- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Monday, 15 April 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Malcolm Chisholm on 24 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether drugs such as Naltrexone that block the effects of opioids are currently available on the NHS.
Answer
Yes.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Monday, 15 April 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Malcolm Chisholm on 24 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what the current usage is of Naltrexone and other drugs that produce the same effect as Naltrexone, broken down by NHS board area.
Answer
Two drugs, naltrexone hydrochloride and naloxone hydrochloride are similar in action in that they block the effects of opioids. Naloxone hydrochloride is used in overdosage with opioids. However, comprehensive figures for the number of patients who received this treatment are not available centrally. Data collected centrally relate to prescribed items dispensed in the community by community pharmacists and dispensing doctors. Naltrexone hydrochloride is used in the treatment of formerly opioid-dependent patients. In 2001, there were 2,041 prescribed items for naltrexone hydrochloride dispensed in the community. This figure does not take into account drugs dispensed by hospitals or hospital-based clinics. The information is given on a national basis in order not to disclose information that may relate to an individual patient.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Monday, 15 April 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Richard Simpson on 24 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has investigated the possible use of pharmacological alternatives to methadone as a means of weaning drug addicts away from heroin.
Answer
As part of a programme of research reviews on the effectiveness of drug treatment, the Executive's Effective Interventions Unit is drawing together existing evidence on the effectiveness of drug therapies (including methadone, buprenorphine, dihydrocodeine and others) from systematic reviews conducted internationally. The findings from this programme of work will be available in June 2002.The Chief Scientist Office in the Executive has also commissioned a randomised trial of methadone versus dihydrocodeine to help in considering the effectiveness of substitute prescribing. The trial is due to be completed in September 2003.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 23 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-21639 by Mr Jim Wallace on 1 February 2002, what consideration and response it has given to the case of Gray v MacLeod (SLT 17) where the sheriff, when faced with the proposition that a march fence type boundary wall was owned to the mid-point only ("ad medium filum"), stated in his written opinion "There has been long-standing doubt as to whether this is correct as a proposition of law" (p.20 of Scots Law Times, 1979) and then went on to make it clear that there was an alternative proposition which denoted the boundary wall was held as common property pro indiviso.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-24572.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 23 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-21639 by Mr Jim Wallace on 1 February 2002, whether it will confirm that sheriff court opinions do not create case law.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-24572.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 23 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-21639 by Mr Jim Wallace on 1 February 2002, what its response is to the statement by the presiding judge in the case of Thom v Hetherington (SLT 724) on the third day of proof that the subject in the case, described as a "mutual" wall, was legally held as "common property pro indiviso" as the words "mutual" and "common" were interchangeable both meaning the same thing and to the fact that the judge referred defence counsel to p639 of The Law of Land Ownership in Scotland (Rankine 4th Edition, 1909).
Answer
It is not appropriate for ministers to seek to interpret case law or comment on statements made in court cases or on the authority of sheriff court opinions. The law in relation to boundary walls has been considered over the years by the courts, the Scottish Law Commission, the Westminster and Scottish Parliaments and both the former Scottish Office and the Scottish Executive. Details of that consideration were set out in my letter of 11 March 2002, a copy of which I have placed in the Parliament's Reference Centre (Bib. number 20516). The issues have received exhaustive examination and the Scottish Law Commission and the Executive are of the view that the existing law in this area is satisfactory and that there is no need for legislation to restate or reform it. The only representations received on this subject are those from the member and one of her constituents.I would, however, be happy to meet the member, together with a representative of the Scottish Law Commission.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 23 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-21639 by Mr Jim Wallace on 1 February 2002, whether the presiding judge in the case of Thom v Hetherington (SLT 724) changed his opinion in deciding that "mutual" and "common" meant different things and that the subject march fence type boundary wall in the case was not held as common property but as "ad medium filum" that is, ownership to an imaginary mid-line only; if so, what response it has given to this; what consideration it has given to paragraph 218 in Volume 18 of the Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia which states that the words "common" and "mutual" are interchangeable when being applied in legal terms to property dividing walls, and whether it believes there to be confusion in the area of the law relating to boundary walls given any change of mind by the judge, the statement that the words are interchangeable in the Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia and as demonstrated by the Scottish Law Commission in its Consultation Paper of 1992.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-24572.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 23 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-21639 by Mr Jim Wallace on 1 February 2002, what consideration and response it has given to the case of Gill v Mitchell regarding a march fence type boundary wall where the sheriff, when no titles were produced, stated he was faced with a difference of opinion, when falling back on common law, as to whether the wall was held "ad medium filum" or as "common property pro indiviso" and while he himself preferred the "ad medium filum" view, the 'common property' view had judicial support (pages 48 and 49 of Scots Law Times, 1980).
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-24572.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 23 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-21639 by Mr Jim Wallace on 1 February 2002, whether the statements by the sheriffs in the cases of Gray v MacLeod and Gill v Mitchell convey to it corroboration of the expression of confusion by the Scottish Law Commission which was extant in the period 1990-93 and of the commission's statement that there are two conflicting lines of case law decision which cannot be satisfactorily reconciled in the aspect of the law concerning march fence type boundary divisions.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-24572.
- Asked by: Irene Oldfather, MSP for Cunninghame South, Scottish Labour
-
Date lodged: Monday, 11 March 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Wendy Alexander on 3 April 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what financial grant or loan assistance "The Big Idea" in Irvine has received since it opened in 2000.
Answer
The Executive has awarded a grant of up to £410,000 over 2001-02 and 2002-03 to The Big Idea. As part of this package of support the Millennium Commission has awarded a further £300,000 to The Big Idea.
