Advisers and meetings on regulations under the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Act 2026: FOI release

Information requested

1. All recorded information setting out the Scottish Government’s policy or position on whether bodies operating voluntary registers, or representing practitioner or commercial interests, including but not limited to the Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners (JCCP), Save Face, the British Association of Medical Aesthetic Nurses (BAMAN), the British Association of Cosmetic Nurses (BACN), the British College of Aesthetic Medicine (BCAM) and the Scottish Medical Aesthetics Safety Group (SMASG), are being or will be consulted or relied upon in the development of regulations under section 5 of the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Act 2026 and the associated licensing arrangements.

2. All recorded information showing meetings, correspondence and other engagement relating to the development of regulations under the Act and the associated licensing Order, on or after 12 May 2026, including the dates of any meetings, the names of attendees, and the organisations those attendees represented.

3. The membership, terms of reference and minutes of any expert, advisory, stakeholder or implementation group established or continued, on or after 12 May 2026, to advise on the regulations or licensing arrangements under the Act, including any successor to the Scottish Cosmetic Interventions Expert Group (SCIEG).

Response

Question 1

This is a formal notice under section 17(1) of FOISA that the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested. The Scottish Government does not have a policy or position on whether bodies operating voluntary registers, or representing practitioner or commercial interests are being or will be consulted or relied upon in the development of regulations under section 5 of the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Act 2026 and the associated licensing arrangements. In the development of policy, including associated legislation, the Scottish Government will engage with stakeholders who may be affected by the policy and stakeholders who have particular knowledge or expertise on the issues.

Representatives of BACN/BAMAN, BCAM, and the British Association of Beauty Therapy and Cosmetology (BABTAC) are members of the Scottish Cosmetic Interventions Expert Group (SCIEG), which met from 2014 and throughout development of the legislation. Scottish Government officials have held informal discussions with JCCP, again prior to and throughout development of the legislation. Officials met with SMASG representatives in May 2024, and the then Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health, Jenni Minto MSP, attended a roundtable organised by SMASG and sponsored by Miles Briggs MSP in June 2024. Officials have engaged through correspondence with SMASG through development of the legislation.

Question 2

I enclose a copy of some of the information you requested.

The following is a list of meetings attended by SG officials with colleagues from other organisations as indicated, where development of regulations under the Act and the associated licensing Order were discussed. The names of attendees are exempt from release under s.38(1)(b) of FOISA. 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.

• 18 May – Scottish Government and Healthcare Improvement Scotland
• 21 May – Scottish Government and UK Department of Health and Social Care
• 28 May – Scottish Government and Royal Environmental Health Institute of Scotland
• 10 June – Scottish Government and Healthcare Improvement Scotland

I have also found 5 documents containing internal and external correspondence relating to the development of regulations under the Act and the associated licensing Order. These documents are included in Annex 1.

Some of the information in Annex 1, which relates to personal information (names and email addresses), is exempt from disclosure under s.38(1)(b). 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.

Some of the information in Annex 1 is exempt under s.29(1)(a) of FOISA because it relates to formulation of policy. 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 acknowledge that this is an area of interest for a number of individuals, and release may inform public debate and increase awareness of these issues. However, I consider that the public interest in favour of maintaining the exemption is stronger. This is because it is important that policy officials can consider potential future approaches and account for these in planning, without being inhibited about the concern that such thinking may enter the public domain.

Some of the information in Annex 1 is exempt under s.36(1) of FOISA because it constitutes legal advice. 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 acknowledge that this is an area of interest for a number of individuals, and release may inform public debate and increase awareness of these issues. However, this is outweighed by the strong public interest in maintaining the right to confidentiality of communications between legal advisers and clients, to ensure that Ministers and officials are able to receive legal advice in confidence, like any other public or private organisation.

Question 3

No expert, advisory, stakeholder or implementation groups have been established since the Non-surgical Procedures and Functions of Medical Reviewers (Scotland) Bill has been passed, therefore this is a formal notice under section 17(1) of FOISA that the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested.

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.

FOI 202600523361 - Information released - Annex

File type

PDF

File size

69.1 kB