Scottish Government consultations

We asked for views on the proposal to make the M8 and M9 Trunk Roads (Newbridge to Hermiston Gait) (Actively Managed Hard Shoulder and Speed Limit) Regulations and in particular comments in relation to the bus lane provisions.

We specifically asked for reference to operational or safety considerations by consultees in support of their comments.

We noted that consultation has been undertaken on the previous actively managed hard shoulder regulations.

Twelve responses were received to the consultation. Five of these were from organisations and seven from individuals. The respondents included a local authority, a public transport organisation, a business group and seven members of the public.

The general feedback from organisations was supportive of the intention to introduce an AMHS.

Comments were received from a number of individual consultees that referred to the use of the hard shoulder as a running lane for vehicles and the impact of the availability of the facility in an emergency. It is noted that the design maintains the hard shoulder facility for use in an emergency and provides additional emergency refuge areas.

A number of the organisations who responded were supportive of the proposals, highlighting the benefit that they will bring to public transport and the promotion of bus travel in particular.

All of the consultation responses have been carefully considered and it was not considered necessary to amend the proposed content of the Regulations.

The Scottish Ministers intend to make the regulations and lay them before the Scottish Parliament with the regulations coming in to force in time for the completion of the project.

In October 2020, Registers of Scotland (RoS) launched a public consultation to seek views on its proposals to increase some of its statutory fees to return it to a cost-neutral position. The consultation ran from 26 October 2020 to 24 December 2020. It was hosted on the Scottish Government’s Citizen Space consultation hub, where people could post their responses. Announcements were posted on the RoS website, by email, and via RoS social media channels to confirm that the consultation was live and to encourage responses while it was live.

In total, 44 responses to the consultation were received from individuals and organisations across the public and private sectors; nine responded on behalf of organisations and 35 as individuals. The consultation included eight question of which seven included a yes/no response.

There was widespread support for the proposals. The question: ‘Do you agree that rejection fees should be removed?’ received the most positive response with more than 90% of respondents agreeing with the proposed change. The question which elicited a significant number of neutral or negative responses was: ‘Do you agree that Registers of Scotland should review its statutory fees on an annual basis?’ with only 55% in favour. The remainder of the questions which included yes/no responses received positive responses of between 75% to 88%.

The consultation responses have been carefully considered and published. Only answers from respondents who gave permission have been published. However, all responses are included in the analysis of this consultation.

The majority of respondents supported the proposals to alter RoS’s statutory fees. As a result, a Scottish Statutory Instrument has been laid in the Scottish Parliament and will go through the parliamentary process.

We asked for views on a minor amendment to road works legislation. We sought views on the proposal to revoke the Scottish Statutory Instrument,  “The “Scottish Road Works Register (Prescribed Fees) Regulations 2020” and replace it with a new Regulation to account for the running costs of £915,000 for the 2021/22 financial year.

In total, twelve responses to the consultation were received, primarily from roads authorities.

There was  support for the proposal: eleven of the twelve responses gave full support; and one gave no answer (yes/no) to the specific question, while providing a paragraph supporting the increase in fees for 2021 on the proviso that the portion their organisation would pay followed the existing process, this has been included as supporting the proposal. One other organisation confirmed support and agreed that the existing mechanism for splitting the overall figure should not change unless specifically consulted on. Two other responses described the range of functionality of the register and the fair overall cost of the service as reasons to support this small increase in cost.

The consultation responses have been carefully considered. All of the respondents supported the proposal to replace the 2020 Scottish Statutory Instrument. As a result, we will now revoke the Scottish Statutory Instrument, “The “Scottish Road Works Register (Prescribed Fees) Regulations 2020”, and replace it with a new Regulation as proposed.