Seòmar agus comataidhean

Reservoir safety is a matter for the reservoir undertaker. The Reservoirs Act 1975 places a duty on undertakers requiring all large raised reservoirs (those capable of storing more than 25,000 cubic metres of water above natural ground level) to be:

overseen at all times by a qualified civil engineer drawn from the Supervising Engineers panel (one of four panels of qualified civil engineers established under the 1975 Act), and

inspected and reported on at least every ten years by a qualified civil engineer drawn from one of the other three approved panels, with any recommendations made as a result of such inspection - as to measures to be taken in the interests of safety - requiring to be implemented.

Local authorities, as enforcement authorities under the 1975 act, have duties under the act to maintain a public register of all large raised reservoirs in their area, to enforce the measures stipulated in the act, and to submit biennial reports to the Scottish Executive on any steps taken to secure that reservoir undertakers observe and comply with the requirements of the act.

We consider that fixed penalty notices, correctly and appropriately used, are an important part of a modern criminal justice system. They offer a quick, proportionate and effective response to a number of instances of minor offending making clear to the offender, and the local community, that such behaviour will not be tolerated. As announced in Smarter Justice, Safer Communities on 22 March 2005, we remain committed in principle to a further extension of the use of fixed penalty notices, with appropriate guidelines and safeguards in place. We will monitor the operation of the antisocial behaviour fixed penalty pilot scheme before reaching any decision to extend their use further.

The Smarter Justice document can be accessed from the Summary Justice Reform website at:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/about/JD/CP/00019008/Homepage.aspx.

Copies are also available in the Parliament’s reference centre (Bib. number 35821).

There are no plans to offer fiscal fines to persistent offenders who are on a course of criminal conduct. It is intended, however, to extend the use of fiscal fines and to introduce other alternatives to prosecution that will be appropriately used on the basis of clear guidelines prepared by the Lord Advocate. This will allow our courts to operate more speedily and effectively. Smarter Justice, Safer Communities – Summary Justice Reform Next Steps, published on 22 March 2005, outlines how these penalties will be used. It can be accessed from the Summary Justice Reform website at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/about/JD/CP/00019008/Homepage.aspx.

Copies are also available in the Parliament’s reference centre (Bib. number 35821).

The information requested is given in table 2.2 (Total gross revenue expenditure per pupil in primary schools 1998-99 to 2003-04) of Expenditure on School Education in Scotland 2005, a Scottish Executive publication of 18 January 2005. A copy of this is available in the Parliament’s Reference Centre (Bib. number 35374). The information is also available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/stats/bulletins/00389-00.asp.

The Education (Publication and Consultation Etc) (Scotland) Regulations 1981 set out the requirements on local authorities for consultation with parents and other interests on proposals to close schools. Authorities will take a range of local circumstances into account in deciding when to consult on such proposals. We have no plans to amend the Regulations to govern the timing of the issue of proposals for consultation.

If there is sufficient evidenceof a crime being committed by an accused person, the prosecutor must consider whataction is in the public interest. Assessment of the public interest involves carefulconsideration of a number of factors including the seriousness of the offence, the interests of the victimand other witnesses, factors relating to the accused (such as age and previous record),as well as local community interests or general public opinion. The public interest is more likely to require prosecutionwhere the accused has a significant history of recent offending particularly wherethis includes convictions for similar crimes.

Under section 302 of the CriminalProcedure (Scotland) Act 1995, Procurators Fiscal are authorised to issue conditionaloffers of a fixed penalty (a “fiscal fine”) as an alternative to prosecution inrelation to any offence in respect of which an alleged offender could competentlybe tried before a district court.  Confidential guidance has been issued to procuratorsfiscal regarding their use of fiscal fines as an alternative to prosecution, whichincludes directions as to the circumstances in which procurators fiscal must notissue a fiscal fine.  These include cases involving overtones of sexual behaviouror racial motivation or aggravation and cases involving the possession of ClassA drugs.

A record of previous fiscal finesoffered to an offender is available in the standard information obtained from the Scottish Criminal Records Office for each case. This information is available toprocurators fiscal at initial case processing stage and will be taken into accountwhen deciding on the most appropriate action in relation to the reported offence.

The fisheries identified and considered by the DEEPNET project extend beyond the Scottish fishing zone, into other EU waters as well as Norwegian, Faroese and International waters. In order to reduce the amounts of abandoned fishing gear and high discard rates in these fisheries, the Scottish Executive engages actively in EU, NEAFC and bilateral negotiations, protecting Scottish interests and promoting good practice across a range of technical issues, including limits on gear soaking time and the effective marking of gear.

Further, the Scottish Executive encourages and endorses voluntary co-operation on these matters between the different sectors of the various national fishing fleets concerned, such as that which produced the voluntary code of conduct agreed between Norwegian and Scottish industry representatives and signed at Banchory in 2002.

We acknowledge the steps which have been taken in recent years, led by the District Courts Association, to improve the quality and consistency of lay justices’ training by publishing materials which allow competence based training to be undertaken.

We believe there is scope for further improvement. On 22 March this year I launched Smarter Justice, Safer Communities, which contains the Executive’s proposals in relation to summary justice reform. It makes it clear that we intend to invest in order to ensure that all lay justices across the country are provided with a consistent and high standard of training. This document can be accessed at from the Summary Justice Reform website at:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/about/JD/CP/00019008/Homepage.aspx.

Copies are also available in the Parliament’s reference centre (Bib. number 35821).

Data about injury road accidents are collected by the police and reported to the Scottish Executive using the Stats 19 statistical report form.

Prior to January 2005, the Stats 19 returns did not record the causes of the accidents. Under a pilot scheme, 15 police forces across Great Britain voluntarily submitted information on contributory factors to accidents along with their Stats 19 returns. However, it is not possible to use the pilot contributory factor data to provide figures which are representative of accidents in Scotland because only two Scottish police forces took part in the scheme. An article which provides some of the overall results of the trial is available on the Department for Transport website at:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_031458.pdf.

With effect from 1 January 2005, a new set of questions on contributory factors was added to the Stats 19 injury road accident reporting system. Information about contributory factors should henceforth be supplied by all police forces for personal injury accidents which are reported either (a) following attendance at the scene by a police officer or (b) by a member of the public to police staff at a police station. There are separate codes for "exceeding speed limit" and "travelling too fast for conditions". However, it should be noted that the new information reflects the reporting officer's opinion at the time of reporting, and is not necessarily the result of extensive investigation. Subsequent enquiries could lead to a change in the opinion of the reporting officer. There may also be accidents for which the reporting officer cannot identify any contributory factors.