Chamber and committees

I refer the member to the answer to question S7W-01934 on 4 August 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

General enforcement of road traffic offences including speeding is the operational responsibility of Police Scotland.

The Scottish Safety Camera Programme supports automated enforcement through national operational prioritisation and deployment of safety camera resources in accordance with the Scottish Safety Camera Programme Handbook. The Handbook also sets out the existing process of engagement with local authorities to provide localised input through annual site selection. Through targetted camera enforcement, the purpose of the Programme is to improve driver behaviour and reduce injury collisions in line with the Road Safety Framework to 2030.

An annual site prioritisation process is undertaken each year and involves partners including the three regional safety camera units, all thirty-two local road authorities, Transport Scotland for trunk roads and Police Scotland. This exercise acts to identify potential new camera sites which meet the minimum criteria, while at the same time assessing the performance of existing enforcement strategies.

In addition to annual site selection, where there are emerging or short term road safety concerns, all road authorities currently have the ability to request a short term or flexible safety camera deployment as required.

Local authorities have a statutory duty in terms of section 39 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 to promote road safety on local roads and where appropriate, speed calming measures. It is for a local authority to consider appropriate measures which will safeguard road users and residents, and to determine the priority that should be given to any road safety measures. It is not for Scottish Ministers to intervene in a local authority’s day-to-day performance of these particular duties.

The Community Wealth Building (Scotland) Act 2026, passed by the Scottish Parliament on 10 February, requires public bodies to work together and actively implement the approach more systematically across Scotland by producing local Community Wealth Building Action Plans, and reporting progress. While Co-operative Development Scotland is not a specified public body in the Act, Scottish Enterprise, of which CDS is a part, must work with local authorities and other public bodies within local ‘community wealth building partnerships’ across Scotland to produce local action plans within three years of commencement of the Act. The local partnerships also have a duty to implement the community wealth building plans and report on progress.

Local authorities are responsible for the development and delivery of flood protection schemes in their area. Since 2016, the Scottish Government has provided £612m to local authorities to support the delivery of flood protection schemes and wider flood resilience activities.

Funding for flood resilience is provided through the local authority general capital grant. This means that decisions related to it are agreed jointly by Ministers and COSLA Leaders following principle-based recommendations from the jointly attended Settlement and Distribution Group. Through this process, a new, more flexible, funding allocation was agreed for financial year 2026-2027. This means that local authorities can invest in local needs and priorities from their local Flood Risk Management Plans.

In parallel we have funded SEPA to develop a Flood Advisory Service that will improve the governance and delivery of high value flood protection schemes across Scotland, learning the lessons from delivery over the last 10 years. Work is ongoing with COSLA to ensure a new funding model is in place to support the delivery of the next programme of high value flood protection schemes once the Flood Advisory Service is operational.

CalMac is currently engaged with an external consultancy to provide independent analysis on the use of LNG vs MGO by MV Glen Sannox. This report is due to be finalised by the end of August. Early results confirm the volumes of CO2 produced during dual-fuel use are lower than if MGO is used as a primary fuel source. CalMac records monthly emissions of CO2 across the fleet as per their reporting obligations. However, like-for-like emission comparison between vessels is challenging due to varied vessel designs and cargo carrying capacity.

This would be an operational matter for Scottish Water. It publishes information on its website at https://www.scottishwater.co.uk/About-Us/What-We-Do/Urban-Waters-Routemap.

Since MV Glen Sannox was delivered to CalMac in November 2024, MGO has been utilised in 20 operating months. As set out in the response to S7W-01548 on 4 August 2026, we cannot therefore compare with the assumptions made in the business case at this time.

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.

This would be an operational matter for Scottish Water. It publishes information on its website at https://www.scottishwater.co.uk/About-Us/What-We-Do/Urban-Waters-Routemap.

Through our flagship Fair Work First approach, we are applying fair work criteria to public sector grants, other funding and contracts where it is relevant to do so – driving fair work practices across the labour market. As part of this approach, Scottish Enterprise, of which CDS is a part, have committed to Fair Work First principles. There is currently no obligation from Scottish Government for the businesses and organisations supported through CDS to make the same commitment, as CDS does not provide grant funding.

The Scottish Government is not aware of any instances since 2021 where road or bridge repair works have been required on trunk roads as a result of improving accessibility for wind farm construction traffic. While, in some cases, third-party developers have undertaken modifications to the trunk road network to accommodate the movement of oversized wind farm construction components, these works have not involved repairs to trunk roads or bridges.