- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 06 June 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 13 September 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is aware of any deterioration of the road bridge over the Montrose basin; whether it has seen the current engineering reports on the bridge; whether it will publish these engineering reports; whether it will work with Angus Council to expedite the replacement of the bridge, and whether it will ensure that during the bridge replacement an alternative bridge suitable for heavy vehicles will be in place.
Answer
The Scottish Executive is aware that Angus Council as the local roads authority is currently planning for a replacement of the Montrose bridge. The Executive has not received engineering reports on the structural condition of the existing bridge. We understand that during the construction phase of a replacement bridge the council would expect to make provision for heavy goods vehicles at all times.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 August 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by John Home Robertson on 12 September 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive how many responses it has received to the consultation document Conservation of Salmon and Sea Trout issued by the Rural Affairs Department on 5 June 2000.
Answer
As at 28 August, 86 responses have been received.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 August 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 12 September 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the economic position of Scottish farming justifies the imposition of new groundwater charges.
Answer
Yes. I refer to the answer I gave today to question S1W-9339 in which I have explained that charges have been kept as low as possible whilst still enabling SEPA to move towards recovering the costs of regulation.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 August 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by John Home Robertson on 12 September 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive how many responses to the consultation document Conservation of Salmon and Sea Trout opposed the proposals contained in the document and whether the Parliament will receive a summary of these objections.
Answer
Responses to the proposals were mixed. Some supported all of them; some were totally opposed; others favoured some but not all. A file containing copies of all responses is available for viewing by MSPs in the Parliament's Reference Centre, and members of the public by appointment in the library of St Andrew's House and the Department's offices in Pentland House.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 August 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 12 September 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive why it has decided to levy annual groundwater charges on Scottish farmers when these annual charges have been waived in England and Wales.
Answer
Our policy is that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) should move toward full recovery of the costs of regulation in line with the polluter pays principle. Charges are determined by SEPA at levels that enable it work towards cost recovery.
At £123, the annual charge, which covers the cost of periodic inspections for monitoring purposes, is considerably lower than originally proposed during public consultation on the Groundwater Regulations. A number of special arrangements have, nevertheless, been made in Scotland to ease the financial burden on farmers of the regulations. In particular, smaller farmers and crofters can share one set of charges by working collectively to dispose of spent sheep dip, thus reducing substantially the amount they pay each year. The annual charge was also waived in Scotland in 1999-2000 while SEPA determined the first tranche of applications.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 20 June 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 4 July 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will financially support the Peterhead Bay Authority with the construction of a new outer breakwater.
Answer
The Executive has no general scheme of assistance to ports and harbours throughout Scotland. Port and harbour authorities operate in a competitive market. They are responsible for making their own investment decisions and raising finance.
Assistance may be available from the Executive for certain fishery related harbour development and through European Funds in eligible areas.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 20 June 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 4 July 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the proposed transportation hub for the Union Square area of Aberdeen should incorporate the city bus services.
Answer
As the planning application is currently before the Scottish Ministers, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on any aspect of the proposals at this stage.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 27 April 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 21 June 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans exist to invest additional money in the transport infrastructure, how much this will amount to and whether the availability of any additional funds will alter its position on the proposed western peripheral bypass for Aberdeen.
Answer
The Minister for Finance informed Parliament on 16 May that an additional £15.9 million was to be allocated to transport in 2000-01. I have already announced that the money will fund a range of transport improvements across Scotland, notably Safer Routes to School and capital investment in Highlands and Islands airports. The Executive's position on the proposed western peripheral bypass for Aberdeen remains as I set out in the debate in Parliament on 10 May.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 09 May 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jack McConnell on 7 June 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive from which dates it expects funding from the new Objective 2 round and the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to be available.
Answer
The European Commission officially received the Objective 2 Plans and the FIFG Plan on 28 April and has five months and six months respectively to provide funding Decisions.
Individual project approvals are not expected to be made until the end of this year.
- Asked by: Mr David Davidson, MSP for North East Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 28 March 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Jack McConnell on 31 May 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will supply projections, for the next five years, of actual non-domestic rate payments in each local authority area in Scotland including comparisons with the payments which would have been expected if the UK unified scheme had continued to be applied and with the projected net payments in respect of comparable premises in the rest of the UK.
Answer
Five-year projections by local authority area are not held centrally. In both Scotland and England the rate poundage for 2000-01 was set with a view to maintaining the total tax take in real terms. A paper showing how the Scottish Executive calculated the rate poundage and poundage comparisons between Scotland and England is available from SPICe. Comparable properties, north and south of the border, starting from the same position, which experience the average uplift at revaluation, should pay the same. Any variations will be due to either sectoral or local conditions.
