Seòmar agus comataidhean

Offshore oil and gas licensing, as well as consenting and the associated fiscal regime, are all matters that are currently reserved to the UK Government.

The Scottish Government has been clear in our commitment to achieving net zero by 2045. Any further extraction and use of fossil fuels must be consistent with Scotland’s climate obligations and just transition commitments and we have advocated for a licencing approach that has a Climate Compatibility Checkpoint as well as taking energy security into account. It is vital that we take an evidence-based approach to the energy transition. At the heart of our approach is ensuring a just transition for Scotland’s valued and highly skilled oil and gas workforces whose skills will be critical to the success of Scotwind and other low carbon energy projects.

The Scottish Government is committed to driving key efficiency programmes such as Scottish Single Estates, Commercial Value for Money (CVfM), Collaborative Procurement frameworks, the Intelligence Automation Centre of Excellence, and Digital programme. There has been strong progress across these programmes which are expected to reach up to £280 million of cost avoidance and cash releasing savings over a two-year period by the end of 2024-25. This figure is not related to pay costs for board members of public sector or other non-departmental bodies.

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-37627 on 27 May 2025.

The following table sets out any representations that officials have identified as being received by the Scottish Government referencing bereavement-based exceptional circumstances or appeals arrangements in relation to the National Qualifications.

It should be borne in mind that different exceptional circumstances and appeals arrangements were in place in 2020, 2021 and 2022 as a result of the alternative awarding processes in place due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-37627 on 27 May 2025. 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

Decisions in relation to Exceptional Circumstances and Appeals services for the National Qualifications are an operational matter for the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA).

Figures quoted in a recent media article related to SQA’s Exam Exceptional Circumstances Consideration Service (EECCS). SQA is the only awarding body in the UK that offers an exceptional circumstances service which specifically reviews alternative evidence. It has been designed to offer young people the best opportunity to demonstrate evidence of attainment if their examination experience is impacted by, for example, bereavement, illness or other personal circumstances. This is a pre-certification process, with requests being submitted within 10 working days after the relevant exam. This means that if a young person experiences bereavement or other personal circumstance ahead of an exam, they can ask for alternative evidence to be taken into account when their grade is being determined – whether or not they are able to attend the exam.

The SQA Appeals service is a separate process that takes place following certification for learners who consider they have not achieved their expected results, and involves a marking review of SQA-marked assessments. Candidates who have undergone exceptional circumstances consideration are excluded from the Appeals Service for the same qualification. This is because the EECCS includes a marking review of any/all submitted external assessments that are related to the request.

SQA provided figures in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request from The Herald newspaper on the number of EECCS requests made and cancelled. SQA do not categorise EECCS requests as successful or rejected. It is incorrect to interpret the data as showing that the SQA did not approve over 90% of exam appeals made on the grounds of bereavement.

While SQA may cancel an EECCS request in some circumstances (where, for example, estimates had not been provided, coursework not completed, or a lack of supporting evidence), a larger number of requests are cancelled by the candidate’s centre (school, college or training provider).

For personal circumstances, such as bereavement, the type of EECCS request submitted is determined by the Head of Centre. SQA do not assess the reason for the request or require access to further details regarding the submission. A centre may cancel an EECCS request if they later determine that either there is not a justification for the request, or the alternative evidence available is not sufficient.

To maintain impartiality and fairness, examiners are not provided with any information about the nature of an EECCS request. This is an important safeguard that has been built into the EECCS to ensure that all candidates are treated equally and receive grades based on evidence-based demonstrated attainment against the national standard.

Local authorities are responsible for the management of their own digital assets and will have processes and financing in place to deal with the repair or replacement of devices as required. We do not hold this information centrally.

In December 2022, local authorities reported that around 280,000 devices had been distributed to learners. This figure contains the 72,000 Scottish Government funded device from the pandemic alongside those purchased through local investment. We do not hold an updated figure but would expect this to be significantly higher, given the ongoing investment from local authorities since this time.

Ministerial pay is set and administered by the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government has no role in this. You may, therefore, wish to direct any detailed questions on pay to the Scottish Parliament. A breakdown on Ministerial salaries is provided on the Scottish parliament website - MSP salaries | Scottish Parliament Website.

I can confirm that all Ministers accepted the equalisation of the MSP element of their salary, with the exception of the First Minister who chose not to do so to avoid any perception that he was personally benefiting from his own decisions on Ministerial pay.

NHS 24 have robust practices in place to ensure patient safety is paramount and that the appropriate procedures are in place for assessing risk.

Scottish Government monitor the performance of NHS 24 and regularly engage with the service to discuss performance related issues. Should NHS 24 feel that their ability to meet demand was presenting any risk to patient safety we would expect them to contact Scottish Government immediately in line with agreed processes.

Scottish Government have had no recent discussions with the British Medical Association (BMA) regarding clinical risks associated with NHS 24 services.