Publication - FOI/EIR release

Correspondence relating to the proposed Resident Doctor’s strike and related pay negotiations: FOI release

Published: 6 May 2026
Directorate: Health Workforce Directorate
Topic: Health and social care, Public sector
FOI reference: FOI/202600501083
Date received: 13 January 2026
Date responded: 24 February 2026

Information request and response under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002

Information requested

All correspondence related to the proposed Resident Doctor’s strike and related pay negotiations with the Scottish Government, sent since 1 January 2026. This should include internal correspondence and correspondence sent to/received from the BMA.

Response

I enclose the information you requested in relation to the Doctors Pay Negotiations in PDF Format, in documents in PDF Format, in the document entitled "202600501083 - Doctors Pay Negotiations"

I also enclose the information you requested in relation to the proposed doctors strike in PDF Format, in the document entitled "202600501083 - Proposed Resident Doctors Strike" which was compiled by a separate team.

Following a comprehensive search, a number of emails were identified as in scope. The relevant emails have been released, with redactions where exemptions under FOISA apply. The following exemptions have been applied, and are noted within the document.

Section 29(1)(a) - applies where the information related to Formulation of Government Policy.

An exemption under section 29(1)(a) of FOISA (formulation or development of government policy) applies to some of the information requested because it relates to the formulation and development of the Scottish Government’s policy on Pay offers for Resident Doctors.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in high quality policy and decision-making, and in the properly considered implementation and development of policies and decisions. This means that Ministers and officials need to be able to consider all available options and to debate those rigorously, to fully understand their possible implications. Their candour in doing so will be affected by their assessment of whether the discussions on Pay offers for Resident Doctors will be disclosed in the near future, when it may undermine or constrain the Government’s view on that policy while it is still under discussion and development.

Section 29(1)(b) – applies where the information related to communications between Ministers.

An exemption under section 29(1)(b) of FOISA (Ministerial communications) applies to applies to some of the information requested because it relates to communications between Scottish Ministers.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing Ministers a private space within which issues and policy positions can be explored and refined, until the Government as a whole can adopt a policy that is sound and likely to be effective. This private thinking space also allows for all options to be properly considered, so that good decisions can be taken. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process.

Section 30(a) – applies where the information related to the convention of Collective Responsibility of Scottish Ministers

An exemption under section 30(a) of FOISA (convention of collective responsibility of Scottish Ministers) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially the convention of the collective responsibility of Scottish Ministers for the Scottish Government’s policy Pay offers for Resident Doctors. Government in Scotland, as in the rest of the UK, has long worked under the convention that Ministers are collectively responsible for decisions and their delivery. Collective responsibility requires collective discretion, and ensures that Ministers can express their views frankly in internal discussion of an issue while maintaining a united front once decisions have been reached. Disclosing communications between individual Ministers and/or Cabinet papers which record their views would prejudice substantially the maintenance of the convention.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in maintaining collective responsibility for the Scottish Government’s decision on Pay offers for Resident Doctors, once a collective decision has been made. Disclosure of these internal discussions between Ministers would be likely to have the effect of undermining the Government’s position on Pay offers for Resident Doctors and thus the effectiveness of the decision, which would not be in the public interest.

Section 30(b)(i) and (ii) – applies where disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of views for the purpose of deliberation or would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of views between officials on sensitive matters.

An exemption under section 30(b)(i) of FOISA (free and frank provision of advice) applies to some of the information requested. This exemption applies because disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit substantially the free and frank provision of advice. This exemption recognises the need for officials to have a private space within which to provide free and frank advice to Ministers and other officials before the Scottish Government reaches a settled public view. Disclosing the content of free and frank advice on a Pay Offer for Resident doctors will substantially inhibit the provision of such advice in the future, particularly because these discussions relate to sensitive issues such as the range of pay offers considered.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the informationoutweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. We recognise that there is a public interest in disclosing information as part of open, transparent and accountable government, and to inform public debate. However, there is a greater public interest in allowing a private space within which officials can provide full and frank advice to Ministers and other officials, as part of the process of exploring and refining the Government’s position on a Pay Offer for Resident doctors, until the Government as a whole can adopt a decision that is sound and likely to be effective. This private thinking space is essential to enable all options to be properly considered, based on the best available advice, so that good decisions can be taken. Premature disclosure is likely to undermine the full and frank discussion of issues between Ministers and officials, which in turn will undermine the quality of the decision making process, which would not be in the public interest.

Section 38(1)(b) – applied to remove personal data, such as names of officials below Senior Civil Service level and personal contact details, in line with data protection legislation.

This exemption is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption.

Out of scope - some information is withheld because it is out of the scope of the current request.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.