- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Tom McCabe on 1 February 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive how many dangerous dogs it estimates are being kept illegally.
Answer
This information is notcurrently held centrally but we have written to Chief Constables to ask, amongother things, if they can estimate the number of dogs that are currently beingkept in their areas in contravention of the ban imposed by the Dangerous DogsAct 1991.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Elish Angiolini on 31 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-30458 by Elish Angiolini QC on 21 December 2006, on what basis and on whose authority the decision was made that no proceedings were to be taken against officers of the Scottish Criminal Record Office.
Answer
The decision not to raise proceedingsagainst the four Scottish Criminal Record Office officers against whom criminalallegations were made was taken by the former Lord Advocate, Lord Boyd, in 2001.A public announcement of this decision was made in September 2001.
The decision was taken on thebasis that there was insufficient reliable evidence upon which to found a prosecution.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Elish Angiolini on 31 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-30458 by Elish Angiolini QC on 21 December 2006, whether the Crown could not raise criminal proceedings against any of the officers concerned even if new evidence came to light.
Answer
In Scots Law, when a decisionto take no proceedings has been intimated by the Crown to a person against whoma criminal allegation is made, the Crown are held to it, and such intimation isregarded by the court as constituting a bar to any proceedings thereafter. Thisrule applies even where new evidence comes to light at a later date.
Accordingly, the decision notto take proceedings against the four Scottish Criminal Record Office officers againstwhom criminal allegations were made is final.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 18 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Patricia Ferguson on 31 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will list all those who have served as policy advisers to the Scottish Arts Council (SAC) or to the Chair of the SAC since 1999, also indicating for each (a) how long they served, (b) how much they were paid and (c) what their outputs were.
Answer
Scottish Arts Council policyis decided and developed corporately by the Council taking advice from staff, committeesand specialist advisers. The Scottish Arts Council occasionally appoints expertspecialists to advise on implementation of specific policy decisions to ensure ithas full understanding of specific fields. However, the firms or individualsappointed do not serve as “policy advisers” in general but are contractedspecifically for a single purpose.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 30 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the written evidence dated 3 May 2006 by John McLean, former Director of the Scottish Criminal Record Office (SCRO), to the Justice 1 Committee’s inquiry, (paper J1/S2/06/17/2), whether it will provide full information in respect of the misidentification of fingerprint evidence in the Scottish Fingerprint Service in June 2000; whether any of the experts concerned in this misidentification were involved in the misidentification of mark Y7 in the Marion Ross murder case; whether there was an independent inquiry into this misidentification and, if so, who carried it out and what the result was; whether the work of the experts concerned with this misidentification was checked for other misidentifications and, if so, over what period of time; whether the experts accepted that they had made mistakes and what remedial action was taken, and whether any of these experts are involved in providing expert evidence in Scottish courts at present.
Answer
There was no misidentification confirmedin the written evidence dated 3 May 2006 by John McLean. That written evidence isavailable at:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/justice1/papers-06/j1p06-17.pdf.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Andy Kerr on 29 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive how refinancing has changed the net present value and cash value of the cash flow to Hairmyres Hospital PFI project consortium shareholders over the contract term.
Answer
This information is not heldcentrally.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Andy Kerr on 29 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive how much capital was raised by the Hairmyres Hospital PFI consortium to deliver that project, broken down into (a) equity, (b) subordinated debt and (c) senior debt.
Answer
The capital raised by the HairmyresHospital PFI consortium to deliver the project was as follows:
| | £000 |
| Senior Debt | 74,473.3 |
| Subordinated Debt | 8,400.0 |
| Equity | 0.1 |
| Total | 82.8734 |
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Andy Kerr on 29 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive what annual payments are to be made to the Wishaw General Hospital PFI consortium over the contract term and how these changed as a result of the refinancing.
Answer
The following table shows theestimated annual payments to be made to the Wishaw General Hospital PFI consortiumover the current contract period.
| Year | Amount (£ Million) | Year | Amount (£ Million) | Year | Amount (£ Million) | Year | Amount (£ Million) |
| 2004-05 | 22.5 | 2011-12 | 25.3 | 2018-19 | 28.3 | 2025-26 | 31.5 |
| 2005-06 | 23.1 | 2012-13 | 25.7 | 2019-20 | 28.7 | 2026-27 | 32.0 |
| 2006-07 | 23.4 | 2013-14 | 26.1 | 2020-21 | 29.2 | 2027-28 | 32.5 |
| 2007-08 | 23.8 | 2014-15 | 26.6 | 2021-22 | 29.6 | 2028-29 | 33.0 |
| 2008-09 | 24.2 | 2015-16 | 27.0 | 2022-23 | 30.1 | 2029-30 | 33.5 |
| 2009-10 | 24.6 | 2016-17 | 27.4 | 2023-24 | 30.6 | 2030-31 | 34.1 |
| 2010-11 | 25.0 | 2017-18 | 27.8 | 2024-25 | 31.0 | 2031-32 | 5.8 |
The Wishaw General Hospital PFIProject has not been subject to refinancing.
Had the hospital been procuredby a traditional procurement route additional annual costs would be incurred includingcapital charges and costs for the provision of hard and soft FM services.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Andy Kerr on 29 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the refinancing of the Wishaw General Hospital PFI project resulted in any change in risk allocation and termination liabilities and, if so, how the additional risks have been priced.
Answer
I refer the member to the answerto question S2W-31057 on 29 January 2007. All answers to written parliamentaryquestions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility forwhich can be found at:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search.
- Asked by: Alex Neil, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2007
-
Current Status:
Answered by Andy Kerr on 29 January 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive what the net present value and cash value gains of the refinancing of the Hairmyres Hospital PFI project are to (a) the private sector and (b) NHS Lanarkshire and, in respect of NHS Lanarkshire, in what form these gains have been made, such as reductions in annual payments or reduced parking charges.
Answer
The refinancing of Hairmyres Hospital inAugust 2004 provided an opportunity for both Prospect and NHS Lanarkshire towork in partnership and capture the considerable benefits from the reducedrisks inherent in the project following the successful completion ofconstruction and the experience gained of operating the hospital.
NHS Lanarkshire took itsshare of the gain as a reduction in its annual unitary charge payment of£419,000 per annum in 2004 prices over 26.75 years. At the time of refinancingthe NPV of NHS Lanarkshire’s share of the gain was calculated as £2.735 million.
The consortium made acapital gain on the refinancing in August 2004 of £16.7 million. Information isnot held on the basis that this was extracted.
The refinancing providessubstantial financial gain for NHSL and was undertaken in line with the Code ofConduct issued by the Office of Government Commerce in July 2002. PartnershipsUK Refinancing Task Force confirmed the business case complied with the termsof the Code.
