- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive, with regard to paragraph 2.25 of Audit Scotland's The new trunk road contracts, what internal guidance it has established to help clarify circumstances where contract termination may be warranted, why such guidance was not established at the outset of the contracts and on what date the development of any such guidance was completed.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-20533 on 29 November 2001, in response to publication of the Auditor General's report.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-19889 by Sarah Boyack on 26 November 2001, why it did not provide a detailed response to the question and how much it spent on answering the question.
Answer
Question S1W-19889 was answered adequately. As the member will be aware, it is not usual to provide details of discussions between ministers and third parties.The estimated cost of answering the member's question S1W-19889 is £60.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive why its Development Department considered that it did not need a quality:price ratio when assessing tenders for trunk road maintenance contracts, as reported in paragraph 1.51 of Audit Scotland's The new trunk road contracts.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-20533 on 29 November 2001, in response to publication of the Auditor General's report.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive why there was no opportunity for bidders for trunk road maintenance contracts to offer innovative proposals from the outset of the contracts involving any change in the level of service or the work specifications, as reported in paragraph 2.14 of Audit Scotland's The new trunk road contracts.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-20533 on 29 November 2001, in response to publication of the Auditor General's report.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive, with regard to paragraph 2.26 of Audit Scotland's The new trunk road contracts, whether its Development Department has levied any lane occupation charges on any companies operating trunk roads maintenance contracts at any time since 1 April 2001 and, if so, whether it will give details of (a) each company involved, (b) (i) the amount and (ii) the date and (c) the default that resulted in each such charge.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-20533 on 29 November 2001, in response to publication of the Auditor General's report.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive why its Development Department clarified aspects of each bidder's quality proposals with the knowledge of the initial results of the financial assessment of bids, as reported in paragraph 1.63 of Audit Scotland's The new trunk road contracts.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-20533 on 29 November 2001, in response to publication of the Auditor General's report.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive why its Development Department's initial assessment was that it was not clear that each bidder's tendered final quality proposals for trunk road maintenance contracts fully met the required quality threshold, as reported in paragraph 1.62 of Audit Scotland's The new trunk road contracts.
Answer
I refer the Member to the answer given to question S1W-20533 on 29 November 2001, in response to publication of the Auditor General's report.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 09 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive what powers it has to determine and influence the future delivery of rail services in Scotland and what use it has made of these powers in the context of consultation and negotiation with the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions.
Answer
On 31 March 1998, Henry McLeish MP, then the minister responsible for Transport at the Scottish Office, announced in the House of Commons that a range of important responsibilities for the operation of railways in Scotland would be transferred to the Parliament and Scottish ministers. These responsibilities were to be delivered within the revised GB regulatory framework, which was subsequently implemented in the Transport Act 2000.The responsibilities have been transferred to the Parliament and the Scottish ministers through provisions in the Transport Act 2000 and Orders made under sections 30 and 63 of the Scotland Act 1998. The Scottish ministers are now responsible for issuing to the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) Directions and Guidance for the franchise providing passenger rail services that start and end in Scotland. They have the power to issue Directions and Guidance for Scottish sleeper services provided by the same franchise, to issue advice to the SRA on other cross-border services, and to fund the SRA to enable it to pay for the franchise providing Scottish passenger services. They also have responsibility for the administration of freight facilities grants and track access grants in Scotland, working within the rules of the schemes agreed at GB level for these subsidies, and for appointing the Chair of the Rail Passengers' Committee for Scotland. The reports of that committee and of the Rail Passengers' Council will be laid before the Parliament. The Parliament has legislative competence over the provision of grants for passenger rail services. It also has competence over the rail responsibilities of Strathclyde PTA/E and of any new such bodies which might be established in Scotland, subject to these falling within the overall framework of the new railway regulatory structure. The final provision of the rail devolution settlement to be implemented will give the Parliament legislative competence over the promotion and construction of railways in Scotland. Ministers' regular meetings with the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions take place within the context of all of these powers.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 11 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive whether Amey Highways Ltd or BEAR Scotland Ltd have made any direct contact with journalists, press organisations, MPs or MSPs in respect of the trunk road maintenance contracts; if so, on what date and whether in each case prior permission was sought from the Executive to make such contact, and where within the roads maintenance contracts the Executive is given authorisation to grant such permissions.
Answer
Since October Amey Highways Ltd and BEAR Scotland Ltd have issued media statements and responded to media requests for factual information from Scottish daily and local newspapers, Sunday newspapers, news agencies and broadcast media. Two statements regarding collapsed manholes on the M8 were issued to MSPs on 29 October 2001 and 15 November 2001. In all cases this contact was made with the prior knowledge of the Scottish Executive. Media requests for information regarding matters of policy or finance continue to be handled by the Scottish Executive.The Conditions of Contract allow the Scottish Executive to vary the contracts.
- Asked by: Andrew Wilson, MSP for Central Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 11 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-19833 by Sarah Boyack on 23 November 2001, why the information requested in questions S1O-4059 and S1W-19848 was not provided in the answers to those questions on 8 and 23 November respectively and what the cost of providing each of those answers was.
Answer
Questions S1W-19833, S1O-4059 and S1W-19848 were answered adequately. As the member will be aware, it is not usual to provide details of discussions between ministers and third parties.The estimated cost of answering each of the member's questions is as follows:-
S1W-19833 | £65 |
S1O-4059 | £120 |
S1W-19848 | £60 |
