Chamber and committees

Questions and answers

Parliamentary questions can be asked by any MSP to the Scottish Government or the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. The questions provide a means for MSPs to get factual and statistical information.

Written questions must be answered within 10 working days (20 working days during recess)
Other questions such as Topical, Portfolio, General and First Minister's Question Times are taken in the Chamber

Urgent Questions aren't included in the Question and Answers search. There is a SPICe fact sheet listing Urgent and emergency questions.

Find out more about parliamentary questions

Filter your results Hide all filters

Displaying 48968 questions Show Answers

Order by |

Question reference: S6W-44319

Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness and Nairn, Independent
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider reducing the amount of money to be allocated to active travel schemes in 2026-27 and to reallocate this for the purposes of establishing an emergency fund to carry out necessary works to maintain bridges in rural Scotland, which may otherwise be closed due to safety reasons, potentially causing difficulties for rural communities, including farmers who rely on such bridges to carry out their work.

The Scottish Budget provides a further real-terms increase in the Local Government Settlement, delivering record funding of £15.7 billion, including a quarter of a billion pounds of unrestricted General Revenue Grant.

Local authorities have a duty under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 to manage and maintain local roads and associated infrastructure in their area and duties under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of traffic.

The vast majority of funding available to councils is provided by means of a block grant from the Scottish Government with the Scottish Budget also providing Councils with full discretion over decisions on Council Tax. It is then the responsibility of individual local authorities to manage their own budgets and to allocate the total financial resources available to them, including on the maintenance of roads and bridges, on the basis of local needs and priorities.

Question reference: S6W-44316

Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness and Nairn, Independent
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will make any further announcements regarding the A9 dualling project before the end of the current parliamentary session.

Question reference: S6W-44317

Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness and Nairn, Independent
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will make any further announcements regarding the A96 dualling project before the end of the current parliamentary session.

Only last month I provided a substantive update to Parliament to reaffirm the Scottish Government’s commitment to dual the A96 and provide assurance we are pressing forward steps to make this happen. This update on 3 February 2026, followed the commitment to progressing A96 dualling included in the Scottish Spending Review 2026 along with the Infrastructure Delivery Pipeline 2026, both of which were published on Tuesday 13 January 2026.

Investment in the trunk road network over the four year Capital Spending Review period to 2029-30 will allow the Scottish Government to make further progress on dualling the A96 between Inverness and Nairn, including the Nairn Bypass. With the land acquired for the scheme in 2025, funding is included in the 2026-27 draft Budget to commence the delivery of advanced works. This will include vital archaeological investigation works and other key environmental and ecological measures, along with significant work to facilitate complex Public Utility diversions.

In parallel to the advanced works, investment in 2026-27 will also allow Transport Scotland to continue to take forward the work to determine the most suitable procurement option for delivering these schemes and further develop the Business Cases. Completion of the preparatory work, including approval of the Business Cases, will enable a firm timetable for delivery to be set as part of the annual budget setting process, with a view to commencing procurement of the main works contract for the Nairn Bypass within this Capital Spending Review period.

The Capital Spending Review allows for the commencement of the construction of the A9/A96 Inshes to Smithton link road in 2028-29 and the Nairn Bypass in 2029-30, subject to business case approval and confirmation of funding beyond the spending review period.

Given this recent and substantive update, no further announcements on the A96 are anticipated before the end of this parliamentary session.

Question reference: S6W-44433

Asked by: Ariane Burgess, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Green Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Mairi Gougeon on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the September 2025 update to the fisheries persistent high mortality analysis confirming that the scope of that work is limited to marine sites, and in light of reports that the Applecross hatchery has recorded approximately 10 million fish deaths over the last four years, including close to half a million deaths in January 2026 alone, during which period the facility has received regulatory consent to expand its operations, what the rationale is for excluding freshwater sites, including hatcheries, from the persistent high mortality analysis, and whether it will commit to extending that work to include the freshwater and hatchery stages of production.

There are significantly fewer fresh water salmon production sites compared to marine sites, and associated available datasets on fresh water mortality are less extensive with higher variation within the data. Therefore, different analytical approaches are required for fresh water sites, and they could not be included in the original analysis of persistent elevated mortality on Scottish salmon farms. The Scottish Government prioritised marine sites for analysis as there are many more marine sites.

There are no immediate plans to extend this analytical work to include fresh water sites. The Fish Health Inspectorate (FHI) is made aware of all mortality events where mortality exceeds specified thresholds, as a result of a voluntary reporting mechanism which is in place. This includes fresh water sites; the FHI investigates mortality events as they occur.

Question reference: S6W-44434

Asked by: Ariane Burgess, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Green Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Mairi Gougeon on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government, in light of reports that, after the Fish Health Inspectorate (FHI) was informed that the Aird salmon farm had been declared fallow while fish were still present, several weeks of sea-lice count data were retrospectively reclassified by FHI as a “withdrawal period prior to harvesting”, despite no harvesting subsequently taking place, what its position is on whether such retrospective reclassification of lice count data is appropriate, and whether there is a standard process for handling incidents where a site is declared fallow while salmon remain on site.

Aquaculture Production Business(APBs)may notify the Fish Health Inspectorate(FHI)of any corrections to sea lice counts which can legitimately occur and information in the public domain states that the publicly available sea lice count record may be subject to change.

Where counts are not provided to FHI without reason, consideration is given to whether APBs have committed an offence under the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2007. The legal obligations regarding reporting guidance have been emphasised to the relevant APB.

The FHI is not aware of other incidents of non reporting of sea lice counts where sites have been incorrectly declared fallow while fish are still held on site. Scottish Government considers the provisions of the Fish Farming Businesses (Reporting) (Scotland) Order 2020 and published sea lice guidance appropriate for salmon farming operations.

Question reference: S6W-44479

Asked by: Claire Baker, MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Shirley-Anne Somerville on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government, further to annex 1 of the Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2026-2031, for what reason the monetary investment in the Tackling Child Poverty Fund as a result of the allocation of “two child limit funds” has increased from £49 million to £61.5 million, and how this fund would have been financed had the “two-child limit” remained in place.

The Scottish Budget 2026-27 committed £61.5 million to the Tackling Child Poverty Fund, with Annex 1 of the Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2026-31 setting out further detail of how these funds have been allocated in 2026-27. This represents an increase of £49 million for the Tackling Child Poverty Fund relative to 2025-26.

The Scottish Government put eradicating child poverty at the heart of the Scottish Budget 2026-27, therefore if funding previously committed to the Two Child Limit Payment was not available, this additional funding would have been considered as a priority as part of the budget and spending review process.

Question reference: S6W-44481

Asked by: Claire Baker, MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Shirley-Anne Somerville on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government, further to annex 1 of the Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2026-2031, how it planned to fund the statutory requirement to uprate the Scottish Child Payment, including the introduction of a £40 weekly payment for under-one-year-olds, had the “two-child limit” remained in place.

We put eradicating child poverty at the heart of the Scottish Budget 2026-27 and Scottish Spending Review, which sets out the Scottish Government’s spending plans up to 2028-29.

If funding previously commitment to the planned Two Child Limit Payment was not available, then additional investment associated with the Scottish Child Payment and premium for children under the age of one would have been considered as a priority as part of the budget and spending review process.

Question reference: S6W-44264

Asked by: Richard Leonard, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Mairi Gougeon on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government what (a) financial and audit checks and (b) other risk assessments Scottish Forestry carries out of applicants for forestry grants.

Full details of how the Scottish Government undertakes these checks and risk assessments can be found on Scottish Forestry’s website. Forestry Grant Scheme guidance on financial eligibility is set out on the How to apply page. Information on the supporting evidence required to claim funds is set out on the Claims and payments page, and the Inspections page details Scottish Forestry’s approach to claim inspection monitoring.

Question reference: S6W-44266

Asked by: Richard Leonard, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish Labour
Submitting member has a registered interest.
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Fiona Hyslop on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will establish an enforcement powers working group for the (a) passenger ferry, (c) bus and tram and (c) taxi sector, similar to the rail enforcement powers working group that was established in 2025.

Question reference: S6W-44389

Asked by: Monica Lennon, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 March 2026
Current Status: Answered by Kaukab Stewart on 20 March 2026

To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it can provide to former employees of Women’s Aid Argyll and Bute who have reported significant pension detriment due to historic financial mismanagement, and whether it will engage with the Pensions Regulator to ensure that these workers are not left financially penalised by the actions of past management.