Scottish Government consultations

We asked for views on two minor amendments to road works legislation. Firstly,  on the proposal to revoke the Scottish Statutory Instrument,  “The “Scottish Road Works Register (Prescribed Fees) Regulations 2022” and replace it with a new Regulation to account for the overall running cost in the 2024/25 and secondly, Secondly, we sought views on amending “The Road Works (Qualifications of Operative and Supervisors (Scotland) Regulations 2017”, and the Road Works (Reinstatement Quality Plans, Qualifications of Supervisors and Operative and Miscellaneous Amendments) (Scotland) Regulations 2023, by expanding the list of approved awarding organisations to include two additional bodies, “Highfield Qualifications” and “EUIAS ”

In total, thirteen responses to the consultation were received, primarily from roads authorities. One response was received from an individual, seven from local authority roads teams, four from statutory undertakers and one from a public body responsible for the regulation of road works in Scotland. Brief analysis of these responses is detailed below:

There was strong support for both proposals; ten of the thirteen responses gave full support for the proposal on Fees. One roads authority noted no objection or preference, and two statutory undertakers objected to the current splitting mechanism. Of the two undertaker responses in opposition to the proposal, one made no alternate suggestions, but noted that undertakers appear to be paying more than roads authorities generally. However as the mechanism is use based, and at present utility firms undertake 75% of works, this is to be expected. Another undertaker suggested a new splitting model for future years in addition to opposing the current one. Twelve of the thirteen responses gave no objection to the addition of two new awarding bodies in road works training for Scotland, with one response skipping the question. One comment was received caveating their ‘no objection’ response,  on the condition that the bodies in question meet the relevant standards

The consultation responses have been carefully considered, most of the respondents supported the proposal to replace the 2022 Scottish Statutory Instrument. As a result, we will now revoke the Scottish Statutory Instrument, “The “Scottish Road Works Register (Prescribed Fees) Regulations 2022”, and replace it with a new Regulation as proposed. We have also added the two new awarding bodies, “Highfield Qualfications” and “EUIAS” to the appropriate statute. We have passed on the single request for a new apportionment model for fees and amounts with the Roads Authority and Utility Committee (Scotland), as the industry body representing the road works community. We have advised that if the group wish to review, amend or replace their current proposed splitting mechanism, comment must be returned to Transport Scotland by September 2024, to allow for sufficient consultation ahead of the next financial year.

We asked your views on SSSC’s proposals to streamline and improve registration. In order to achieve this, we asked your views on reducing the number of Register parts from 23 to 4, requiring employees to apply for registration within three months of starting a new role and be registered within six months. We also asked about SSSC’s proposals to include more information on the public facing Register, such as specialist qualifications for social workers, and information relating to fitness to practise which is currently available on a different parts of the SSSC website. The consultation opened on 4 October 2023 and closed on 2 January 2024.

A total of 69 responses were received; of these, 53 were from individuals and 16 were from organisations. 

The vast majority of respondents were supportive of the proposals, with many highlighting that reducing the number of register parts will help improve the process of registering with the SSSC. 87% of respondents agreed with this proposal, with 77% agreeing with the proposals to reduce the timescales for applying and 77% also agreeing with the proposals to include more information on the public facing Register.

There were also some respondents who had some concerns with certain aspects of the proposals. Several respondents highlighted that they believed 3 months was too short a timescale to expect a worker to apply for registration and others believing that sharing additional information on the public facing register could have a negative impact on individuals.

A full analysis of the consultation is available on the Scottish Government website.

The Scottish Government intends to implement the proposals set out in the consultation by amending Regulation of Care (Social Service Workers) (Scotland) Order 2005, The Scottish Social Services Council (Appointments, Procedure and Access to the Register) Regulations 2001 and The Registration of Social Workers and Social Care Workers in Care Services (Scotland) Regulations 2013. More information is available on the Scottish Parliament Website.

We asked for your views on whether Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) should be continued as part of the range of policy measures in place to address alcohol related harm, and, in the event of its continuation, the level the minimum unit price should be set going forward. The consultation opened on 20 September 2023 and closed on 22 November 2023. We asked for your views on whether Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) should be continued as part of the range of policy measures in place to address alcohol related harm, and, in the event of its continuation, the level the minimum unit price should be set going forward. The consultation opened on 20 September 2023 and closed on 22 November 2023.

We received 545 responses to our consultation questions. These included responses from 432 individuals and 113 organisations. Respondents included public health organisations, alcohol industry representative bodies and alcohol producers.

Two fifths of all respondents (39%) supported MUP continuing, three fifths (59%) were opposed, and 2% did not answer. There were, however, significant differences between individuals and organisations. Just over one quarter (27%) of individuals supported MUP continuing, compared to nine in ten (88%) organisations. All public health organisations who responded to the consultation agreed MUP should continue; however, 83% of alcohol industry representative bodies and 60% of alcohol producers were opposed.

One third of respondents (32%) agreed with the proposed minimum unit price of 65 pence. Two thirds (66%) disagreed, and 2% did not answer. Individuals and organisations held almost exactly opposing views. While 79% of individuals disagreed and 19% agreed, among organisations 79% agreed and 17% disagreed.

Most respondents held firm views either for or against MUP. One third (32%) supported a continuation and a price increase, while three fifths (59%) opposed both proposals. However, 7% were in favour of MUP continuing, but opposed to the specified price.

A full analysis of the consultation can be found on the Scottish Government website.

The Scottish Government is grateful to those who took the time to provide a response to this consultation. The consultation analysis report has now been published, along with the individual/organisation responses (where permission was granted). We have also provided feedback which can be read on the Scottish Government’s website. Following extensive evaluation, the evidence supports that MUP has had a positive impact on health outcomes, namely a reduction in alcohol-attributable deaths and hospital admissions, particularly in men and those living in the most deprived areas, and therefore contributes to addressing alcohol-related health inequalities. It is our intention to lay draft orders before Parliament to continue minimum unit pricing beyond 30^th April, and to set the price per unit at 65 pence.