Questions and answers

Question reference: S1W-31483

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 12 November 2002
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 22 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will produce timescales for completing staged assessments and planning processes and distribute them for consultation to parents, young people and professionals, seeking views on whether the timescales should be laid down in law or guidance, as referred to in Improving our Schools - Assessing our children's educational needs - The Way Forward?.

Question reference: S1W-31470

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 12 November 2002
Current Status: Answered by Ross Finnie on 21 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-28916 by Ross Finnie on 25 September 2002, how the position set out in the answer is compatible with the proposed crofting community right to buy in the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill.

Question reference: S1W-31294

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 06 November 2002
Current Status: Answered by Jim Wallace on 19 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive whether any minister has had sight as at 6 November 2002 of a draft of HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary's report on police visibility.

Question reference: S1W-31349

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 07 November 2002
Current Status: Answered by Jim Wallace on 18 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive what the annual costs of the Scottish Conveyancing and Executry Services Board have been in each of the last three years and what the total cost of the board has been to date.

The Scottish Executive has made the following payments of grant in aid to the board:

Year ending 31 March 1997	£88,626
Year ending 31 March 1998	£153,834
Year ending 31 March 1999	£126,489
Year ending 31 March 2000	£131,678
Year ending 31 March 2001	£128,235
Year ending 31 March 2002	£120,273

The total cost of grant in aid payments to the board since financial year 1996-97 is £749,135. The estimated payment for year ending 31 March 2003 is £142,000.

Question reference: S1W-31272

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 05 November 2002
Current Status: Answered by Jim Wallace on 18 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive what the total cost to it has been of Scott Davidson's case against it in respect of alleged infringement of his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including its own legal costs and legal aid and court costs.

Mr Davidson lodged a petition in October 2001 for judicial review of an alleged decision of the Scottish ministers to detain him in "slopping out" conditions, in breach of Article 3 of the ECHR. So far, there has been one hearing in the Outer House of the Court of Session and two hearings in the Inner House. The legal issues which have arisen in this case such as impartiality of the judiciary and the rights of courts to make interim orders against the Scottish ministers are significant and go beyond the ECHR compatibility of the conditions of the prisoner's detention.Preparation for court proceedings is done by legal and administrative staff within the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Prison Service as part of their normal duties. Cost information is not available disaggregated to individual cases. The situation is the same for the courts. The court proceedings have been dealt with as part of the normal business of the courts involved. Information about legal aid costs is also not available for individual cases.Counsels' fees so far incurred by the Executive are in the region of £95,000.

Question reference: S1W-31095

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 October 2002
Current Status: Answered by Jim Wallace on 18 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-28802 by Mr Jim Wallace on 23 October 2002, whether any other instances of incorrect recording of disciplinary offences have been found in the records placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre and, if so, what any such instances are.

Question reference: S1W-31092

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 October 2002
Current Status: Answered by Jim Wallace on 18 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-28802 by Mr Jim Wallace on 23 October 2002, when the incorrect recording of the three disciplinary charges of possession of an unauthorised item as the disciplinary charge of holding a person against his will was made, by whom it was made and when it was discovered.

Question reference: S1W-30309

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Friday, 04 October 2002
Current Status: Answered by Elish Angiolini on 18 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive how many (a) reports were made to procurators fiscal, (b) proceedings were taken by procurators fiscal and (c) convictions were made under sections (i) 3(1), (ii) 4(1) and (iii) 5(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 in each of the last three years, broken down by sheriff court district.

Information is available from the Crown Office system about the number of cases received by procurators fiscal during the last three financial years that included charges under the section mentioned. Information is not available from that system in relation to the outcome of every such charge as only whole case outcomes are currently recorded.Some information is available from published Scottish Executive statistics about persons proceeded against and convicted where the main charge in the case was a contravention of the section mentioned. It should be noted that where a person is proceeded against for more that one crime or offence, only the "main charge" is recorded for Scottish Executive statistical purposes. The main charge is that which is the most serious and receives the severest penalty.This has a particular effect on drugs cases as most included charges for both section 4(3)(b) and 5(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Crown Office statistics record both charges but the Scottish Executive record only the "main charge". The figure for persons prosecuted (tables 4, 5 and 6) and convicted (tables 7, 8 and 9) will therefore tend to be far smaller than that for the number of cases reported (tables 1, 2 and 3).In addition, the recording period differs between the Scottish Executive and the Crown Office statistics. The former record a case when it receives its final disposal, the latter when it is first reported and the same case will therefore often appear in different recording years. Furthermore, the Crown Office statistics show the number of cases reported (many cases will have more than one accused) and the Scottish Executive figures show the number of persons proceeded against and convicted, although several persons may be included in the same report. For these reasons, it is not possible to relate the Crown Office data on incoming cases to the Scottish Executive data on proceedings and disposals. The information described is provided in the following tables. Table 1Cases Reported to Procurators Fiscal Which Included Charges Under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 Section 4(2), 1999-2000 to 2001-02

	Finacial Year
Office	1999-2000	2000-01	2001-02
Aberdeen	1
Ayr	2		2
Cupar		1	1
Dingwall	1		1
Dornoch	1		1
Dumbarton			2
Dumfries		4	1
Dundee	2	1	3
Dunfermline	3	3	5
Dunoon	3		1
Edinburgh	11	18	14
Elgin			1
Falkirk	1	1	2
Fort William	1
Glasgow		3	4
Haddington	1	1
Hamilton	2	1	2
Inverness		3
Jedburgh	1	2	7
Kilmarnock	1		2
Kirkcaldy	2	4	9
Kirkwall			4
Lanark		2
Linlithgow	2	1	5
Lochmaddy			1
Oban		4	1
Paisley		1	4
Peebles	3	1
Perth		1	2
Peterhead		1
Selkirk			1
Stirling			5
Stornoway			1
Tain		1
Wick			3
Total	38	54	85

Table 2Cases Reported to Procurators Fiscal Which Included Charges Under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 Section 5(3), 1999-2000 to 2001-02

	Financial Year
Office	1999-2000	2000-01	2001-02
Aberdeen	69	112	126
Airdrie	47	52	57
Arbroath	9	8	14
Ayr	23	24	59
Banff	2
Campbeltown	1	5	2
Cupar	2	9	11
Dingwall	6	5	6
Dornoch		3	2
Dumbarton	21	26	28
Dumfries	5	18	17
Dundee	24	33	72
Dunfermline	20	46	40
Dunoon	5	6	4
Duns	3	4	12
Edinburgh	111	155	219
Elgin	15	23	14
Falkirk	14	26	64
Forfar	2	5	17
Fort William	6	10	17
Glasgow	356	322	468
Greenock	14	27	36
Haddington	5	8	13
Hamilton	94	80	68
Inverness	21	22	41
Jedburgh	3	9	19
Kilmarnock	38	43	115
Kirkcaldy	41	66	71
Kirkcudbright	2	2	2
Kirkwall	2	2	3
Lanark	13	12	16
Lerwick	4	6	6
Linlithgow	30	25	43
Lochmaddy		1	1
Oban	4	8	8
Paisley	65	48	62
Peebles	3	4	3
Perth	39	27	68
Peterhead	22	21	27
Portree	2	1	7
Rothesay			2
Selkirk	3	8	10
Stirling	16	18	57
Stonehaven	2	6	11
Stornoway	2	2	2
Stranraer	5	7	10
Tain	8	12	12
Wick	5	6
Total	1,184	1,363	1,962

Table 3Cases Reported to Procurators Fiscal Which Included Charges Under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 Section 4(3), 1999-2000 to 2001-02

	Financial Year
Office	1999-2000	2000-01	2001-02
Aberdeen	109	121	147
Airdrie	54	52	52
Arbroath	13	7	18
Ayr	28	23	64
Banff	1
Campbeltown	1	4
Cupar	6	11	13
Dingwall	10	2	3
Dornoch		1	2
Dumbarton	31	29	34
Dumfries	26	51	42
Dundee	33	44	89
Dunfermline	24	45	56
Dunoon	4	9	3
Duns	2	7	16
Edinburgh	157	170	245
Elgin	16	24	13
Falkirk	41	61	123
Forfar	9	7	19
Fort William	8	11	19
Glasgow	512	465	585
Greenock	37	42	35
Haddington	6	13	13
Hamilton	107	90	83
Inverness	46	32	61
Jedburgh	4	11	22
Kilmarnock	42	52	122
Kirkcaldy	54	72	81
Kirkcudbright	3		11
Kirkwall	2	3	3
Lanark	14	7	15
Lerwick	3	15	7
Linlithgow	35	38	45
Lochmaddy		1
Oban	4	11	4
Paisley	73	46	70
Peebles	2	7	3
Perth	30	47	79
Peterhead	24	27	29
Portree	2	1	7
Selkirk	8	13	14
Stirling	17	29	87
Stonehaven	3	6	11
Stornoway	2	3	7
Stranraer	19	14	29
Tain	8	14	12
Wick	8	9	4
Total	1,638	1,747	2,397

Table 4Persons Proceeded Against Under Section 4(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, by Court, 1998-2000

	1998	1999	2000
All Courts¹	68	67	24
	11	11	1
Aberdeen	1	-	-
Airdrie	1	2	-
Arbroath	1	-	-
Ayr	2	-	1
Cupar	-	-	1
Dornoch	-	-	1
Dumbarton	-	1	-
Dumfries	1	-	-
Dundee	2	-	1
Dunfermline	10	10	2
Dunoon	1	2	-
Edinburgh	3	7	5
Elgin	1	1	-
Falkirk	-	3	-
Glasgow	8	11	2
Haddington	1	-	-
Hamilton	1	1	2
Inverness	-	-	1
Kilmarnock	1	1	1
Kirkcaldy	7	6	-
Kirkcudbright	1	1	-
Lanark	2	-	-
Linlithgow	1	3	4
Oban	1	-	1
Paisley	5	3	-
Perth	-	-	1
Selkirk	1	-	-
Tain	-	1	-
Wick	5	3	-

Note:1. All courts figure includes a small number of High Court and district court cases.Table 5Persons Proceeded Against Under Section 5(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, by Court, 1998-2000

	1998	1999	2000
All Courts¹	819	746	544
Non-sheriff courts	12	8	12
Aberdeen	35	21	21
Airdrie	32	45	26
Alloa	14	17	10
Arbroath	3	7	3
Ayr	20	28	21
Banff	3	1	-
Campbeltown	2	1	1
Cupar	2	7	5
Dingwall	3	3	3
Dumbarton	30	21	13
Dumfries	3	9	5
Dundee	14	9	13
Dunfermline	33	13	3
Dunoon	2	3	1
Duns	1	1	-
Edinburgh	74	49	48
Elgin	4	8	6
Falkirk	7	5	6
Forfar	4	3	4
Fort William	5	1	1
Glasgow	221	258	142
Greenock	31	25	12
Haddington	4	5	3
Hamilton	60	49	50
Inverness	17	5	5
Jedburgh	6	3	4
Kilmarnock	24	26	29
Kirkcaldy	18	9	9
Kirkcudbright	1	-	1
Kirkwall	-	3	-
Lanark	4	7	4
Lerwick	-	1	-
Linlithgow	13	15	6
Oban	3	1	8
Paisley	50	29	22
Peebles	1	-	2
Perth	31	33	21
Peterhead	9	5	1
Portree	-	1	-
Rothesay	1	-	1
Selkirk	3	1	6
Stirling	8	5	5
Stonehaven	3	-	-
Stornoway	-	2	1
Stranraer	4	1	6
Tain	2	2	2
Wick	2	-	2

Note:1. All courts figure includes a small number of High Court and district court cases.Table 6Persons Proceeded Against Under Section 4(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, by Court, 1998-2000

	1998	1999	2000
All Courts¹	1,282	1,339	1,139
	289	402	344
Aberdeen	73	75	42
Airdrie	31	24	22
Alloa	6	10	3
Arbroath	3	4	8
Ayr	16	19	20
Banff	1	1	1
Campbeltown	-	-	2
Cupar	6	3	5
Dingwall	5	3	6
Dornoch	3	-	-
Dumbarton	25	22	17
Dumfries	31	14	15
Dundee	25	21	19
Dunfermline	18	16	10
Dunoon	1	5	7
Duns	1	-	-
Edinburgh	92	83	65
Elgin	8	6	5
Falkirk	35	28	25
Forfar	9	3	12
Fort William	2	7	4
Glasgow	287	306	251
Greenock	35	29	33
Haddington	2	3	-
Hamilton	59	48	52
Inverness	16	6	5
Jedburgh	1	1	2
Kilmarnock	43	32	26
Kirkcaldy	22	28	11
Kirkcudbright	2	4	-
Kirkwall	-	5	1
Lanark	5	6	2
Lerwick	1	2	-
Linlithgow	15	16	28
Oban	3	5	1
Paisley	43	33	28
Peebles	-	1	2
Perth	29	32	28
Peterhead	10	6	8
Portree	4	-	-
Rothesay	1	-	1
Selkirk	6	2	2
Stirling	7	13	8
Stonehaven	1	3	2
Stornoway	3	4	1
Stranraer	7	4	11
Tain	-	2	-
Wick	-	2	4

Note:1. All courts figure includes a small number of High Court and district court cases.Table 7Persons with a Charge Proved Under Section 4(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, by Court, 1998-2000

	1998	1999	2000
All Courts¹	57	51	22
	10	8	1
Aberdeen	1	-	-
Airdrie	1	2	-
Arbroath	1	-	1
Ayr	2	-	1
Cupar	-	-	1
Dornoch	-	-	1
Dumfries	1	-	-
Dundee	1	-	1
Dunfermline	8	7	2
Dunoon	1	2	-
Edinburgh	3	7	4
Elgin	1	1	-
Falkirk	-	3	-
Glasgow	7	5	2
Haddington	1	-	-
Hamilton	1	1	1
Inverness	-	-	1
Kilmarnock	1	1	1
Kirkcaldy	6	4	-
Kirkcudbright	1	1	-
Linlithgow	1	3	4
Oban	1	-	1
Paisley	3	2	-
Selkirk	1	-	-
Tain	-	1	-
Wick	4	3	-

Note:1. All courts figure includes a small number of High Court and district court cases.Table 8Persons with a Charge Proved Under Section 5(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, by Court, 1998-2000

	1998	1999	2000
All Courts¹	586	505	377
Non- sheriff courts	7	6	9
Aberdeen	32	17	18
Airdrie	15	24	11
Alloa	13	15	9
Arbroath	3	6	3
Ayr	11	16	16
Banff	2	1	-
Campbeltown	2	1	1
Cupar	2	6	3
Dingwall	3	3	3
Dumbarton	16	16	8
Dumfries	3	9	4
Dundee	8	6	11
Dunfermline	21	10	3
Dunoon	2	3	-
Duns	1	1	-
Edinburgh	64	39	38
Elgin	4	7	6
Falkirk	1	4	6
Forfar	4	3	3
Fort William	5	-	1
Glasgow	146	150	85
Greenock	25	21	8
Haddington	4	5	3
Hamilton	36	24	30
Inverness	15	4	5
Jedburgh	5	3	4
Kilmarnock	15	18	20
Kirkcaldy	12	7	5
Kirkcudbright	1	-	1
Kirkwall	-	2	-
Lanark	3	4	2
Lerwick	-	1	-
Linlithgow	13	13	6
Oban	1	1	4
Paisley	35	18	12
Peebles	1	-	2
Perth	27	27	18
Peterhead	7	4	1
Portree	-	1	-
Rothesay	1	-	-
Selkirk	3	1	5
Stirling	6	3	4
Stonehaven	3	-	-
Stornoway	-	2	1
Stranraer	4	1	5
Tain	2	2	2
Wick	2	-	1

Note:1. All courts figure includes a small number of High Court and district court cases.Table 9Persons with a Charge Proved Under Section 4(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, by Court, 1998-2000

	1998	1999	2000
All Courts¹	943	961	847
Non-sheriff courts	236	291	267
Aberdeen	64	66	39
Airdrie	6	3	2
Airdrie	12	6	9
Alloa	5	10	2
Arbroath	2	3	6
Ayr	10	11	13
Banff	1	1	1
Campbeltown	-	-	2
Cupar	6	3	5
Dingwall	3	3	5
Dornoch	2	-	-
Dumbarton	17	12	9
Dumfries	21	11	11
Dundee	4	1	4
Dundee	15	14	13
Dunfermline	11	16	5
Dunoon	1	2	5
Duns	1	-	-
Edinburgh	83	73	54
Elgin	7	5	4
Falkirk	28	24	24
Forfar	9	3	9
Fort William	1	5	4
Glasgow	180	207	160
Greenock	20	18	27
Haddington	2	1	-
Hamilton	29	22	26
Inverness	15	6	4
Jedburgh	1	1	2
Kilmarnock	29	20	21
Kirkcaldy	19	24	8
Kirkcudbright	2	3	-
Kirkwall	-	3	1
Lanark	4	4	1
Lerwick	1	1	-
Linlithgow	14	16	27
Oban	3	3	-
Paisley	22	13	20
Peebles	-	1	2
Perth	24	22	24
Peterhead	7	4	5
Portree	4	-	-
Rothesay	1	-	1
Selkirk	5	2	2
Stirling	7	13	7
Stonehaven	1	3	2
Stornoway	3	3	1
Stranraer	5	4	9
Tain	-	2	-
Wick	-	2	4

Note:1. All courts figure includes a small number of High Court and district court cases.

Question reference: S1W-29922

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 24 September 2002
Current Status: Answered by Elish Angiolini on 15 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive how many reports to procurator fiscals of offences under each of sections 7(1), 8(2), 9(1), 10(1)(a) and 12 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) Scotland Act 1995 were proceeded with in each of the last three years, broken down by sheriff court area.

Question reference: S1W-29921

Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 24 September 2002
Current Status: Answered by Elish Angiolini on 15 November 2002

To ask the Scottish Executive how many reports of offences under each of sections 7(1), 8(2), 9(1), 10(1)(a) and 12 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) Scotland Act 1995 have been made to procurators fiscal in each of the last three years, broken down by sheriff court area.

There has been one such report in the year 2001-02. The charge of a contravention of section 7(1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) Scotland Act 1995 was one of four charges in a case reported to the Procurator Fiscal at Edinburgh. The case was disposed of by way of an indictment in terms of section 76 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, which is an accelerated mechanism in solemn procedure for disposing of case where a plea has been agreed; the indictment is served on a shorter notice period and contains only the charges to which it has been agreed guilty pleas will be tendered and accepted. The section 76 indictment in this case did not include the section 7(1)(a) charge. A sentence of six months imprisonment was imposed.

Chamber and committees