Development Fund and the Climate Justice Fund.

All applications for funding are assessed by external experts, and grant applicants must include audited or independently verified accounts, as well as a risk assessment and risk management plan for their proposed project.

Each successful applicant receives a grant offer letter, which amongst other things requests formal, six-monthly progress reports in addition to regular routine monitoring. We scrutinise these project reports against the five Criteria for Evaluating Development Assistance established by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's Development Assistance Committee (OECD DAC), and we work closely with grant holders to ensure that progress is satisfactory against agreed objectives and budget. Only once a report is satisfactory will we release the next tranche of project funds.

Standard grant conditions include that:

- grantees shall return funds not used for the approved purposes to the Scottish Government

- grantees must provide six-monthly reports according to guidelines issued by the Scottish Government; and payments will be released only once these are approved.

- the Scottish Government will only pay for what grantees actually spend in a given financial year – the Scottish Government may ask grantees to return any funds not spent by 31 March

- unspent funding in any one year may not automatically be carried over to the subsequent year unless prior permission has been obtained from the Scottish Government and revised budgets have been approved

- the grant is not to be used for party political advocacy or activity.

- specific conditions on random source expenditure checks

- January reporting point requirement, in addition to the two six monthly reporting requirements, specifically on the project's current/forecasted position on budgets, to enable the Scottish Government grant manager to make early decisions about any budgetary changes that have arisen, and to agree those changes or claw back in any resulting underspend.

Question reference: S5O-01911

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 14 March 2018
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 21 March 2018

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the need to promote gender equality.

Tell us your views

Seòmar agus comataidhean