Chamber and committees

Funding allocated to local authorities for bail information and supervision schemes increased from £313,322 in 1999-2000, to £426,553 in 2000-01, £945,536 in 2001-02 and to £971,859 in 2002-03.The expenditure for bail schemes in 1999-2000 and 2000-01 was £337,591 and £526,637 respectively. Local authorities are presently in the process of submitting their audited accounts for 2001-02 and so the figures on expenditure for 2001-02 and 2002-03 are not currently available.

Where a person is accused on petition, all pre-trial procedures are held in private including the consideration of applications for bail. This is because bail applications are considered at hearings which also cover confidential matters.Where a person convicted on indictment applies for interim liberation pending the determination of his appeal, his application is considered in private by the court on the basis of a written submission. I understand that the Crown have a system in place for alerting victims and next of kin when a person convicted of a serious crime is granted interim liberation pending appeal.We are currently considering the full range of issues around interim liberation on bail, in consultation with the Lord Justice General.

I have asked John Ewing, Chief Executive of the Scottish Court Service to respond. His response is as follows:The feasibility study, which was commissioned after the discovery of dry rot, was prepared with regard to the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act and contains proposals to comply with the requirements of the legislation. No further report has been commissioned.

I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-28957 today. All answers to written PQs are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/search_wa.

The Executive has been aware of the issues relating to constraints on water and waste water infrastructure for some time. A number of meetings were held earlier this year with representatives of the house building industry, the then water authorities, representatives of local authorities, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Water Industry Commissioner, to explore the way forward.In the first instance, however, this is an operational matter for Scottish Water. I am aware that they have been undertaking a significant amount of work in past months following the meetings referred to, to review their whole investment programme. This work has been necessary to inform them better about the investment required to ease such constraints across Scotland, and about its prioritisation.When this work is completed, I understand that Scottish Water intend to arrange meetings with local authorities to discuss their findings.

The information requested is not held centrally. I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-28957 today. All answers to written PQs are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/search_wa.

The ministerial targets set for the Scottish Court Service include targets relating to quality of service. Quality of service in the sheriff courts is measured by the percentage of sheriff courts achieving administrative standards agreed with the Sheriff Principal and by the percentage of court houses meeting the Coming to Court standards. The results are reported in the Scottish Court Service Annual Report and Accounts.

I have asked John Ewing, Chief Executive of the Scottish Court Service to respond. His response is as follows:Tain Sheriff Court has no facility to allow easy access for disabled persons. However Lochmaddy, Dingwall and Portree all have disabled access into the building and disabled toilet provisions. In addition Portree has a stair lift to gain access to the courtroom on the first floor.

I have asked John Ewing, the Chief Executive of the Scottish Court Service to respond. His response is as follows:The Scottish Court Service is currently assessing the scale and extent of the work required to bring the court up to the level of compliance required by the Disability Discrimination Act. In most courts there is already disabled access to the sheriff clerk's offices but in other cases work may be needed to extend the access to a wider range of courts, jury rooms and witness accommodation. The full extent of work needed and costings have yet to be determined. The following table lists the courts where work is likely to be required.Facilities for the Disabled

Location	Disabled Access to Jury and Witness Rooms	Disabled Access to Courts	Disabled Access to General Office
Aberdeen	Yes	Yes in Cts 2,3 4 & 7	Yes
Airdrie	Yes	Yes but not Ct 4	Yes
Alloa	No	No	Yes
Banff	Yes	Yes	Yes
Campbeltown	No	Yes	Yes
Cupar	No	Yes	Yes
Dingwall	No	No	Yes
Dornoch	No	No	Yes
Dumfries	Ct 1 only	Ct 1 only	Yes
Dunoon	No	No	Yes
Duns	No	No	-
Elgin	Yes	Yes	Yes
Forfar	Ct 1 only	Yes	Yes
Fort William	No	No	Yes
Greenock	Only 1	Yes	Yes
Hamilton	Not Ct 2, 4	Yes but not Ct 4	Yes
Inverness	Not Ct 1, 3	No	Yes
Kilmarnock	Yes	No	Yes
Kirkcaldy	Ct 2 & 3 only	Ct 1 only	Yes
Kirkcudbright	No	No	Yes
Kirkwall	No	No	No
Lanark	Ct 3 only	No	No
Lerwick	No	No	Yes
Linlithgow	Yes	Yes	Yes
Lochmaddy	No	No	No
Oban	No	No	Yes
Paisley	Yes	Yes	Yes
Peebles	No	No	Yes
Portree	Yes but too small	Yes	Yes
Rothesay	No	No	Yes
Selkirk	No	No	Yes
Stirling	One Ct	One Ct only	Yes
Stonehaven	No	No	No
Stornoway	No	Yes	Yes
Stranraer	No	No	Yes
Tain	No	No	Yes
Wick	No	No	Yes"

I have asked John Ewing, Chief Executive of the Scottish Court Service to respond. His response is as follows:The Scottish Court Service is currently undertaking an audit of the Court estate to determine the scale and extent of work required throughout the Estate to ensure compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act. Additional resources have been provided to the Court Service to enable any reasonable and necessary adaptations to proceed. The information is not collected centrally in respect of District Courts as responsibility for this rests with the relevant local authority.