Chamber and committees

I have asked Tony Cameron,Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is asfollows:

SPS does not routinelyrecord detailed expenditure against individual cases, particularly since manyof these cases raise identical issues. Since 1 April 2003SPS has incurred separately identifiable costs (excluding expenditure on Napierand Davidson) of approximately £0.3 million in defending legalchallenges to prison conditions based on the European Convention of HumanRights. Most of these challenges have related to slopping out.

Lead contamination ofdrinking water arises from old lead pipes. There are no lead pipes in thepublic water supply distribution network. Old lead pipes are still in use as servicepipes (connecting premises to the water main in the street) and as internalplumbing in older buildings. Lead plumbing is generally confined to premisesbuilt before 1964 but the use of lead service pipes continued in some parts of Scotlanduntil 1971.

Scottish Water routinelysamples and tests for lead in accordance with the Water Supply(Water Quality) (Scotland) Regulations 2001. In 2004, 1,810 samples were taken fromconsumers’ taps in Scotland and analysed for lead. Of these, 20 exceeded thestandard of 25 microgrammes per litre. Where the standard was exceeded, theowner/occupier of the building was advised of the risk from lead in drinkingwater and the steps that they could take to minimise that risk.

The three former water authoritiesundertook detailed lead studies between 1999 and 2002 to identify areas whereplumbosolvency control was required at water treatment works. Plumbosolvencycontrol minimises the extent to which lead is dissolved from service pipes andplumbing.

In 2002, the Scottish Centrefor Infection and Environmental Health (now Health Protection Scotland) undertooka study of new homes in Scotland to determine the extent of the illegal use of leadsolder in plumbing in new homes.

This information is not heldcentrally. This is a matter for chief constables.

I refer the member to the answer to question S2W-25298 on 16 May 2006. All answers to written parliamentary questions are availableon the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search.

The Executive has not yet receivedMs McKie’s account of expenses.

Scottish ministers have no collectivepower to direct Chief Constables on operational matters. The Lord Advocate has a statutory power to instruct thepolice in Scotland in relation to the investigation and reporting of allegedcriminal activity.

The Scottish Executive doesnot have responsibility for the appointment or functions of the AdvocateGeneral. Officials of the Lord Advocate’s office are in regular contact with officials of the Advocate General’s office in relation to matters of mutual concern. Thatpractice continued during the period referred to in the question.

I have asked Tony Cameron,Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is asfollows:

I refer the member to the answer to questionS2W-17354 on 24 June 2004 which sets out what information the SPS and Reliancehave agreed to publish. The information requested does not fall within thescope of this agreement. The agreed information can be seen on the SPS websiteat www.sps.gov.uk.

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.

I have asked Tony Cameron,Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service to respond. His response is as follows:

I refer the member to the answer to question S2W-25470 on 11 May 2006. All answers to written parliamentary questions areavailable on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can befound at http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search.

In relation to restrictedpatients, the State Hospital adhere to the advice contained in Section 5.10 of the Memorandum of Procedure which provides guidance to professionals for themanagement of restricted patients. In certain cases, visits to particular locationswould not be appropriate and if such limits are identified the reasons for thisare fed back to individual patients. It is important that suspension-of-detentionprogrammes are designed and conducted in such a way as to sustain publicconfidence in the arrangements as a whole, and to respect the feelings andpossible fears of victims and others who may have been affected by theoffences. Leave will only take place when it is deemed appropriate and safe.

I announced on 22 March, inresponse to the deficiencies identified in the Report by the Mental WelfareCommission into the care and treatment of Mr L and Mr M, that we were taking anumber of steps to reinforce public confidence in the services that areprovided. The full response is available on:

www.scotland.gov.uk/Inquiry/Treatment.

Scottish ministers do nothave a statutory role to consent to suspension of detention of non-restrictedpatients.

I refer the member to the answerto question S2W-23666 on 12 April 2006. All answers to written parliamentary questions areavailable on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be foundat http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search.