- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 15 January 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 23 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive when it will publish a bill to reform the record of needs procedure.
Answer
The Scottish Executive published the draft Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill on Friday 17 January 2003, copies of which are available in the Parliament's Reference Centre (Bib. number 26036).
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 24 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Allan Wilson on 15 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive what the total catch of salmon was in 2002, broken down by area and type of fishery.
Answer
Salmon catch figures for 2002 are not yet available.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 11 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 13 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-31495 by Ross Finnie on 25 November 2002, whether it is aware of a letter from it to Mr Daniel Quinn, dated 1 October 2001, reference number of 2001/00263560R, that refers to previous correspondence regarding the eviction of the tenants from Powhillon Farm, Dumfriesshire, on 9 June 1999 and whether it will give an updated position on its involvement in the matter.
Answer
Following the eviction, Mr Quinn corresponded with officials in the Scottish Executive. The letter highlighted, of 1 October 2001, was a part of that correspondence. However, there is no outstanding correspondence between Mr Quinn and the Executive. It remains the case that the Scottish Executive had no involvement in the eviction.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 11 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 13 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-31496 by Ross Finnie on 25 November 2002, what information it has received about any complaint relating to the eviction of the tenants from Powhillon Farm, Dumfriesshire, on 9 June 1999 that is currently being considered by Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary; whether it will enquire further into the status of all complaints and investigations in respect of this matter, and whether it will give an updated position in respect of the original question.
Answer
No complaints relating to this eviction are the subject of investigation by the Scottish Executive. I understand that a complaint has been made against Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary and that this is currently under investigation by Dumfries and Galloway Council as the Police Authority for the area. Complaints against the police in Scotland are regulated by statute, principally the Police (Scotland) Act 1967, the Police (Conduct) (Scotland) Regulations 1996 and the Police (Conduct) (Senior Officers) (Scotland) Regulations 1999. In these circumstances, I have nothing further to add.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Hugh Henry on 10 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive what expenditure the Scottish Criminal Records Office has incurred with regard to the (a) salaries, (b) pension contributions and (c) other work-related expenses paid in respect of the fingerprint experts that gave evidence in the prosecution of Shirley McKie, broken down by the periods (i) from June 2000 until their suspension from work, (ii) during their suspension from work and (iii) since their return to work.
Answer
Responsibility for pay and other staff-related service conditions for the civilian staff at the Scottish Criminal Record Office formally rests with Strathclyde Joint Police Board. The board has, however, made available the following information in respect of the three fingerprint officers who gave evidence in the prosecution of Shirley McKie and a fourth officer who did not give evidence but who was involved in the process leading up to the prosecution and who was suspended with the other three officers:
| Period (i) | £33,544 |
| Period (ii) | £314,049 |
| Period (iii) (projected to March 2003) | £200,303 |
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Hugh Henry on 10 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO), or any other public body, made any financial contribution to the legal costs of the fingerprint experts involved in the prosecution of Shirley McKie either before, during or after their suspension for wrongful identification of the fingerprint evidence led by the SCRO in the case.
Answer
The Scottish Criminal Record Office has not made any financial contribution to the legal costs of the fingerprint experts involved in the prosecution of Ms McKie, nor has any other public body as far as I am aware.The Scottish Executive has accepted responsibility for the defendants' legal cost arising out of the civil action raised on behalf of Ms McKie.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 13 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Hugh Henry on 10 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive, with regard to the prosecution of Shirley McKie, what costs were incurred by (a) it, (b) the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) and (c) any other public bodies, including the Crown Office and the police, in (i) prosecuting the case, (ii) inquiring into the (1) circumstances of the prosecution and (2) deficiencies of the SCRO revealed as a result of the prosecution, (iii) considering the prosecution of those involved in the case and (iv) defending legal actions initiated by Shirley McKie.
Answer
The cost incurred by the various public bodies involved in work related to these matters cannot be separately identified from within the costs incurred by those bodies in discharging the totality of their business.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Hugh Henry on 10 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-31827 by Mr Jim Wallace on 3 December 2002, what outstanding matters from previous inspections of the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO) will be considered by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in the follow-up inspection of the SCRO in January 2003.
Answer
As part of the forthcoming Review Inspection of the Scottish Criminal Record Office (SCRO), HM Inspectorate of Constabulary will seek to identify the progress made in addressing all of the recommendations and suggestions contained in its Primary Inspection Report of the SCRO Fingerprint Bureau.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Hugh Henry on 10 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will direct HM Inspectorate of Constabulary to ensure that its previous recommendations and those of the Change Management Review Team established by the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland regarding openness and accountability in the Scottish Criminal Records Office are implemented fully.
Answer
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has a statutory duty to enquire into police efficiency independently of the Scottish Executive. It would not, therefore, be appropriate for the Scottish Executive to direct HMIC in how it should discharge its duty.The forthcoming Review Inspection of the Scottish Criminal Record Office (SCRO) will seek to identify the progress made in addressing the recommendations and suggestions contained in its Primary Inspection Report of the SCRO Fingerprint Bureau. The ACPOS Change Management Review Team Report was a positive initial step in the process of responding to HMIC's recommendations and suggestions and the forthcoming Review Inspection will take this and other work into account as it evaluates the effectiveness of changes made within the SCRO Fingerprint Bureau.
- Asked by: Michael Russell, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 12 December 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Hugh Henry on 10 January 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive what response it made, or advice it gave, to the Public Petitions Committee with regard to petition PE544 on the Scottish Criminal Records Office (SCRO); whether any such advice or response indicated that it was unable to provide information to the committee because of a pending civil case; whether it acted properly in giving such advice, and whether it will now respond to the concerns of the petitioners.
Answer
The substance of the Scottish Executive's response is recorded at column 2532 of the Official Report of the meeting of the Public Petitions Committee held on 3 December 2002 and can be found at:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/official_report/cttee/petit-02/pu02-1802.htm#Col2532The Executive is satisfied that its response was appropriate.The petition was addressed to the Public Petitions Committee and it will be for the committee in the first instance to decide how to respond to the petitioners' concerns.
