Chamber and committees

Questions and answers

Parliamentary questions can be asked by any MSP to the Scottish Government or the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. The questions provide a means for MSPs to get factual and statistical information.

Written questions must be answered within 10 working days (20 working days during recess)
Other questions such as Topical, Portfolio, General and First Minister's Question Times are taken in the Chamber

Urgent Questions aren't included in the Question and Answers search. There is a SPICe fact sheet listing Urgent and emergency questions.

Find out more about parliamentary questions

Filter your results Hide all filters

Displaying 2611 questions Show Answers

Order by |

Question reference: S2W-17736

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Monday, 04 July 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 19 July 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive what obligation there is on the Parliament to implement a framework decision of the Council of Ministers of the European Union and what action may be taken against the Parliament or the Executive in the event of failure to implement a framework decision.

Framework Decisions fall within the Third Pillar of the European Union. They are binding on member states by virtue of Article 34(2)(b) of the EU Treaty. The UK is therefore under an international obligation to implement Framework Decisions. However, unlike First Pillar measures under the EC Treaty there is no provision for infraction proceedings in respect of Third Pillar measures and so the UK cannot be taken before the European Court of Justice for failing to implement a Framework Decision.

Responsibility for implementing Framework Decisions in areas of devolved competence rests with Scottish ministers.

Question reference: S2W-17744

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Monday, 04 July 2005
Current Status: Answered by Tom McCabe on 12 July 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive what work has been commissioned of civil servants by special advisers since the inception of the Parliament.

Question reference: S2W-17648

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 29 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Hugh Henry on 6 July 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that civil partners brought together under the Civil Partnership Act 2004 ought to have their status recognised in other EU member states for the purposes of rules on (a) ownership of property, (b) inheritance, (c) actions in delict, (d) parental responsibility, (e) financial provision for children, (f) adoption, (g) access to public housing, (h) tenancies, (i) fatal accident claims by one partner in the event of the death of the other, (j) criminal evidence and (k) taxation and, if so, what action it will take in order to achieve this.

On implementation from 5 December, the Civil Partnership Act 2004 will allow same-sex couples to register their partnerships. Registration will bring a package of responsibilities and rights similar to those which opposite-sex couples acquire through marriage.

The same-sex registered partnerships of certain overseas jurisdictions will be treated as civil partnerships throughout the UK. These are listed in schedule 20 of the act and are referred to as “specified relationships”. In future, this list can be added to by order as other countries establish similar relationships. Equally, it is anticipated that these overseas jurisdictions will recognise civil partnerships registered in the UK.

At present, some EU member states have equivalent “specified relationships” while others do not. It is not for the Scottish Executive to comment on the policies of other EU member states.

Question reference: S2W-17649

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 29 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Hugh Henry on 6 July 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that civil partners brought together under the Civil Partnership Act 2004 might suffer any disadvantages on moving to another EU member state where their status is not recognised.

Question reference: S2W-17353

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 5 July 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-16954 by Cathy Jamieson on 9 June 2005 and given that the only statistics on prisoner movements in Scotland in 2004 on the Scottish Prison Service website are those showing movements by Reliance Secure Task Management Ltd whose contract was not fully rolled out in 2004, why it did not provide an answer to the question on how many prisoner movements there were from (a) police custody to court, (b) prisons to court, (c) hospital to court and (d) court to court and how many other prisoner movements there were in each month of 2004 in total and whether it will now do so.

Question reference: S2W-17357

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 27 June 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive what the total value of illegal drugs seized by police authorities was in each of the last five years, broken down by type of drug.

Question reference: S2W-17356

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 27 June 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive whether any of the legislative responsibility for the implementation of the draft Framework Decision on the retention of data processed and stored in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or data on public communications networks for the purpose of prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of crime and criminal offences including terrorism would fall on the Scottish Parliament if it were to be implemented as it stands.

Question reference: S2W-17355

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 27 June 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answers to questions S2W-16495, S2W-16933 and S2W-16934 by Cathy Jamieson and Colin Boyd on 23 May, 8 June and 9 June 2005, how it reconciles its assertion in the answer to question S2W-16495, that the matters contained in the draft Framework Decision on the retention of data processed and stored in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or data on public communications networks for the purpose of prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of crime and criminal offences including terrorism are reserved to the UK Government, with statements in its answer to question S2W-16934 that criminal investigation and procedure, including procedures for obtaining warrants, are devolved and, in answer to question S2W-16933, that the implementation of instruments dealing with judicial co-operation which relate to devolved matters of criminal law and procedure will fall within devolved competence.

We have no difficulty in reconcilingthe answers given to S2W-16495, S2W-16933 and S2W-16934. While legislation in thegeneral area of criminal law and procedure is devolved under the Scotland Act 1998,the subject matter of the current draft Framework Decision on data retention fallswithin the reserved area of telecommunications and wireless telegraphy under schedule5 to that act. The extent to which changes to criminal procedure are required willbe considered in detail when implementing the Framework Decision, as will the reserved/devolveddivide in relation to those changes. In view of section 29(3) of the Scotland Act,the creation of procedural rules specific to the Framework Decision – if any arerequired - may be reserved. However, general rules of criminal procedure are devolved.

Question reference: S2W-17354

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 24 June 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-16511 by Cathy Jamieson on 23 May 2005, whether its agreement with Reliance Secure Task Management Ltd regarding the monthly performance summary of the contract for the provision of prisoner escort and court custody services is available in writing and, if so, whether it will provide the full written terms of that agreement and why it did not provide this information in the answer to question S2W-16511.

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

The answer to the previous question gave information on what information could be released as agreed with Reliance. A full copy of the written agreement is as follows:

Monthly Reliance Custodial Services (RCS) Performance Report – Headline Definitions

Prisoner Movements

Police Custody to Court

The number of prisoner escorts from police custody to court, but not the return journey, for the calendar month.

Prisons to Court

The number of prisoner escorts from prisons to court, but not the return journey, for the calendar month.

Hospital to Court

The number of prisoner escorts from hospital to court, but not the return journey, for the calendar month.

Court to Court

The number of prisoner escorts from one court to another court, but not the return journey, for the calendar month.

Other

The number of other prisoner escorts which count toward calculation of volume bandings, including non-core escorts, for the calendar month. In this context, return journeys as described above do not count, nor do “walk ins” who are subsequently given a custodial disposal. Inter court transfers are reported separately.

Performance

On Time Delivery to Court

The percentage of prisoners delivered to court on time, as defined by the contract.

Prisoners Unlawfully at Large

The number of performance measures that have been applied against RCS for each incident in that month for prisoners who have been released in error, or escaped or who are unlawfully at large.

Financial

Payment due to Service Provider

The total amount, presented as a single figure, due to RCS based upon the Invoice and Credit note submitted by RCS for that month including any revision(s) to the credit note as a result of the monthly meeting between the Operations Director and the Monitor. The number of pending items (if any) following this meeting they will be highlighted on the Monthly Report.

Scottish Prison Service, 6 August 2004.

Question reference: S2W-17359

Asked by: Kenny MacAskill, MSP for Lothians, Scottish National Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 June 2005
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 24 June 2005

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-15656 by Mr Jim Wallace on 8 May 2001, how many police officers from ethnic minority communities there currently are in each police force and what the latest figures are for the recruitment, retention and promotion of such officers.

The latest available information is set out in the following table.

2003-04

Force	Number of Visibly Ethnic Officers	Number of Visibly Ethnic Recruits	Wastage of Visibly Ethnic Officers	Promotion of Visibly Ethnic Officers
Central Scotland	3	1	1	0
Dumfries and Galloway	1	1	0	0
Fife	4	1	1	0
Grampian	3	0	1	0
Lothian and Borders	30	0	0	0
Northern	2	0	0	0
Strathclyde	58	9	3	1
Tayside	5	2	2	0
Total	106	14	8	1

Source: Annual Statistical Returns from forces to Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary.