- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 09 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ivan McKee on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government how it monitors and evaluates the performance of Registers of Scotland in delivering public services.
Answer
Registers of Scotland is accountable to the Scottish Parliament and its performance is regularly scrutinised by the Economy and Fair Work Committee. The Scottish Government also receives regular reports on the progress RoS is making in delivery of its Corporate Plan 2022-2027 strategic objectives, which includes updates on the achievement against RoS’s Key Performance Indicators for its service performance (timeliness, quality and customer satisfaction).
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 10 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ivan McKee on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to increase the availability of (a) bicycles and (b) other sustainable transport options for its staff.
Answer
The Scottish Government does not currently plan to increase the availability of bicycles for use by staff. We do not have any plans to increase the availability of other sustainable transport options.
Our staff already have access to cycle mileage expenses for official business journeys, a cycle to work scheme for commuting journeys, a season ticket scheme covering public transport operators, and discounted personal car hire and car club journeys through our staff benefits package.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 09 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ivan McKee on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government how the National Planning Framework 4 accounts for the cumulative impact of energy infrastructure projects on rural Scotland, and, in light of the reported feedback from affected communities, whether it plans to revisit these provisions.
Answer
NPF4 places climate and nature at the centre of our planning system and makes clear our support for all forms of renewable, low-carbon and zero emission technologies. Potential impacts on communities and nature, including cumulative impacts, are important considerations in the decision-making process and all applications are subject to site-specific assessments.
While Scottish Ministers can decide to amend the NPF or review it in full at any time, having an established and consistent policy framework enables confidence in the planning system and so we expect to exercise this power sparingly. We have no current plans to amend NPF4.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 09 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Gillian Martin on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government what communication strategies are being developed to ensure that the Environmental Authorisations (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2025 are explained to (a) the public and (b) stakeholders.
Answer
To support ongoing public and stakeholder engagement SEPA has published consultations relating to the Environmental Authorisations (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2025, and linked to the Scottish Government consultation. SEPA will use its webpages and social media to ensure authorisation holders and applicants understand how any changes impact them and any action they need to take.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 09 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ivan McKee on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to balancing the contributions of energy infrastructure projects to net zero targets with their social and environmental impacts on rural areas, as part of any future review of the National Planning Framework 4.
Answer
NPF4 places climate and nature at the centre of our planning system and makes clear our support for all forms of renewable, low-carbon and zero emission technologies. Potential impacts on communities and individual dwellings are important considerations in the decision-making process and all applications are subject to site-specific assessments.
Where new development proposals come forward, the planning system requires decision makers to weigh up all relevant policies, as well as relevant material considerations, in applying balanced planning judgement.
While Scottish Ministers can decide to amend the NPF or review it in full at any time, having an established and consistent policy framework enables confidence in the planning system and so we expect to exercise this power sparingly. We have no current plans to amend NPF4.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 09 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ivan McKee on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government what stakeholder engagement is planned to ensure that any future review of the National Planning Framework 4 includes perspectives from rural areas.
Answer
The preparation of NPF4 involved extensive engagement, including with rural interests. Legislation requires that within 10 years after publishing the framework, the Scottish Ministers are to either revise the framework, or publish an explanation of why they have decided not to revise it. When revising the framework, legislation requires that a participation statement must be published, setting out when consultation is likely to take place and with whom Ministers intend to consult, including such persons or bodies with a role in delivery of statutory outcomes. One such outcome is increasing the population of rural areas of Scotland.
We have no plans to review NPF4 at present, but any future review would meet the requirements to engage with relevant interests, including perspectives from rural areas, at the appropriate time. Regulations allowing for amendment of the NPF came into force in December 2025 and set out minimum requirements for engagement with stakeholders.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 09 January 2025
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ivan McKee on 16 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to address reported concerns from rural communities that the National Planning Framework 4 disproportionately favours large-scale energy infrastructure projects at the expense of local development priorities.
Answer
National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) places climate and nature at the centre of our planning system and makes clear our support for all forms of renewable, low-carbon and zero emission technologies. Potential impacts on communities and individual dwellings are important considerations in the decision-making process and all applications are subject to site-specific assessments. Local Development Plans should seek to realise their area’s full potential for electricity and heat from renewable, low carbon and zero emission sources by identifying a range of opportunities for energy development.
All planning applications must be determined in accordance with the statutory development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For any given area of Scotland this consists of the National Planning Framework and the relevant Local Development Plan(s). If there is a conflict between the policies in NPF4 and Local Development Plans in making any planning decision, the most recently adopted prevails.
When determining applications made under the Electricity Act 1989, representations from community councils and members of the public are taken into account.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 19 December 2024
-
Current Status:
Answered by Dorothy Bain on 15 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of cases handled by the Aberdeen office of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) resulted in a conviction in each of the last five years.
Answer
In the last 5 years, almost 100,000 charges have been reported to the Aberdeen Office of COPFS.
COPFS uses a live, operational database to manage the processing of reports submitted to Procurators Fiscal by the police and other reporting agencies throughout Scotland. It is designed to meet business needs in the processing of criminal cases, rather than for statistical analysis. Any data sought in the requested period would encompass convictions for cases reported out with that period. As such, any figures would not accurately reflect numbers of convictions in respect of the cases reported in that period.
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 19 December 2024
-
Current Status:
Answered by Dorothy Bain on 15 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government what percentage of cases handled by the Aberdeen office of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) in the last year involved alleged offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
Answer
The following table shows percentage of cases reported to the Aberdeen Procurator Fiscal’s Office containing one or more charge under - Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
Criminal cases reported to COPFS Aberdeen Procurator Fiscal office during the financial year 2023-24 |
| | | |
| | 2023-24 | |
Percentage of cases reported which contained one or more charge under - Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 | 7% | |
- Asked by: Douglas Lumsden, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 19 December 2024
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jamie Hepburn on 15 January 2025
To ask the Scottish Government how many freedom of information requests it has refused in each of the last five years, broken down by the basis for refusal.
Answer
The following table sets out the number of requests where there has been no disclosure of any information (fully exempted):
Year | Full exemption of info |
2020 | 884 |
2021 | 1108 |
2022 | 1047 |
2023 | 1010 |
2024 | 1052 |
The exemptions applied are noted below, per year. Many responses can have more than one exemption applied. The information provided details the lead exemption as indicated by our case handlers on our case handling system.
| | 2020 (Nos) | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
EIR exceptions | | | | | |
10(4)(a) The number of requests for which all of the information was not held | 81 | 80 | 65 | 124 | 130 |
10(4)(b) The number of requests refused because they were manifestly unreasonable (other than on grounds of cost) | 3 | 5 | 15 | 23 | 27 |
10(4)(c) Requests which are too general | | | | | |
10(4)(d) Material in the course of completion | 5 | 6 | 6 | 13 | 3 |
10(4)(e) Internal communications | 1 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 4 |
10(5)(a) Substantial prejudice to international relations | | 1 | | 1 | |
10(5)(b) Substantial prejudice to course of justice | 1 | | | 2 | |
10(5)(c) Substantial prejudice to intellectual properties | | | 1 | | |
10(5)(d) Substantial prejudice to confidentiality of proceedings | | | 1 | | |
10(5)(e) Substantial prejudice to confidentiality of commercial or industrial information | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 |
10(5)(f) Substantial prejudice to the interests of a third party | | 1 | | 1 | |
10(5)(g) Substantial prejudice to the protection of the environment | | 3 | | | 1 |
10(8) Neither confirm nor deny whether environmental info held | | 1 | | | |
11(1) Personal data of the applicant | | | | 1 | 1 |
11(2) Third party personal data | 3 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 2 |
11(6) Neither confirm nor deny whether personal data held | | | | | |
| | 2020 (Nos) | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
FOI exemptions | | | | | |
12(1) Complying will exceed the upper cost limit | 124 | 104 | 173 | 145 | 179 |
14 Repeated/vexatious | 41 | 26 | 25 | 24 | 23 |
17 Information not held | 453 | 588 | 523 | 481 | 489 |
18 Neither confirm nor deny the information exists | 2 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 1 |
25(1) Otherwise accessible | 65 | 198 | 130 | 73 | 100 |
25(3) Publication scheme | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1 |
26(a) Disclosure prohibited: enactment | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 |
26(c) Disclosure prohibited: contempt of court | 1 | 1 | | | 1 |
27(1) Future publication: 12 weeks | 47 | 25 | 22 | 26 | 15 |
27(2) Future publication: programme of research | | | | 2 | |
28 Substantial prejudice to UK relations | 8 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4 |
29(1)(a) Formulation/development of government policy | 7 | 8 | 19 | 5 | 5 |
29(1)(b) Ministerial communications | 3 | | 2 | | 1 |
29 (1)(c) Advice by Law Officers | | 1 | | 4 | |
29(1)(d) Operation of Ministerial private office | 2 | | | 3 | 1 |
30(b)(i) Substantial inhibition to free and frank provision of advice | 5 | 4 | 4 | 12 | 11 |
30(b)(ii) Substantial inhibition to free and frank exchange of views | 1 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 2 |
30(c) Substantial prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs | 2 | 11 | 6 | 12 | 5 |
31(1) National security | | | | 1 | |
32(1)(a) Substantial prejudice to international relations | | | 1 | | |
32(1)(b) Confidential information obtained from abroad | | | | | |
33 (1)(a) Trade Secret | | 1 | | | |
33(1)(b) Substantial prejudice to commercial interests | 5 | 7 | 9 | 5 | 5 |
33(2)(b) Substantial prejudice to the UK administration | | | | | |
| | 2020 (Nos) | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
FOI exemptions | | | | | |
34(1) Information held for the purposes of a criminal investigation | 1 | 1 | | | 2 |
34(2)(b) Information held regarding cause of death | | | | 1 | |
35(1)(a) Substantial prejudice to prevention or detection of crime | | | 2 | | 1 |
35(1)(g) Substantial prejudice to the exercise by a public authority for any of its functions (as listed in s35(2)) | | | | 1 | |
36(1) Confidentiality of communications | 3 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 6 |
36(2) Actionable breach of confidence | | | 3 | | |
37(1)(a) Court records | | | | | 1 |
37(1)(b) Court records: inquiry or arbitration | 1 | | | 3 | 2 |
38(1)(a) Personal data of the applicant | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 12 |
38(1)(b) Third party personal data | 9 | 9 | 6 | 10 | 7 |
38(1)(c) Personal census information | | | | | |
39(1) Endangerment to health or safety | | 3 | | | |
41(a)(b) Communications with the Royal Family and Honours | | | 1 | 1 | |
For the purposes of responding to this written PQ we have interpreted that the term ‘FOI request’ refers to requests responded to under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOI(S)A) and the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRS).
We have also interpreted the question to mean those requests that were valid and refused in their entirety on exemption grounds. This means where no information was released to the requestor because an exemption or multiple exemptions were applied. Please note that we have not included requests that were invalid e.g. no name provided or those currently in progress and being answered.
When SG refuses a request it is because exemptions or exceptions apply to the information being requested. The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOI(S)A) and the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRS) allow responses to be fully exempted, where all information being requested has been withheld from disclosure, or partially exempted where some information has been released and some information withheld where an exemption has been applied.