- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 11 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 12 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it stands by the statement in its announcement on 22 August 2002 by the Minister for Environment and Rural Development on proposals for the protection of the scallop industry that a majority of the scallop industry supports its proposals
Answer
In my statement of 22 August, I did not say that a majority of the scallop industry supported our proposals for scallop conservation. I said that a majority of the industry supported our proposals. That reflected the fact that our consultation exercises were addressed to the Scottish fishing industry as a whole, not just to scallop fishermen, and that the responses showed the Scottish fishing industry as a whole to be supportive of our proposals. I stand by this interpretation of the responses to our consultation exercises, and by the need for additional conservation measures. However, what has since become clear is the strength of opposition from parts of the scallop sector in particular. That is something on which I am reflecting in my continuing discussions with the Rural Development Committee.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 15 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will list, for each works package under the Holyrood project where no performance bond was obtained, (a) the name of the company awarded the contract, (b) details of the work involved, (c) the total value of the contract as awarded and (d) whether there was any other form of protection other than a performance bond required from the party awarded the contract such as a parent company guarantee; if so, whether it will detail what protection was to be obtained and whether it was obtained and, where no form of protection was required, on what basis that decision was reached.
Answer
My answer to question S1W-30170 on 16 October 2002, explained that negotiations on trade contracts for the new Scottish Parliament building at Holyrood are carried out on a commercially confidential basis, and that it would not be appropriate to name publicly those contractors who have yet to provide a performance bond. The same principle applies to all contractors and I am therefore unable to list those contractors, or provide any of the associated information requested, on this occasion.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Mary Mulligan on 11 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to alter the current rule that registration of children for dentistry services under the NHS lasts for only 15 months and whether it will amend the rule so that a child remains registered as a patient with a dental practice until he or she reaches adulthood.
Answer
The Scottish Executive has no current plans to alter the 15-month NHS registration period with a dentist.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 11 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what information it has received on why no submission was made to the European Commission from the UK to receive a share of its financial package to fight transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE) and other animal diseases in the EU in 2003.
Answer
EU legislation requires member states to submit applications for such funding by 1 June. The Executive is aware that due to an administrative oversight a submission from the UK was not submitted by that deadline. Administrative procedures have been amended to avoid a repetition in the future. Discussions are currently under way with Commission officials to establish whether there is any scope to consider an EU contribution to the 2003 TSE surveillance programme costs.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 11 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 7 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-28916 by Ross Finnie on 25 September 2002, what its estimate is of the area of land that is under traditional secure tenancy arrangements; what the source and date is for such an estimate; how many farm units are held under such tenure, and what the average si'e of such units is.
Answer
Over 1.7 million Ha of agricultural land in Scotland are rented under full tenancy agreements (that is, tenancies under the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991 with traditional secure tenants or limited partnership tenants, including minor holdings) (source:
Scottish Agricultural Statistics, Scottish Executive, 2001). As I explained in the answer given to question S1W-28914 on 18 October 2002, there were estimated to be around 14,000 full tenancy agreements under the 1991 act active in Scotland in 2001. We do not hold information centrally which subdivides this figure further. On the basis of the above information, we estimate that the average size of a holding under a full tenancy agreement in Scotland is around 120 Ha.A Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) survey estimated that around 64% of such tenanted land is held under 1991 act tenancies with a traditional secure tenant (source:
Land Tenure Patterns in Scotland, RICS Scotland, 1995, Table 1). This would mean that around 1 million Ha of agricultural land in Scotland are held under traditional secure 1991 act tenancies.All answers to written parliamentary questions can be found on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/search_wa.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 10 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 7 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer what the reasons are for appointing an Opening Ceremonies Manager for the new Parliament building; when the decision was taken that such an appointment should be made; who has been appointed to the post and, if the appointee was already a member of the Parliament's staff, whether the postholder's substantive post will be filled; whether the post was advertised and, if so, where, and how much the recruitment exercise cost, including any savings associated with the postholder's substantive post.
Answer
A member of the Parliament's staff has been appointed, following an internal competition, to undertake the duties of Opening Ceremonies Manager on a temporary basis. The decision to make the appointment was taken by the Corporate Body on 25 June 2002. The reasons for the appointment are as follows: experience of the 1999 Opening Ceremony pointed towards the need for one or more dedicated members of staff; the work of the Opening Ceremonies Steering Group requires to be supported and the contributions from different sections of parliamentary staff require to be co-ordinated; communication with and monitoring of the work of an external events co-ordinator, once appointed, will best be managed through the post; calls on the budget provisionally allocated for the Opening Ceremonies will be monitored by the manager. His substantive post has been advertised internally, to be filled on a temporary basis. No recruitment costs, other than staff time, have been incurred. To date, no savings have accrued. I will write to the member directly with the other details requested.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 10 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 7 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer whether there has been any expenditure unnecessarily incurred by the Office of the Presiding Officer; if so, whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will provide details, and what the reasons are for the position on this matter.
Answer
No.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 10 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 7 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body considers that there is scope for savings in the expenditure of the Office of the Presiding Officer and, if so, whether any such savings can be made in respect of the expenses relating to the (a) Presiding and Deputy Presiding Officers and (b) staff of the Office of the Presiding Officer.
Answer
No.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 10 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 7 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) has received any correspondence from Prince Charles: if so, whether it will publish any such correspondence and any response made, and what the reasons are for its position on the matter.
Answer
No correspondence has been received from HRH The Prince of Wales by the SPCB.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 10 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 7 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer how much the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body has spent on entertainment and hospitality since July 1999, giving details of each event where such costs were incurred, including the purpose of the event, who attended and on what date the event took place.
Answer
The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body has incurred approximately £156,000 of expenditure on hospitality over a 39-month period, since July 1999. The cost of identifying each individual event and those present over the last three years would not be justified.