Questions and answers

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 ��˿�� 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 1076 questions Show Answers

Order by |

Question reference: S6W-42638

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 December 2025
Current Status: Answer expected on 13 January 2026

To ask the Scottish Government whether it can provide an estimate of the (a) highest, (b) lowest and (c) average cost of flood insurance for existing residential properties in circumstances where SEPA's high emissions scenario has placed the homes in an area that is deemed to be at a high risk of flooding.

Question reference: S6W-42637

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 December 2025
Current Status: Answer expected on 13 January 2026

To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with SEPA over its adoption of Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5, in which a global temperature rise of 4.3 degrees centigrade is anticipated, as set out in the document, Climate change allowances for flood risk assessment in land use planning Version 6, and what its position is on whether the principal environmental regulator has chosen to use an overly precautionary emissions scenario, when COP30 projections had a maximum temperature increase of 2.8 degrees centigrade.

Question reference: S6W-41927

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Friday, 14 November 2025
Current Status: Answered by Jenni Minto on 1 December 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) regarding its decision not to approve the targeted treatment (a) elacestrant and (b) capivasertib for secondary breast cancer, and what information it has on the SMC's reasons for not approving the use of each drug in NHS Scotland.

The (SMC) appraisal is undertaken independently of Scottish Ministers and is based on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of newly licensed medicines at a population level, ensuring value for both the NHS in Scotland and taxpayers.

Following a submission for (a) elacestrant (Korserdu®), as a treatment for postmenopausal women, and men, with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, the SMC published ‘’ advice in November 2025, and (b) capivasertib (Truqap®), as a treatment for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast secondary breast cancer, the SMC published ‘’ advice in October 2025.

In both cases, the submitting pharmaceutical companies did not present a sufficiently robust economic analysis to gain acceptance. The SMC would welcome a resubmission from both companies at any time.

Question reference: S6W-41928

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Friday, 14 November 2025
Current Status: Answered by Jenni Minto on 1 December 2025

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on what the evidential basis is for the Scottish Medicines Consortium's decision not to approve the use of the targeted treatment (a) elacestrant and (b) capivasertib for secondary breast cancer, in light of the drug being approved for use in the NHS in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The (SMC) appraisal is undertaken independently of Scottish Ministers. Making decisions about whether or not to recommend that people should routinely have access to new medicines is a complex task, and the independent SMC bases its decisions on the best available evidence provided to it.

Where licensed medicines, such as elacestrant and capivasertib, are not routinely available on the NHS in Scotland, doctors can use the PACS Tier Two system to request access on a case-by-case basis. The cost of the medicine is not a decision-making criterion when considering PACS Tier Two applications.

Question reference: S6W-41847

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 13 November 2025
Current Status: Answered by Jenny Gilruth on 26 November 2025

To ask the Scottish Government how many teachers have been promoted to a senior leadership position within secondary schools, including (a) headteachers, (b) deputy headteachers and (c) principal teachers, who have completed a formal management training programme to support them in the discharge of their increased responsibilities, in (i) each of the last three full financial years and (ii) 2025-26 to date, broken down by local authority.

Statistics on the overall number of teachers in promoted posts are published as part of the teacher census statistics, available on the Scottish Government website here:

The Scottish Government does not collect data on the number of teachers promoted to a senior leadership position within secondary schools.

While the Scottish Government does not hold data on the number of teachers who have completed a formal management training programme, we provide funding of over £800,000 per year for the Into Headship programme which aims to ensure aspirant head teachers are supported to develop and build the necessary knowledge, skills and understanding required in senior leadership roles, and the In Headship programme for headteachers early in post to support them to build the necessary knowledge, skills and understanding required of headteachers.

Question reference: S6W-41298

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Monday, 13 October 2025
Current Status: Answered by Jenni Minto on 10 November 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, for each of the 21 recommendations in the report Transvaginal Mesh Case Record Review that it decided not to accept, what the reasons were in each case for the decision not to implement the recommendation.

Question reference: S6W-41296

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Monday, 13 October 2025
Current Status: Answered by Jenni Minto on 10 November 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding the 21 listed recommendations in the report, Transvaginal Mesh Case Record Review, which of the recommendations it (a) accepted and (b) rejected.

The Scottish Government did not reject any of the recommendations from the Transvaginal Mesh Case Record Review.

Recommendations 1, 2 and 5 were about how similar case record reviews might be conducted, and in particular how they might be conducted in a more cost-effective fashion. The Government has no plans to conduct further case record reviews.

Recommendations 3 and 16 were about training of General Practitioners and surgeons. Training about transvaginal mesh and possible complications has been made available to GPs in Scotland, and we continue to support the introduction of a GMC credential in mesh removal surgery.

Recommendation 4 was about a registry. It is being implemented by the establishment of a Scottish Pelvic Floor Registry and Audit Programme by Public Health Scotland. It will collect, understand, and measure data to improve pelvic floor services for women in Scotland, and contribute Scottish data to the UK-wide registry being progressed by NHS England. The SPFRAP will begin collecting data in 2026, with the first report expected in 2027.

Recommendations 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17 and 18 were about communication to and decision making with patients. NHS Scotland seeks to exemplify the implementation of these recommendations through the operation of the NHS Scotland Complex Mesh Surgical Service (CMSS). The CMSS forms part of a national, published patient pathway and its services are explained on a dedicated website and through other information resources. It places patient-centred decision-making at its core, ensuring that patients have access to high-quality decision aids, sufficient time to consider their options, and support in reaching a final decision about their treatment. Patients are contacted in advance of attending the service, encouraged to bring a companion, and invited to record consultations. All decisions are documented to ensure clarity between patient and clinician, and patients are offered postoperative photographs showing the mesh that has been removed. The service is committed to continuous improvement and regularly surveys patient experience. More generally, the Chief Medical Officer wrote, on October 2023, to Health Boards highlighting the report and emphasising the importance of fully informed consent in all circumstances. With respect to patients returning from the independent sector surgeons, these individuals will receive two follow-up telephone or video calls from their surgeon or specialist nurse post-operation. Any further aftercare will be provided by the patient’s local Health Board.

Recommendation 19 was about guidance on significant adverse events. Healthcare Improvement Scotland continues to improve guidance on significant adverse events.

Recommendations 20 and 21 were about collaboration between mesh centres in the UK. The CMSS in Glasgow continues to collaborate with other UK mesh centres to share and disseminate best practice.

Question reference: S6W-41297

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Monday, 13 October 2025
Current Status: Answered by Jenni Minto on 10 November 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, for each of the 21 recommendations in the report Transvaginal Mesh Case Record Review that it decided to accept, whether it will set out the evidence in each case that demonstrates that the recommendation has been implemented.

Question reference: S6W-41470

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Monday, 27 October 2025
Current Status: Answered by Angus Robertson on 7 November 2025

To ask the Scottish Government, regarding any funding applications that Creative Scotland has received to support South Asian productions through the funding programmes that it manages, including those where the finance is provided by the National Lottery, how many applications in total there have been that were initially recommended for funding but where the non-departmental public body eventually reached a final decision not to support the project in (a) each of the last three full financial years and (b) 2025-26 to date.

A ‘South Asian production’ is a broad term which could span various languages, countries, art forms, and cultural contexts.

Generally the region is defined to include: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

Regarding organisations and individuals that specifically described their project as ‘South Asian’ or referred to one of the countries that form South Asia, the following is a breakdown of the funding awards since 2022-23:

2022-23

19 approved awards for combined value of £413,653
10 unsuccessful applications requesting combined value of £229,635

Of these unsuccessful applications, 2 were recommended for funding (requesting £33,092)

2023-24

15 approved awards for combined value of £470,229
19 unsuccessful applications requesting combined value of £326,521

Of these unsuccessful applications, 12 were recommended for funding (requesting £203,081)

2024-25

19 approved awards for combined value of £367,359
27 unsuccessful applications requesting combined value of £1,087,174

Of these unsuccessful applications, 8 were recommended for funding (requesting £246,983)

2025-26 (to date)

6 approved awards for combined value of £91,199
4 applications that are pending decision for combined value of £202,882
8 unsuccessful applications requesting combined value of £138,302

Of these unsuccessful applications, 3 were recommended for funding (requesting combined value of £70,682)

Question reference: S6W-41471

Asked by: Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Monday, 27 October 2025
Current Status: Answered by Angus Robertson on 7 November 2025

To ask the Scottish Government how much funding Creative Scotland has provided, through the funding programmes it manages, including those where the finance is provided by the National Lottery, for South Asian productions in (a) each of the last three full financial years and (b) 2025-26 to date.