Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 13 October 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1210 contributions

|

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

I know that Food Standards Scotland has had a flat-cash budget settlement from financial year 2022-23 through to the current financial year of £22.7 million. Real-terms erosion will have an effect. What funding challenges is FSS facing, and what measures are you taking to mitigate them?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

What you have said is reflected in the external audit that was published in December. Given what you have said about a potential planned overspend, are you confident that the FSS will achieve financial balance in the current financial year?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

I apologise.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

Could you develop that a bit further and say what practical action you are taking with the Scottish Government to address that deficit? You mentioned that you are working together. What does that look like in practice?

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

I appreciate your candour. Thank you very much.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

I invite our witnesses to reflect on where they would like Food Standards Scotland to be in 2035, when it will celebrate its 20th anniversary.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee [Draft]

Food Standards Scotland

Meeting date: 10 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

Does anyone else have any other thoughts?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

I appreciate the opportunity to join you this morning. It has been very interesting to hear panel members discuss how the quality standard of decision making around dangerous buildings could be improved.

I wonder whether the requirement for CARE accreditation could be stipulated in the context of a section 29 or 30 order. I am conscious of what the City of Edinburgh Council representative said about building standards, which was that action is usually taken immediately to remove any immediate public risk; a cordon is set up; and then there is, in most cases, a bit of a cooling-off period. Given that that is the point at which a more considered assessment can be made, might that also provide an opportunity to stipulate that bringing in CARE-accredited structural engineers in listed building cases—which, as has been discussed, are relatively few in number—would be an appropriate and proportionate measure? Indeed, the cost of doing so could be recovered from the owner if it incurs an extra fee for the council.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

That is an interesting case. Another case that I have noted, which might be of particular interest to Mr Ewing, is the Secretary of State for Scotland v Highland Council—the so-called Achintore case—involving Fort William primary school, in which the council attempted to defend its proposed demolition of a B-listed school building. It constituted a prima facie offence under legislation equivalent to the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997; the case predated it, but the test was broadly similar to the test available for offences under section 8 of the 1997 act, and the Secretary of State for Scotland at the time succeeded in obtaining an interdict to prevent demolition, providing evidence that remedial works were in fact possible. Now that Highland Council, ironically, uses the building as offices following a full refurbishment in 2018, that case perhaps illustrates that the key here is having a sort of umpire of expertise, if you like, at the heart of decision making so that the case can turn on those judgments.

On Professor Masterton’s earlier point, if the CARE register were to be enhanced in statute, not only would it provide a powerful incentive for conservation accreditation for structural engineers in Scotland and a higher standard of assessment for the engineers making those decisions; the list of people who would seek to get accredited would probably grow, if that became a legislative check in both the 2003 act under sections 29 and 30 as well as a potential enhancement to the enforcement powers in the 1997 act. Do the witnesses agree that that is likely? There are cases where one person’s engineer makes a fatal decision about the building and another engineer disputes it. If they are brought in, accredited conservation engineers more often than not tend to find the solution, when other engineers have doomed the building.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee [Draft]

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Paul Sweeney

It helps me get an indication that there is some cooling-off period, which might provide an opportunity to enhance the legislation. It is not as if you move in with a bulldozer and completely level a building in 24 or 48 hours or whatever. That would happen only in very rare and exceptional cases.