Questions and answers

Question reference: S6W-36437

Asked by: Stephen Kerr, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 03 April 2025
Current Status: Answered by Ivan McKee on 23 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with NHS boards and other public bodies to identify further opportunities for co-location, estate consolidation and hybrid working efficiencies.

The Scottish Government has regular discussions with NHS and public bodies on these matters as they are key stakeholders and governance members of the Single Scottish Estate (SSE), which supports a more efficient approach to public sector property management. This includes through co-location and sharing of on-site services.

Our ongoing and extensive engagement with these bodies, includes current SSE Location Based Reviews in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Perth, Aberdeen and Inverness. There have been discussions at the SSE governance meetings and Public Sector Property Forum, which all of these bodies are invited to attend.

NHS national bodies and other public bodies in Scotland are covered by the Scottish Public Finance Manual (SPFM) so are required to engage with, and submit business cases to, Scottish Government Property Controls for Ministerial decisions on their estate. There is usually early discussion with the Scottish Government on each proposal.

The Scottish Government attends the Scottish Property Advisory Group, which is led by the NHS, to consider their property matters. Recent NHS engagement has included with NHS National Services for Scotland and NHS Education on their Edinburgh office requirements. The Scottish Government also attends a number of public body groups as appropriate, such as recent attendance at the Delivery Bodies Group to discuss the SSE work.

Question reference: S6W-36507

Asked by: Craig Hoy, MSP for South Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 03 April 2025
Current Status: Answered by Gillian Martin on 23 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what support it will provide to producers in sectors such as brewing, who may not be able to absorb extended producer responsibility costs, in light of it not being categorised as a tax.

Extended producer responsibility for packaging (pEPR) has exemptions to avoid unnecessarily burden on small producers. Producers with an annual turnover less than £2m and 50 tonnes of packaging supplied are exempt from pEPR payments, but are required to report packaging data. This exempts approximately 70% of the UK's smaller producers from paying scheme fees. The four UK nations will keep these thresholds under review.

Question reference: S6W-36498

Asked by: Craig Hoy, MSP for South Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 03 April 2025
Current Status: Answered by Gillian Martin on 23 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what measures it will take to ensure transparency in how extended producer responsibility scheme funding is allocated to local authorities.

PackUK is the scheme administrator for extended producer responsibility for packaging (pEPR), operating on behalf of the four nations. PackUK is responsible for calculating and distributing local authority payments.

The requirements that PackUK must consider when assessing funding to local authorities are set out in the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging and Packaging Waste) Regulations 2024.

In November 2024 indicative payments were shared with local authorities, along with guidance to help local authorities understand how payments have been calculated and allocated. PackUK has also engaged with local authorities through online forums and gathering stakeholder feedback to ensure accuracy of payments. Scottish Local Authorities have been indicatively allocated a total of £160m in 2025-26, out of a total of £1.4bn in pEPR funding across the UK.

Scottish Government officials have continued to work closely with COSLA throughout the development and implementation of pEPR.

Question reference: S6W-36783

Asked by: Beatrice Wishart, MSP for Shetland Islands, Scottish Liberal Democrats
Date lodged: Wednesday, 09 April 2025
Current Status: Answered by Ivan McKee on 23 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider reviewing its planning policy on wind turbines to encompass any health impacts of living, working or learning near to wind turbines, and the potential impact that the distance between buildings and turbines could have on health, including shadow flicker and low frequency noise.

Our Fourth National Planning Framework (NPF4) was published and adopted following extensive consultation and engagement and approval by the Scottish Parliament. Having an established and consistent policy framework enables confidence in the planning system and we have no current plans to amend NPF4.

NPF4 Policy 11 (energy) requires that wind energy project design and mitigation will demonstrate how impacts on communities and individual dwellings, including residential amenity, visual impact, noise and shadow flicker, are addressed.

Question reference: S6W-36782

Asked by: Beatrice Wishart, MSP for Shetland Islands, Scottish Liberal Democrats
Date lodged: Wednesday, 09 April 2025
Current Status: Answered by Ivan McKee on 23 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government how its planning policy is developed to ensure that there is no negative impact on people's health as a result of wind turbines.

National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) was developed through extensive stakeholder engagement, supported by a range of impact assessments, and was approved by the Scottish Parliament prior to its adoption in February 2023.

NPF4 Policy 11 (energy) requires that wind energy project design and mitigation will demonstrate how impacts on communities and individual dwellings, including through visual impact, noise and shadow flicker, are addressed.

All applications are subject to site specific assessment and guidance for the assessment of noise from onshore wind turbines across the UK is set out in ETSU-R-97.

Question reference: S6T-02471

Asked by: Liam Kerr, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 April 2025
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 22 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that 506 sex offenders in Scotland have changed their name in the past two years.

Question reference: S6T-02475

Asked by: Kenneth Gibson, MSP for Cunninghame North, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 April 2025
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 22 April 2025

To ask the Scottish Government when it expects to conclude negotiations with Peel Ports regarding the purchase of Ardrossan Harbour.

Question reference: S6F-04003

Asked by: Pam Gosal, MSP for West Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 April 2025
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 24 April 2025

To ask the First Minister what impact the Scottish Government anticipates that the Supreme Court judgment regarding For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers will have on the implementation of the Public Sector Equality Duty in Scotland.

Question reference: S6F-04007

Asked by: Ariane Burgess, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Green Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 April 2025
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 24 April 2025

To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on when the Scottish Government expects to respond to the Loch Long salmon farm planning application.

Question reference: S6F-04001

Asked by: Alex Cole-Hamilton, MSP for Edinburgh Western, Scottish Liberal Democrats
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 April 2025
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 24 April 2025

Question to be taken in Chamber.

Tell us your views

Seòmar agus comataidhean