- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 July 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 13 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive how many fines were recovered by civil diligence following the procedure under section 221 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995; what proportion this represents of the total number of all fines imposed; what the average value of fine recovered by civil diligence was following the procedure under section 221 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995; what the total value was of fines recovered under section 221 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, and what proportion this represents of the total value of all fines imposed, all in total and broken down by sheriff court in each of the last three years.
Answer
The information available is shown in the table. Information on the average and total value of fines recovered by civil diligence, and the proportion this represents of the total value of fines imposed, is not available.Number of Sheriff Court Fines Ordered for Recovery by Civil Diligence and Proportion This Represents of Total Fines Imposed
1, 1999-2001
| Sheriff Court | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 |
| Number of Fines | % of Total Fines Imposed | Number of Fines | % of Total Fines Imposed | Number of Fines | % of Total Fines Imposed |
| Aberdeen | 3 | 0.1 | 2 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Airdrie | 1 | 0.1 | 2 | 0.2 | 1 | 0.1 |
| Alloa | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Arbroath | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ayr | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Banff | 1 | 0.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Campbeltown | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cupar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dingwall | 1 | 0.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dornoch | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dumbarton | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Dumfries | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dundee | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dunfermline | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Dunoon | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Duns | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Edinburgh | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 0.1 |
| Elgin | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Falkirk | 3 | 0.2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.1 |
| Forfar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Fort William | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Glasgow | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0.3 | 0 | 0 |
| Greenock | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.2 |
| Haddington | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Hamilton | 4 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Inverness | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jedburgh | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kilmarnock | 2 | 0.1 | 2 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Kirkcaldy | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kirkcudbright | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kirkwall | 1 | 0.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lanark | 3 | 0.4 | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Lerwick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Linlithgow | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Lochmaddy | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oban | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Paisley | 3 | 0.2 | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Peebles | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.1 |
| Peterhead | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Portree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rothesay | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Selkirk | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Stirling | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 |
| Stonehaven | 5 | 0.9 | 2 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Stornoway | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Stranraer | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tain | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.3 |
| Wick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 35 | 0.1 | 26 | 0.1 | 11 | 0.02 |
Notes:1. Fines marked for recovery by civil diligence in whole or in part. There are no figures available on the actual amounts recovered.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 July 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 13 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what value of district court fines is presently outstanding, in total and broken down by district court.
Answer
The value of district court fines currently outstanding is not held centrally. Information on the value of district court fines outstanding is collected from district courts on an annual basis as at the end of the financial year. Data for the most recent year available (to March 2001) are included in the answer to question S1W-27635.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 July 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 13 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what value of district court fines was outstanding on 31 March 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002, in total and broken down by district court.
Answer
The available information is given in the following table. Data for the year ending March 2002 are not yet available. Yearly totals for Scotland are not comparable due to data being unavailable in different courts in different years.Value (£) of Fines Imposed by District Court Outstanding at Financial Year End
| District Court | 1997-981, 2 | 1998-991, 3 | 1999-20001, 4 | 2000-015 |
| Aberdeen City | 172,968 | 170,154 | 146,067 | 174,041 |
| Aberdeenshire | 111,548 | 105,219 | 88,310 | 57,110 |
| Angus | N/A | 61,063 | 66,454 | 78,960 |
| Argyll and Bute | 13,928 | 18,591 | 10,622 | 15,440 |
| Clackmannanshire | 27,442 | 24,969 | 36,557 | 25,060 |
| Dumfries and Galloway | 128,215 | 91,070 | 93,166 | 73,779 |
| Dundee City | 108,800 | 107,749 | 141,223 | 117,039 |
| East Ayrshire | N/A | N/A | N/A | 26,698 |
| East Dunbartonshire | 23,055 | 19,308 | 17,353 | 10,955 |
| East Lothian | 18,136 | 23,076 | 17,437 | 20,690 |
| East Renfrewshire | 24,020 | 9,688 | 11,039 | 689 |
| Edinburgh, City of | 176,926 | 204,800 | 168,300 | N/A |
| Eilean Siar | N/A | 1,043 | 1,720 | 2,852 |
| Falkirk | 84,369 | 95,517 | 116,921 | 140,405 |
| Fife | 25,750 | 13,417 | 41,529 | 44,066 |
| Glasgow City | N/A | N/A | 1,363,032 | 859,316 |
| Highland | 124,384 | 155,406 | 114,759 | 114,639 |
| Inverclyde | 29,116 | 32,968 | 40,862 | 58,640 |
| Midlothian | 22,347 | 34,516 | 34,588 | 34,599 |
| Moray | 3,442 | 3,170 | 2,878 | 18,204 |
| North Ayrshire | 38,985 | 58,381 | 58,203 | 55,392 |
| North Lanarkshire | 165,000 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Perth and Kinross | 23,221 | N/A | 99,439 | 80,214 |
| Renfrewshire | 81,913 | 137,367 | 101,108 | 77,094 |
| Scottish Borders | 87,204 | 155,943 | 51,372 | 69,695 |
| South Ayrshire | N/A | 54,948 | 74,455 | 131,984 |
| South Lanarkshire | 148,938 | 270,753 | 234,924 | 237,096 |
| Stirling | N/A | N/A | N/A | 47,612 |
| West Dunbartonshire | N/A | 121,587 | 77,853 | 77,799 |
| West Lothian | 123,894 | 148,762 | 147,885 | 84,660 |
| Scotland | 1,763,600 | 2,119,465 | 3,358,056 | 2,734,731 |
"N/A" denotes data not available.Notes1. Figures relate to fines initiated at the court, i.e. include fines transferred OUT but exclude fines transferred IN.2. 1997-98: Figure for Inverclyde is an estimate. Figure for North Lanarkshire excludes Coatbridge and Cumbernauld. Figure for South Lanarkshire excludes Rutherglen and includes compensation orders and (for Lanark) fiscal fines.3. 1998-99: Figure for Fife is for Cupar only.4. 1999-2000: Figure for Fife excludes Kirkcaldy. Figure for South Lanarkshire includes fiscal fines for Lanark court only.5. 2000-01: Figures for Angus, Glasgow and West Lothian include fines transferred out. Figure for Perth & Kinross includes fines transferred out and registered fines.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 25 June 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 13 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-25103 by Mr Jim Wallace on 21 June 2002, whether it intends to (a) commission new private prisons or young offenders institutions or (b) commission services from private prisons or young offenders institutions where it is possible to see from one wing to another, giving the reasons for its position on this matter.
Answer
I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is as follows:As stated in the answer given to question S1W-25103, being able to see from one wing of a prison to the other is not considered to be a problematic issue. It is therefore possible that in the event of any new private prison or young offenders institution being commissioned, it might incorporate this feature.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 15 July 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 12 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive Scottish Executive what percentage of police officers who have retired in each of the last three years on grounds of ill health suffered from (a) stress or mental illness, (b) injuries incurred while on duty and (c) physical injuries not caused as a result of assault or accident at work.
Answer
Information on the reason for ill health retirements is not held centrally.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 15 July 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 12 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive Scottish Executive how many police officers below the rank of inspector retired in each of the last three years and how many such officers (a) had completed 30 years or more service and (b) retired on grounds of ill health.
Answer
Information on retirements by rank is not held centrally. The available information is shown in the following table:
| Year | TotalRetirements | No. of Retirements with30 Years or More Service | No. of Retirements onIll Health Grounds |
| 1999-2000 | 464 | 130 | 187 |
| 2000-01 | 461 | 109 | 198 |
| 2001-02 | 490 | 105 | 197 |
Source: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary's Annual Statistical Returns from forces for 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 11 April 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 12 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it intends to compile figures to compare recidivism rates at public prisons and private prisons, giving the reasons for its position on this matter.
Answer
No. Measuring recidivism is a complex issue, and recidivists may commit further crimes for which custodial sentences are not awarded by sentencers and the reason for recidivism are affected by many factors outwith prison. Furthermore, individual prisoners may well spend time in both private and public prisons during the course of the sentence. The Scottish Prison Service publishes information on "Return to Custody", the most recent being follow-up information on those prisoners released from prison during 1998.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 11 April 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 8 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, in relation to the Scottish Prison Service estates review, what its position is on the fact that PricewaterhouseCoopers did not audit the methodology of determining costs and risk pricing inputs for the public sector comparator in the Financial Review of Scottish Prison Service Estates Review and what the reasons are for this position.
Answer
PricewaterhouseCoopers were not asked to do an audit. They were asked to undertake a financial review to support investment decisions that form part of the Scottish Prison Service Estates Review. The Executive is content that this verification process carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers is robust.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 11 April 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 5 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, in relation to the Scottish Prison Service estates review, whether the private prisons envisaged will be allowed to take prisoners from other jurisdictions and, if so, from which jurisdictions and under what circumstances.
Answer
I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is as follows:Yes. As is presently the case with HMP Kilmarnock, any new private prisons would be able to take prisoners from other jurisdictions in the same circumstances as publicly operated prisons. Those circumstances are as follows:Under Schedule 1 of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997, prisoners may be received in any Scottish prison from another UK jurisdiction for the purposes of maintaining family contact or to enable the prisoner to attend criminal proceedings in Scotland.Also, under the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons or a bilateral agreement based on that Convention, prisoners may be received in any Scottish prison from a foreign jurisdiction because they have been repatriated to the UK to serve the remainder of their sentence. The aims of the Convention and the bilateral agreements are entirely humanitarian - to enable prisoners to transfer to their home country to serve the remainder of their sentence. At present 48 countries are signatories to the Convention and the UK has agreements with a further 12 countries.Finally, prisoners may be received from other jurisdictions because they have been extradited either to stand trial or because they were unlawfully at large after conviction by a Scottish court. The United Kingdom has formal extradition relations with over 100 countries through two multilateral schemes - the European Convention on Extradition and the Commonwealth Scheme for the Rendition of Fugitive Offenders and a number of bilateral treaties.
- Asked by: Roseanna Cunningham, MSP for Perth, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 05 July 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jim Wallace on 2 August 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has ever received any notice under paragraph 6.8 of the Minute of Agreement between the Secretary of State for Scotland and Kilmarnock Prison Services Ltd for the Design, Construction, Management and Financing of a Prison at Kilmarnock.
Answer
I have asked Tony Cameron, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is as follows:Yes.
