We Asked, You Said, We Did

We held a public consultation seeking views on the Scottish Government's proposals to mitigate the two-child limit in Universal Credit in Scotland. The consultation opened on 21 February 2025 and closed on 18 April 2025. 

We asked four questions about:

• whether Social Security Scotland should deliver payments to mitigate the two-child cap in Scotland;
• whether the powers at s79 of the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 to top-up Universal Credit should be used to mitigate the two-child cap;
• whether payments to mitigate the two-child cap should be disregarded as income by the UK Government; and
• any potential impacts of the proposed approach outlined in the consultation on different groups of people, communities and businesses.

We also held a workshop with people who have lived experience of the two-child limit on Universal Credit to supplement the online consultation.

A total of 267 responses were received. Most consultation responses were from individuals, with 42 responses from organisations. A range of organisations responded including third sector organisations, local authorities and representative bodies. 

During the workshop event attendees shared their answers to the consultation questions. Their insights were considered alongside the formal consultation responses.

We commissioned an independent research company, Wellside Research, to conduct the analysis of the consultation responses and their analysis report has been published on the Scottish Government website. The analysis report is also available in easy read format. We have published the consultation responses, where permission has been given to do this, on Citizen Space.

The Scottish Government is committed to effectively scrapping the impact of the two-child cap in 2026. We are working at pace to begin payments as soon as possible.

In response to requests to consider a general power of competence for local authorities in Scotland, we launched a consultation to seek views on:

• The perceived barriers, risks and limitations of existing legislative powers.
• What functions, beyond those already conferred by statute, local authorities in Scotland wish to pursue and whether new legislation or amendments to existing legislation would best deliver those additional functions. 
• The continuing reluctance in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to rely on a General Power of Competence and how best to ensure the effective framing of similar legislative powers in Scotland to provide clarity and confidence to local authorities in the use of such powers.
• How best to ensure that legislation contains the right balance of flexibility and control to mitigate risks arising from greater financial freedoms.

The consultation proposed various approaches for consideration, which reflected the possibility of:

1. retaining the existing statutory framework without change,
2. amendments to widen the scope of existing legislative powers whilst retaining appropriate controls to mitigate risk,
3. introducing a General Power of Competence.

The consultation elicited a wide range of divergent views. A clear preference was expressed for a general power of competence by some, whilst others felt that specific rather than general powers would best serve the public interest whilst providing the flexibility and greater certainty sought by local authorities to pursue innovation without fear of legal challenge. Some felt that a general power of competence or amendments to existing legislation could deliver the greater freedoms sought by local authorities. Some respondents did not support the introduction of a general power of competence or amendments to existing legislation, and highlighted the risks of removing existing safeguards designed to protect public funds and the provision of public services.

We have carefully reviewed the range of views expressed. Options will now be explored to deliver an appropriate balance between the aspirations of Local Government for greater local empowerment and confidence in innovation whilst providing public assurance that appropriate safeguards are in place to mitigate financial risk and ensure continued prioritisation and delivery of core public services.

We sought views on the proposed administration regulations for the Scottish Aggregates Tax (SAT). Views were also sought on a range of issues to inform relevant impact assessments and ensure that these are fully considered. The consultation opened on 24 January and closed on 21 March 2025. 

Five responses to the consultation were received from various stakeholder groups. Two of those responses were received from the SAT expert advisory group members prior to the launch of the consultation. For the purposes of the analysis, the two responses from SAT advisory group members have been included, and respondents have been broadly categorised. One response was received from a primary aggregates industry body, one response was received from a waste and resource management body, and three responses were received from tax/accountancy/legal bodies. 

Most respondents agreed with the majority of the provisions in the draft administration regulations and impact assessments. However, it was noted that there will be an additional administrative burden on taxpayers due to the level of information being requested in the aggregates invoice and tax return. A key theme in the responses was that the definition of an aggregates invoice (as stipulated in the draft secondary legislation) would cause problems for the primary aggregates industry, and that this should be amended. 

Respondents also sought further clarity on the following provisions: 

• Penalties for failure to use a weighbridge/specified method  

• Group registration 

• 30-day tax return period  

• Time-limit for claims 

Stakeholder feedback on the partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA) proposed:  

• Greater reference to the research being undertaken via ClimateXChange, a centre for expertise on climate change, to better understand the evidence base on the role of recycled aggregates. 

• Further detail on the compliance costs to affected businesses.  

• An update on the assessment of cross-border complexities. 

• Information on the number of visits undertaken and the methodology used to select which operators were approached / visited. 

• Post-implementation review: further information is needed on what intervals the reviews will take place, how these will be carried out, and the level of detail to assess effectiveness of SAT. 

The material and views gathered through the consultation activities have informed the development of SAT policy in advance of the proposed introduction date of 1 April 2026. 

The Scottish Government has carefully considered the responses to the consultation and amendments have been made to regulation 2 on the definition of an aggregates invoice. Other amendments were made to correct minor spelling mistakes and referencing errors within the regulations. 

Further clarity has been provided in the consultation analysis report to answer stakeholder queries on a number of issues highlighted. 

The Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment has also been revised to include further information, as highlighted by respondents, and to answer queries raised. 

We sought expertise in our call for evidence to inform the development of a new inshore fisheries management framework for Scotland. Views were sought to inform the objectives of the framework and how it should be structured, who should be involved in fisheries management and how they should be involved, and what the framework should seek to deliver.

In total 100 responses were received from 52 individuals and 48 organisations. They represented views from around Scotland as well as from national respondents.

A number of key points came through during the course of analysing responses to this Call for Evidence:

• The majority of respondents supported a regional approach to inshore fisheries management in Scotland.
• The most common preferred delineation to be used for managing Scotland’s inshore fisheries was the Scottish Marine Region.
• There was significant support for an improved model of co-management in Scotland, however views on what this should look like differed significantly between respondents.
• A range of views were received about our existing Regional Inshore Fisheries Group (RIFG) network; these mirrored responses already received during our recent review of the RIFG network which have subsequently been considered and acted upon.
• A number of respondents repeatedly outlined the value in best available data to inform decision making, the need for greater transparency, and the need for appropriate resource to support delivery of an improved inshore fisheries management model.
• The theme of creel limits, and a need for them in the future, was prevalent in responses to a number of the questions.
• Views were often polarised depending on the background of the respondent.

We published the responses to the call for evidence on Citizen Space, where permission has been given to do this. We also published a call for evidence analysis report on the Scottish Government website.

The Scottish Government is grateful to those who took the time to provide a response to this call for evidence. The responses will be considered further by officials and will inform the development of a new inshore fisheries management framework. We will engage with stakeholders through our existing networks to develop proposals ahead of consultation in early 2026.

We asked for your views on a range of proposals, relating to a licensing and regulation scheme for non-surgical cosmetic procedures, including the role of local authorities and Healthcare Improvement Scotland in inspection and enforcement. The consultation also proposed the allocation of specific procedures to three groups to differentiate in what setting procedures should be carried out and by who, standards for hygiene, training and insurance, and age restrictions.

We received a total of 2,207 responses to the consultation; 2,075 responses were from individuals and 132 were from organisations.

The responses showed broad support for action to make the sector safer. This included support for a licensing scheme for some procedures (which we called group 1 procedures), and the restriction of some procedures only to appropriate healthcare professionals (which we called group 3 procedures). We also proposed a middle group of procedures (which we called Group 2) that we proposed should be restricted to HIS regulated or clinical settings, but could be carried our by non-healthcare professionals. Views on Group 2 were split. Most respondents believed that the majority of the procedures in the proposed group should either be restricted to healthcare professionals (with Group 3), or be available in licensed premises (with Group 1).

There was strong support for many of the practical aspects of proposals made. This included the requirement for a dual licensing system (for premises and practitioners) for procedures taking place outwith a HIS regulated setting, and for local authorities and HIS to have appropriate powers to enforce their proposals. There was also strong agreement that non-surgical cosmetic procedures should only be carried out on people aged 18 and over.

We have published responses to the consultation from all respondents who gave permission. We have also published the Scottish Government response to, and updated proposals following, the consultation. The response can be found here.

As a result of the consultation responses received, and feedback from other engagement with a range of stakeholders, we have reclassified the groupings of procedures based on the most appropriate mitigation for the risks of a procedure, rather than the procedure itself. As a result of this we have made some changes to the groups that some procedures sit in. We have also made changes to our proposed regulation of procedures in each group.

As set out in the 2025-26 Programme for Government, a Non-Surgical Cosmetic Procedures Bill will be introduced to the Scottish Parliament. The Bill will regulate the delivery of certain non-surgical cosmetic procedures to support client safety. It will ensure that certain procedures are required to be delivered from suitable premises, and will make provision to support the enforcement of appropriate standards for service providers

In addition, we will pursue secondary legislation under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 to establish a licensing regime for less invasive (group 1) procedures.

We sought your views on the proposal for the Scottish Government to seek the Parliament’s approval to extend the duration of Part 2 Order Making Powers in the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 for a further five year period from June 2025 to June 2030.  The consultation opened on 16 December 2024 and closed on 10 February 2025.

You provided us with 21 responses to the questions in our consultation. The responses came in from 15 organisations and six individuals.

With regards to the proposal to seek Parliament's approval to extend the Part 2 Order Making Powers for a further five years, our analysis of the responses found that 16 were in agreement, four opposed and one was neutral with no response given.

We published the responses to the consultation on Citizen Space, where permission has been given to do this.

We also published a consultation analysis report on the Scottish Government website.

As the responses received clearly support the proposal to seek Parliament’s approval to extend the order making powers for a further five year period, we took the necessary action to allow Parliament to consider and scrutinise the request to extend the powers. The Minister for Public Finance gave evidence in relation to this at the Finance and Public Administration Committee on 11 March 2025, where the committee approved the motion to extend these powers. Parliament approved them on 26 March 2025. The Minister for Public Finance signed the SSI (Scottish Statutory Instrument) on 27 March 2025 and this will take effect from June 2025. 

The public consultation sought views on proposed changes to clarify the status of digital assets as objects of property in Scots private law.

21 written responses to the consultation were received. We had a mixture of responses from individual respondents and respondents on behalf of representative bodies and organisations, mainly from the legal and financial services/fintech sectors.

Stakeholders overwhelmingly supported that primary legislation is the most effective way to resolve uncertainty regarding the status of digital assets in Scots private law. 

There was some divergence in responses regarding the scope of potential future legislation, particularly in terms of the recommended legal classification and defining characteristics of digital assets.

There was broad agreement that digital assets should be classified as incorporeal moveable things. On ownership and the transfer of ownership, most respondents agreed that control over a digital asset should generally be the basis for establishing ownership.

View the consultation analysis report

Where permission to publish has been provided, the consultation responses are now available to view online.

After carefully considering all responses, Scottish Ministers have decided to introduce a Digital Assets Bill as outlined in the Programme for Government 2025 to 26.  The consultation demonstrated strong support for clarifying the legal status of digital assets in Scots law by primary legislation.

For your views on proposed changes to section 9 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 (“the 1980 Act”), with the aim of supporting the alignment of legislation with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child by requiring that children and young people’s views are taken into account in relation to their participation in religious observance (“RO”) and religious and moral education (“RME” also known as "Religious Education" or "RE") in schools.

The consultation was launched on 14 November 2024, given the questions around current legislation on RO and RME and the Scottish Government’s UNCRC obligations, with the Scottish Government proposing to amend the legislation to ensure clarity and put the position in relation to UNCRC compliance beyond doubt as soon as possible.

The consultation asked 6 questions around views on the positive and/or negative implications of these changes, as well as insights into how the right to withdraw currently works in practice, including how schools implement the current guidance.

The consultation closed on 26 January 2025. A total of 530 validated responses were received from a broad range of stakeholders and individuals. You provided views on the wide range of issues presented including those we asked about as well as around the themes more generally.

The independent analysis of the consultation responses has been published as well as the consultation responses (where permission was granted).

The responses to this consultation have informed policy development in the form of:

• The religious observance and religious education provisions of the Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill and its accompanying documents.
• Work on developing updated guidance to accompany the implementation of any legislative changes in this area.

We asked for your views on a set of draft regulations to transfer the Police Appeals Tribunal (PAT) into the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland. The consultation asked ten questions around various proposals regarding the transfer of the PAT. The questions asked were a mix of open and closed questions. The consultation opened on 30 October 2024 and ran until 22 January 2025.

There were seven responses to the consultation. Six (86%) came from organisations and one (14%) came from an individual. There was strong support for some of the proposals such as the procedure for the notice of appeal to be submitted followed by a reply from the respondent and for the routes of onward appeal from the PAT. There was broad support offered for proposals around the potential payment of expenses and the publication of decisions. Respondents to these questions agreed with these proposals but suggested that matters such as the circumstances of each case and data privacy concerns should be important considerations.

There was mixed support for the proposed membership of the PAT. Three responses were in favour of maintaining the current membership arrangements of three legal members while three responses felt there should be members with policing and lay experience.

The response to the open questions gave helpful feedback on some of the technical provisions within the draft regulations or made more general suggestions around clarifying certain procedure rules and the effect of recent primary legislation. There was also support for some of the general practices of the First-tier Tribunal, for example, the role of supporters, being included in the Procedure Rules.

The views given on the proposed draft regulations will be used to inform the process of finalising the set of draft regulations regarding the transfer of the PAT. We will consider carefully all of the points raised when finalising the draft regulations.

We are grateful for the detailed responses to many of the questions and would like to thank everyone who responded. We have published the nonconfidential responses to the consultation (see links below).

View submitted responses where consent has been given to publish the response.

The full government consultation response has been published on the gov.scot website: Police Appeals Tribunal - transfer to First-tier Tribunal for Scotland: consultation analysis and response.

We asked for views on the proposed introduction of fixed penalty notices for offences under; 

•  The Environmental Protection (Single-Use Vapes) (Scotland) Regulations 2024, 

• The Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Scotland) Regulations 2021,  

• The Environmental Protection (Cotton Buds) (Scotland) Regulations 2019 and, 

• The Environmental Protection (Microbeads) Regulations 2018. 

We sought your views on the levels at which we propose these penalties should be set, and asked for any comments in relation to other provisions in the Regulations.  

We received 25 responses to this consultation. Of these, 11 responded as individuals and 14 on behalf of an organisation. Responses were primarily provided by Local Authority Trading Standards.  

An overwhelming majority of responses were supportive of the introduction of fixed penalty notices. Key points raised included extending the payment deadlines for fixed penalty notices, the introduction of an appeal mechanism for retailers if they believe an FPN was issued in error without an impact of the discount for early payment, raising the level of penalties set for fixed penalty notices, the importance of alignment with other UK nations, and the introduction of forfeiture and destruction provisions for single-use vapes supplied in contravention of the Vapes Regulations.  

In response to feedback provided, we made the following changes to the Regulations: 

• Amended the wording to remove the reference to online payments, to enable local authorities to utilise the most appropriate payment method in their area, as not all local authorities have an online payment system. 

• Extended the payment deadlines to 14 days for discounted payments and 28 days for full payments for FPNs under the Vapes Regulations. This brings the deadlines in line with those in the Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Act 2010 (TMPS), which Trading Standards officers (who are also responsible for enforcing these Regulations) are experienced at enforcing and under which FPNs are regularly issued. 

• Included provision for a direction-making power in the Vapes Regulations which will enable the Scottish Ministers to direct that single-use vapes supplied in contravention of the regulations are to be treated as waste and disposed of or treated as appropriate. This brings the Scottish Regulations in line with similar provisions in the other UK vapes regulations. 

We agreed with the importance of alignment across the UK nations with regards to enforcement, and therefore opted to keep the proposed level of penalties as are set out in the draft Regulations. 

The full government consultation response has been published on the gov.scot website: Environmental Protection (Single-Use Vapes) (Scotland) Regulations 2024 - fixed penalty notice amendment consultation: response  

We asked for views on a minor amendment to road works legislation. We sought views on the proposal to revoke the Scottish Statutory Instrument which accounts for the target cost of operating the Scottish Road Works Register and replace it with a new Regulation to account for the overall running cost in the 2025/26 financial year. The projected running cost for 2025/26 will increase to £1,008,819 from £901,314.

In total, nineteen responses to the consultation were received, primarily from roads authorities.  Seven responses were from individuals, three from statutory undertakers. Brief analysis of these responses is detailed below.

There was strong support for the proposal; sixteen of the nineteen responses gave support for the proposal. Two statutory undertakers and one individual were not content with the agreed cost sharing matrix developed by the Roads Authority and Utility Committee (Scotland).

Of the two undertaker responses in opposition to the proposal, one made no alternate suggestions but commented that road authority activities have largely increased. Whilst there has been increase in noticing of work carried out by road authorities, there was still a continuation of increase in utility works and at present utilities carry out 73% of the works. Another undertaker suggested a new splitting model for future years in addition to opposing the current one. 

The consultation responses have been carefully considered, most of the respondents supported the proposal to replace the 2024 Scottish Statutory Instrument. As a result, we will now revoke the Scottish Statutory Instrument, “The “Scottish Road Works Register (Prescribed Fees) Regulations 2024”, and replace it with a new Regulation as proposed. 

The public consultation sought views on proposals to extend marine planning zone boundaries to resolve an existing gap in aquaculture planning regulations.

53 responses were received from a wide range of stakeholders, of which 29 were from groups or organisations and 27 were from individual members of the public.

A number of respondents who agreed with the proposals commented that they would close a regulatory gap, ensure developments were appropriately assessed under existing regulations and allow farms to be located further from the shore in line with developments in aquaculture equipment technology.

A number of issues were raised both by respondents who disagreed with the proposals and those who agreed. The points raised were wide ranging, but some key themes emerged including concerns regarding regulators capacity,  the assessment of proposed developments and impacts on other marine users.

View the consultation analysis report

Where permission to publish has been provided, the consultation responses are now available to view online.

Following careful consideration of all the responses received, Scottish Ministers have decided to bring forward a Scottish Statutory Instrument to extend marine planning zone boundaries as proposed in the consultation paper.

We consulted on the investigative powers for the Scottish Pubs Code Adjudicator under the Tied Pubs (Scotland) Act 2021, suggesting criteria for investigation, enforcement and financial penalties. 

Feedback included the formality of the investigation process, the costs of the process and their potential impact on the sector, ensuring fair treatment between businesses of different sizes in the sector, and the initial and upper limits for financial penalties.

We will consider this feedback in developing and publishing an investigation policy in advance of the commencement of the investigation and enforcement provisions in the Tied Pubs (Scotland) Act 2021. 

We sought your views on the introduction of a Scottish Building Safety Levy (SBSL) to provide funding for the Scottish Government’s Cladding Remediation Programme. The consultation opened on 23 September 2024 for a period of eight weeks, closing on 18 November 2024. The consultation invited responses to a range of open and closed questions on aspects relating to the SBSL, including the strategic context for the tax, scope, calculation, operational considerations, and impacts. 

The consultation received a total of 78 responses, mostly from property developer organisations and other housing/property stakeholders. The consultation was accompanied by a programme of engagement with industry stakeholders and prospective taxpayers, and through an Expert Advisory Group. 

Most responses were from those operating within the residential property development sector who were opposed to the introduction of the SBSL, with concerns raised that this would place a further cost burden on the housebuilding industry which is already contributing towards the cost of cladding remediation. Responses emphasised the need to consider the impact of the SBSL on housebuilding within a wider context of cumulative impacts and regulation on the sector, and of the housing emergency and the importance of building new homes.  

There was strong support from respondents to mitigate impacts of the SBSL on affordable housing, on smaller developers, and on island and rural communities. 

The Scottish Government is grateful to everyone who engaged with and provided a response to this consultation. Responses have been analysed in a report which has been published following the introduction of the Building Safety Levy (Scotland) Bill on 5 June 2025. Where permission has been given to do so, responses have been published on Citizen Space. 

We recognise the general opposition to the introduction of the SBSL but note that no immediate alternative solutions are being offered by respondents to address the funding challenge associated with cladding remediation. 

In lieu of the SBSL, the Scottish Government would be required to fund its Cladding Remediation Programme through its existing capital budget envelope or through changes to other devolved taxes. Neither of these options would meet Scottish Ministers’ objective of ensuring that there is parity in the funding arrangements between the Scottish and UK governments, and that the costs do not fall directly onto homeowners or disproportionately onto the general taxpayer.  Work on the SBSL has balanced the need to raise revenue for cladding remediation efforts with minimising any potential impact on the housebuilding sector, including providing exemptions for affordable housing and housing built on islands, and providing an annual levy-free allowance to protect smaller developers. 

The Scottish Government asked for your views on proposals to implement a minimum charge on single-use beverage proposals. Topics included:

• Charge level
• Scope of the charge
• Use of net proceeds
• Enforcement
• Implementation
• Impact assessment results

There were 1,068 unique respondents to the consultation. Over 800 responses were submitted by individuals with the remaining amount submitted by businesses.

Views on these initial proposals were mixed, with no clear agreement on how best to deliver the charge fairly and effectively.

We want to thank everyone who took the time to respond to the consultation.

The analysis of the consultation responses and responses to the consultation, where permission has been given, have been published.

We are now taking time to fully consider the issues raised to ensure the charge is effective, proportionate, and fair.

We will continue to work closely with stakeholders to develop an approach that is deliverable and allows businesses and consumers time to prepare, including through working with the Single-Use Disposable Cups Charge Advisory Group.

We will also continue to develop measures aimed at tackling the consumption of problematic single-use items and promoting uptake of reusable alternatives.

For your views on various parts of the Scottish Pubs Code. Topics covered within the consultation paper included: Market Rent Only leases, guest beer agreements, information for prospective tenants, rent assessment, flow monitoring devices and gaming machines.

The consultation was launched on 17 September 2024, and was a short, targeted consultation drawing upon concerns raised by stakeholders following the making of the Scottish Pubs Code Regulations 2024. The proposals were informed by workshops that were carried out with tenant and pub-owning business representatives.

The consultation closed on 4 November 2024 and asked 20 questions. A total of 21 responses were received from stakeholders and individuals.  16 were from groups or organisations (eight Pub-owning businesses, six Representative bodies and two Campaign groups) and five from individual members of the public.

The Scottish Government’s analysis of the consultation has been published as well as the consultation responses (where permission was granted).

The responses to this consultation will inform proposed Ministerial changes to the Scottish Pubs Code.

The intention is for an amending Scottish Statutory Instrument (SSI) to be laid in the Scottish Parliament in January 2025 and, subject to the parliamentary process, for it to come into effect on 31 March 2025. The code will be subject to statutory review, with the first review period ending on 31 March 2026 and further reviews due every 3 years thereafter.

We asked for your views on proposals for children’s hearings redesign.  The consultation focussed on potential legislative changes required to redesign Scotland’s children’s hearings system to build on its strengths so that it can deliver the best possible experience to the children and families in need of its support.

The consultation opened on 26 July 2024 and closed on 28 October 2024.

105 responses were received across the 13 week consultation period.  Of those 105 responses, 56% were from organisations, and 44% were from individuals. The consultation was supported by a series of online and in person engagement events throughout August, September and October which reached over 500 people.

The wide ranging responses to the consultation and the lack of consensus between many respondents on several of the areas in the consultation reflects the fine balance and interaction between the various sensitive issues at play and the complexity of redesigning the children’s hearings system. 

The Scottish Government commissioned The Children and Young People's Centre for Justice (CYCJ) to undertake an independent, impartial analysis of the responses to the consultation.  This analysis was published in early 2025, the responses themselves will also be published (where permission to publish was given).

We are carefully considering what we have heard during the consultation process to help inform development of future legislation and practice and will continue to engage with key stakeholders along with representatives of those with lived and living experience of the children’s hearings system in Scotland. 

We consulted on our initial proposals for a Scottish equivalent to the Passivhaus standard between July and October 2024.

We asked for your views on a range of key topics relating to determining the principles for a Scottish equivalent:

• Identifying the components of an equivalent standard.
• Proposals to improve the setting of energy performance and ventilation standards for new buildings, leading to lower energy demand (and reduced running costs) and a healthy indoor environment.
• Proposals to improve assurance that the design intent for energy performance and ventilation standards for new buildings is achieved in practice.
• General topics which are material to the ongoing development of energy and environmental standards set by building regulations.
• The proposed updated programme to deliver the current energy standards review and the commitment on a Scottish equivalent to the Passivhaus standard.
• Notes on the proposed amendments of regulations.

Consultation activity ran from 31 July 2024 to 23 October 2024 and received a total of 350 responses. 186 were from organisations and 164 were from individuals. Of the responses received, 64 respondents instructed that their responses should not be published. Of these 64 responses, 25 were from individuals and 39 from organisations.

Accordingly, following final QA checks, 290 consultation responses were published on the consultation page.

Responses represented a range of views and offered useful insight into many aspects of the proposals. The consultation analysis report is now published.

• Determining the principles for a Scottish equivalent to the Passivhaus standard - Analysis of Consultation Responses - gov.scot

Following review and consideration of responses to the consultation and focussing on items that may require modifications to the Building Regulations to satisfy Mr Rowley’s final Bill proposal, it is our position that only limited changes to regulations are needed to support an outcome, up to and including that delivered through the voluntary Passivhaus Standard.

In respect of how we set performance requirements, the Scottish Government is content that the current regulations and schedule of mandatory standards within The Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 already provide the necessary legislative provisions to give effect to the final proposal for a proposed Domestic Building Environmental Standards (Scotland) Bill. The outcome being ‘to introduce new minimum environmental design standards for all new-build housing to meet a Scottish equivalent to the Passivhaus standard, in order to improve energy efficiency and thermal performance’.

Changes that are necessary to legislation have been identified and these relate to building standards processes. In particular, the mandating of information needed to demonstrate to verifiers that compliance in both the design and the construction of buildings is being taken forward correctly. We can confirm that regulations amending The Building (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2004 were laid on 12 December 2024. These introduce a requirement for developers to provide an “energy and environmental design statement” with building warrant applications and an “energy and environmental construction statement” with each completion certificate. These statements will describe how the design and construction of the building complies with paragraphs 3.13, 3.14, 3.28, 6.1 to 6.7, 6.10, 7.1 and 7.2 of schedule 5 of the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004. These are the mandatory standards relevant to the delivery of energy and environmental performance.

Part 1 of the Scottish Government response to the consultation, which covers regulatory amendments, is now published.

• Determining the principles for a Scottish equivalent to the Passivhaus standard - Scottish Government Response Part 1 - Regulatory Changes - gov.scot

Part 2 of the Scottish Government response to the consultation will follow in early 2025.

Next Steps

The July 2024 consultation proposed an implementation date of 2028 for the new standards and there was widespread support for this. To enable the construction sector to prepare for the changes an implementation date of 31 March 2028 was set out in the regulatory amendments.

We will continue to work with the Working Group and wider industry stakeholders through 2025, informed by response to this consultation, to agree and develop the detail of changes to how we set energy and environmental standards for new buildings with the aim to publish revised standards in early 2026.

Regulatory amendments

Amendment to regulations are published here: The Building (Procedure) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2024

The consultation aimed to gather views on modernising the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, with a particular focus on:

• Improving access to justice for adults affected by the AWI Act
• Shifting the focus of the AWI Act to one that truly centres on the adult
• Enabling adults to access rights more easily
• Ensuring adults are supported to make and act upon their own decisions for as long as possible
• Ensuring that when an adult cannot make their own decisions despite support, that their will and preferences are followed unless doing so would be to the overall detriment of the adult
• Setting out proposals for reform concerning authority for research

Whilst it was clear from the consultation responses that there is strong support to modernise the AWI legislation, risks relating to European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) non-compliance in relation to deprivation of liberty cases emerged.

Specific concerns were also raised in relation to resourcing AWI practice, the need for greater awareness and access to independent advocacy and a need for a more granular level of detailed to be provided to allow fuller consideration of reform proposals.

We concluded that there is the need for a more detailed approach to be developed to ensure we can bring forward solutions consistent with ECHR legislation and that further work must be prioritised ahead of bringing forward a Bill in this area. 

Between 19 August and 14 October 2024, the Scottish Government consulted on proposed fisheries management measures within Scottish Offshore Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). In total, management measures for 20 MPAs were consulted on, with 15 of these sites having two options proposed (either zonal or full site closure) and the other five only having one option proposed (full site closure). Views were also sought on a proposed amendment to the boundary of the West of Scotland MPA. 

Additionally, the consultation asked for views on a range of supporting documents, including Sustainability Appraisal (SA), draft Fisheries Assessments, Strategic Environmental Report (SEA), Socio-Economic Impact Assessment (SEIA), partial Business and Regulatory Impact Assessments (BRIAs) and partial Island Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA). 

The consultation included a mix of closed and open-ended questions. 

In total, the consultation received 3,881 valid responses, with 97% submitted by individuals and 3% by organisations. Campaign responses accounted for 95% of submissions. 

Responses to the consultation revealed a fundamental divide between advocates of conservation and industry stakeholders when it came to proposals for zonal or full site measures. 

Respondents preferring zonal measures argued that these approaches were informed by extensive stakeholder collaboration and designed to balance environmental objectives with the continuation of fishing activities. This approach was also viewed as vital for maintaining economic resilience and food security.  

However, critics of zonal measures warned of potential fragmentation in protection, arguing that leaving certain ecological features unprotected could compromise conservation goals and fail to adequately address the pressures on sensitive habitats and species. 

Advocates for full site measures stressed the necessity of comprehensive protection to restore ecosystems to favourable conservation status. These respondents argued that full site approaches better align with international conservation obligations and enhance resilience to climate change by preserving biodiversity. 

Regarding the proposed boundary amendment to the West of Scotland MPA, half of respondents (50%) were in favour with only 10% expressing opposition. The remaining 40% of respondents expressed neutrality. 

In relation to the supporting documents many respondents urged for a more balanced set of assessments, incorporating comprehensive cost-benefit analyses and long term ecosystem considerations. They wanted more emphasis on economic benefits of measures and a greater consideration given to potential displacement impacts of fishing activity. In relation to the SEA, some respondents expressed approval that it provided a good summary and, due to the current lack of benchmark evidence, it is useful for future reference as a point of comparison. 

The Scottish Government is grateful to everyone who engaged with and provided a response to this consultation. Responses have been collated and analysed to produce the consultation analysis report which was published on 31 January 2025. The report is available to read online: Fisheries management measures within Scottish Offshore Marine Protected Areas (MPAs): consultation analysis. 

The key findings from this report will be taken into account when decisions on management measures and the West of Scotland MPA boundary are made later this year. The intention is for relevant Scottish Statutory Instruments (SSIs) to be laid in the Scottish Parliament and, subject to the parliamentary process, for these to come into effect in 2025.