Chamber and committees

The Scottish Government has no current plans to review the legislation relating to responsible non-motorised access rights or the associated guidance, the Scottish Outdoor Access Code (SOAC). Responsible behaviour is fundamental to Scotland’s access rights framework, established under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, and further defined and promoted through the SOAC. The 3 key principles of SOAC - that people should respect the interests of other people, care for the environment, and take responsibility for their own actions – remain valid.

We know that the vast majority of people who exercise access rights do so responsibly and in accordance with the SOAC. At the same time, we are acutely aware of the impacts that irresponsible or anti-social behaviour can have on land owners and land managers, including gamekeepers, and the challenges that such behaviour can create for the effective management of land. However, it is important that the irresponsible actions of a minority do not diminish the hard-won access rights that are exercised responsibly by the overwhelming majority of users.

Walkers visiting areas which may be affected by deer-stalking should always consult the Heading for the Scottish Hills website or seek local information, where available, about deer stalking activity taking place that day so that they can plan their route to avoid disturbing any deer management taking place.

Local and national park authorities (access authorities) and NatureScot continue to work with land managers, and stakeholder organisations to promote responsible access and responsible land management, ensuring that Scotland’s access rights framework continues to balance the interests of those enjoying the outdoors with those who live and work on the land. Where new trends, activities or issues emerge, additional guidance is developed and published by NatureScot and the National Access Forum to provide timely clarification and advice. This approach enables emerging challenges to be addressed quickly and proportionately without the need for a full review of the SOAC or legislative change.

Scottish Government funding schemes, for example ScotZEB, are designed and delivered in accordance with the relevant legal and regulatory frameworks, including subsidy control requirements. Where relevant, scheme design and delivery may also take account of wider considerations such as supply chain resilience. Applications are assessed against the published eligibility criteria for the scheme concerned and funded projects must comply with the applicable requirements.

Vehicle safety and cybersecurity requirements are reserved matters and are overseen by the UK Government through the DVSA and the National Cyber Security Centre. All vehicles entering service in Scotland must meet relevant UK-wide safety, security and product standards, regardless of where they are manufactured. Compliance with those requirements is the responsibility of operators.

NHS Scotland does not generally determine access to specialist dental services on the basis of a medical diagnosis alone. Referrals to the Public Dental Service, Special Care Dentistry, or secondary care services are made based on an individual's assessed clinical needs, the complexity of treatment required, and any factors that may affect their ability to receive care safely within a general dental practice.

Following referral, decisions on the most appropriate treatment pathway, including whether specialist services are required and the priority assigned to a patient, are matters for NHS clinical teams.

The Scottish Government has not made an assessment of these reported proposals.

Maintaining competitive journey times, reliability and capacity is vital for rail connectivity between Scotland and London. We would be disappointed by any change that led to longer journey times for passengers travelling to and from Scotland.

Responsibility for HS2, including decisions arising from the programme's revised scope, the HS2 reset announced earlier this year, and the work of West Coast Partnership Development, lies with the UK Government.

Since 2024, the Scottish Government has commissioned an annual boost to the Scottish sample in the ASH Smoke Free GB Youth survey. Each year, around 750 Scottish adolescents aged 11 to 17 are asked questions about their behaviours and attitudes towards tobacco, vaping and other nicotine products, including nicotine pouches.

The latest report was published in August 2026 (https://www.gov.scot/publications/vaping-smoking-scottish-adolescents-results-ash-smokefree-gb-youth-survey-2026/pages/3/), with results from the 2024 and 2025 survey also available on the Scottish Government website: https://www.gov.scot/publications/vaping-smoking-scottish-adolescents/pages/1/;https://www.gov.scot/publications/vaping-smoking-scottish-adolescents-results-ash-smokefree-gb-youth-survey-2025/. The next wave of data collection is expected to take place in March 2027.

Data are collected on social grade and the Office for National Statistics Indices of Multiple Deprivation (ONS IMD), which are not directly comparable with the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). The sample is skewed towards higher social grades and less deprived areas and is therefore unlikely to be representative by deprivation. This limitation should be considered when interpreting the findings.

The Scottish Government continues to keep its evidence needs under review, including how best to monitor the use of nicotine pouches and other emerging nicotine products among children and young people, while balancing analytical value, cost and timeliness.

The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 provides local authorities with the freedom and responsibility to determine their own borrowing, capital financing and treasury management arrangements within the statutory framework established by Parliament.

Local authorities are required to have regard to the CIPFA Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities and the Treasury Management Code, which require borrowing and capital investment decisions to be affordable, prudent and sustainable and supported by an approved Treasury Management Strategy. Within this framework, responsibility for borrowing, debt management and treasury decisions rests with individual local authorities.

Scottish Ministers do not have a role in directing or approving local authorities' borrowing strategies, treasury management decisions or debt restructuring proposals. It is therefore for each authority to determine whether the early repayment, refinancing or restructuring of existing borrowing represents an affordable and value-for-money option in light of its own financial circumstances and long-term financial strategy.

Local authorities continue to have access to borrowing from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) and other approved sources of finance and are best placed to assess whether changes to their debt portfolio would reduce financing costs, manage financial risk effectively and deliver value for money for local taxpayers. This reflects the fundamental principle of the prudential framework that borrowing and debt management decisions should be taken locally by elected members, supported by professional financial advice and informed by the authority's own assessment of affordability, prudence and sustainability.

A Partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA) was undertaken as part of the Outline Business case for the extension of the £2 fare cap to the Strathclyde area and this will be published shortly. The BRIA component covers the potential impact on bus operators, the taxi industry and rail.

The Scottish Government is engaging constructively with all relevant stakeholders to support considered and informed discussion on our draft proposals, and we are consulting on those proposals before any decisions are taken. The consultation seeks views and evidence from retailers, producers, consumers and other stakeholders on the potential benefits, risks and unintended consequences of any food price cap scheme, including methods of ensuring compliance and enforcement of any regulatory regime.

Postal delivery companies are commercial organisations, operating in an unregulated market. The Scottish Government has long called for an end to unfair delivery charges, but only the UK Government has the power to regulate these. Where there are opportunities to do so, the Scottish Government urges these companies to be fair and transparent in their pricing policies.

The Scottish Government supports the maintenance of the Universal Service Obligation (USO) and makes regular representations to the UK Government and Royal Mail on behalf of Scottish consumers.

On 25 August 2026, following the publication of the Consumer Scotland report, I wrote to UK Government ministers offering to meet and discuss the challenges faced by island communities. I have also requested that the UK Government convene Royal Mail, Post Office Ltd, Ofcom, parcel delivery companies, and consumer and community organisations to make urgent and necessary progress on postal services and parcel delivery regulation.

I refer the member to the answer to question S7W-03096 on 24 September 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.