- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 22 January 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Margaret Curran on 5 February 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether, when checks are made on emissions from telecommunications masts, consideration is given to the amalgam of cumulative emissions at peak times from a single telecommunication mast equipped with multiple antennae.
Answer
The audit of mobile phone base stations set up in response to the recommendations of the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (the Stewart Group) is being carried out by the Radiocommunications Agency (RA).The RA, when conducting its initial audit of mobile telephone base stations on school sites, did not automatically calculate the amalgam of cumulative emissions at peak times. The audit was designed to measure accurately all emissions received at the measurement location at the time when the audit was undertaken.Nonetheless, the RA was alert to the possibility that at the time of each audit not all channels from any particular base station would, necessarily, be transmitting. Consequently the RA decided to carry out more detailed measurements where the measurements taken were found to be higher than 1/100th of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines. However, these additional measurements did not prove necessary as during the course of the many thousands of measurements made during the 101 audits, the highest measurement recorded was 1/279th of the ICNIRP guidelines. Typically measurement levels were found to be many thousands of times below the ICNIRP guidelines.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 16 November 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Mike Watson on 11 December 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive whether Article 3 of the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revision) will have any implications for independent historical and archaeological associations in Scotland and what steps it will take to ensure that such associations do not suffer any adverse consequences as a result of Article 3.
Answer
Article 3 of the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revision) recently signed by the UK Government seeks to ensure that archaeological excavations and prospecting are undertaken in a scientific manner by qualified, specially authorised persons. The most recent summary of the Government's view was that expressed in reply to a House of Commons Parliamentary Question on 13 July by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport:"In broad terms, current measures in place in the UK already meet the Convention's requirements. The Government does not believe that additional legislation, requiring a licensing system, is necessary to fulfil Article 3. Much archaeological work is already controlled through existing mechanisms. There may be scope for developing a voluntary Code of Conduct for those who wish to undertake archaeological work outside the existing systems of control."I believe that there will continue to be an important role for voluntary historical and archaeological associations in Scotland.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 22 October 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 5 November 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive what effect the European Commission's recent proposal to make all medicines for livestock and horses available only on prescription will have on agricultural merchant businesses.
Answer
This proposal forms part of a much wider set of proposals to amend and update the procedures for the authorisation and control of both human and veterinary medicines in the EU. In its present form this particular proposal could prevent agricultural merchants supplying medicines intended for administration to food-producing animals. Veterinary medicines legislation is not devolved. But my officials are liasing closely with DEFRA colleagues to try to modify the proposals to allow a more flexible approach to be adopted to product distribution.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 13 July 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 10 August 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive why the residents of the travellers' site at Duncholgan were not consulted over the future of the nearby landfill site at Lingerton, Argyll.
Answer
Halcrow Crouch, the agents acting for the applicant, Shanks Waste Services confirmed to Argyll and Bute Council in a letter dated 1 December 2000 that neighbour notifications and plans had been issued to all the residents at Duncholgan. They were not required to do so as the Travelling People's site lies outwith the statutory notifiable distance.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 13 July 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 10 August 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive how many alternative sites were considered when the future of the landfill site at Lingerton, Argyll was discussed and whether the Lingerton site satisfies the Scottish Environment Protection Agency's guidelines on landfill.
Answer
The question of alternative sites is a matter for the developer before an application is submitted to the planning authority. The Scottish Ministers would not take this into account in their consideration of a planning application notified to them by a local authority. I understand that Argyll and Bute Council does not consider that the Lingerton landfill site satisfies the regulatory requirements and this prompted the planning application for improvements. Once these are completed, the operator will require to apply to SEPA for a Permit under the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations 2000.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 29 June 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Iain Gray on 1 August 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive whether its proposals for the purchase of salmon fishing rights in the draft Land Reform (Scotland) Bill will result in a loss of revenue raised by fisheries trusts in crofting areas for salmon and sea trout conservation and, if so, how that revenue will be replaced.
Answer
The Trusts are funded by Fishery Boards and fishing proprietors and their revenues will be determined in future as they are now by decisions made by those who provide the funding. The proposals in the draft Bill do not alter that.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 29 June 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Iain Gray on 1 August 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive what consultation it has carried out or plans to carry out with individuals or bodies who work on salmon and sea trout rivers on its proposals in the draft Land Reform (Scotland) Bill on the purchase of salmon fishing rights.
Answer
The draft Land Reform (Scotland) Bill was published in a consultation paper in February 2001. This consultation document was available free to members of the public and also published on the internet. A period of 18 weeks from the publication date was allowed for submission of responses. Officials also met with representatives of the Association of Scottish Salmon Fisheries Boards and the Scottish Anglers National Association on 28 June to hear their views on the draft Bill proposals.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 29 June 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Iain Gray on 1 August 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has conducted any survey into the impact on employment levels and tourism revenue of its proposals in the draft Land Reform (Scotland) Bill to allow crofting community bodies to purchase salmon fishing rights.
Answer
We consider the consultation exercise which we have recently completed and which included responses from Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Highland Council as well as landowners and crofting interests is a more effective mechanism for eliciting views on the impacts of our proposals.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 03 July 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Wendy Alexander on 31 July 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive what measures are being taken to alleviate any financial difficulties being experienced by the network of privately owned hostels in the Highlands and Islands as a result of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak.
Answer
Tourism businesses received substantial aid from the £13.5 million package of emergency relief announced on 28 March. We hope to make an announcement shortly about a strategy for addressing the medium and longer term effects of foot-and-mouth disease on tourism.
- Asked by: Jamie McGrigor, MSP for Highlands and Islands, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 27 June 2001
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 25 July 2001
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will reimburse Argyll & Bute Council and Highland Council for the costs they incurred in setting up and manning disinfectant points on the roads during the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak.
Answer
The decision by the Argyll & Bute and Highland Councils to set up disinfectant points in their areas was taken despite advice from the Scottish Executive that such measures were unlikely to prove effective in disease control terms. The Executive, therefore, has no plans to reimburse the councils for the costs incurred.