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 42362 questions Show Answers

Order by |

Question reference: S6W-31488

Asked by: Pam Duncan-Glancy, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jenny Gilruth on 5 December 2024

To ask Scottish Government whether it will provide further details of the methodology used to provide the "independent, external scrutiny and challenge of the review" of the marking of Higher History in 2024, including the conclusions and wider reflections, as set out in the SQA's Higher History Review 2024 report, and whether the individual responsible for the review spoke to any teachers who were not employed by the SQA as markers.

Marking of exams, and quality assurance of the associated processes, is an operational matter for the SQA in its independent role as an examination body.

The Scottish Government did not instruct the review into the marking of Higher History in 2024 carried out by SQA and the detail of the methodology (including who the reviewer spoke to) were operational decisions for the SQA.

The Scottish Government notes that the SQA has undertaken a substantial review which has demonstrably considered a wide range of evidence in reaching its conclusions. These findings have been independently peer reviewed by the Executive Director of Qualifications and Assessment at the Welsh Joint Education Committee (WJEC), who agreed that its conclusions and recommendations are supported by evidence.

Question reference: S6W-31530

Asked by: Jeremy Balfour, MSP for Lothian, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jenny Gilruth on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to repeat the Health and Wellbeing Census; if so, what the earliest date is by which this may be implemented; which local authorities have confirmed so far that they (a) will and (b) will not participate; whether children's identity numbers will be gathered again, and what consultation has been undertaken with (i) parents and (ii) groups representing parents regarding (A) methodology and (B) question choice.

Question reference: S6W-31493

Asked by: Pam Duncan-Glancy, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jenny Gilruth on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether it (a) asked the SQA to undertake an independent review of the marking of Higher History in 2024 and (b) set the parameters for the independence of that review.

Question reference: S6W-31507

Asked by: Craig Hoy, MSP for South Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Shona Robison on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government how much extra money it is currently due to spend on public sector pay in 2024-25 compared to what it forecast when it set out its 2024-25 Budget in December 2023.

Question reference: S6W-31528

Asked by: Beatrice Wishart, MSP for Shetland Islands, Scottish Liberal Democrats
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Neil Gray on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government, further to the answer to question S6W-31099 by Neil Gray on 15 November 2024, how much of its £30 million investment in planned care was allocated to NHS Grampian to support additional orthopaedic activity at Woodend Hospital.

As set out in my response to S6W-31527 on 2 December 2024, approximately £1.36 million was initially allocated to NHS Grampian to support 980 additional orthopaedic joint procedures at Woodend Hospital over a 9 month period. However, due to unforeseen circumstances, NHS Grampian were unable to commence activity in the timeline originally anticipated and currently expect to deliver 95 additional joints at Woodend by end of March 2025.

The remainder of the funding from the £1.36 million will be redirected to other priority areas, including orthopaedic capacity at the Golden Jubilee University National Hospital.

We are working with Health Boards, including NHS Grampian, to develop detailed annual delivery plans for 2025/26 to support waiting list reductions and improve productivity, and orthopaedics will be a key priority area.

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

Question reference: S6W-31492

Asked by: Pam Duncan-Glancy, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jenny Gilruth on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether it instructed the SQA to carry out a review of the marking of Higher History in 2024, and, if so, whether it will provide details of its instructions.

Question reference: S6W-31518

Asked by: Annie Wells, MSP for Glasgow, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 November 2024
Current Status: Answered by Neil Gray on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government what evidence it can provide to confirm that 90% of Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) standards 1-5 were fully implemented as of April 2024.

Public Health Scotland (PHS) publishes a Benchmarking Report each year to demonstrate progress being made by local areas in their implementation of the Medication Assisted Treatment standards. The Report each year includes a detailed breakdown on the three streams of evidence required to assess implementation – processes in place, numerical data gathered and a summary of experiential feedback from people in treatment and recovery.

Process evidence demonstrates that local policies and procedures are in place for service delivery in line with the MAT standards criteria. Numerical evidence demonstrates services are actively gathering data required for future service improvement and to ensure the services available are best targeted. Experiential evidence demonstrates what people receiving support say about the services so that further improvement and focus can be implemented.

The most recent PHS Report was published in July 2024 in which the evidence confirmed 90% of standards 1-5 have been implemented against the criteria set out. That report covered 2023/24 and concluded that all 29 local areas reported evidence to show implementation of MAT standards 1-5.

Question reference: S6W-31892

Asked by: Mark Ruskell, MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife, Scottish Green Party
Date lodged: Monday, 02 December 2024
Current Status: Answered by Jim Fairlie on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to review the Weeds Act 1959, in light of all of the “injurious weeds” listed in it reportedly being considered native plants vital to biodiversity.

The Weeds act is referenced by the direct payments regulations in regard to minimum activity rules around region 1 land which is to say that the control of weeds is one of the minimum activities required in the absence of agricultural production from that land.

Whilst enforcement of the weeds act remains active this is largely used in response to complaints predominantly in relation to the control Ragwort for the protection of horses. The Scottish Government can review the Weeds Act as part of the agriculture reform programme and will look at the relevance of the weeds act provisions and if these should be revised.

Question reference: S6W-31886

Asked by: Monica Lennon, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish Labour
Date lodged: Monday, 02 December 2024
Current Status: Answered by Mairi Gougeon on 5 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will produce a good practice guide in relation to the aquaculture industry, similar to that which exists for onshore wind projects.

Last year we published our Vision for Sustainable Aquaculture, which sets out the Scottish Government's long term aspirations for the sector.

The Vision makes clear that communities that host aquaculture should be engaged in the sector’s development, share in its success and be supported through a range of lasting benefits.

Building on recent Crown Estate Scotland aquaculture lease increases, we are working to enhance community engagement through the consenting system, and we have committed to delivering good practice principles for community benefits from aquaculture developments in future. I look forward to discussing and developing the scope and timing of that work with the Scottish Aquaculture Council and other stakeholders.

Question reference: S6O-04110

Asked by: Brian Whittle, MSP for South Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 04 December 2024
Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 12 December 2024

To ask the Scottish Government, further to the publication of the access principles in November 2023 by the General Practice Access Short Life Working Group, what work it has undertaken to develop a set of standards or performance indicators to evaluate the performance of GP access models.