Questions and answers

Question reference: S1W-14599

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Wednesday, 28 March 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sarah Boyack on 23 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive what expenditure is currently planned for each of the continuing and new trunk road projects referred in Scottish Executive News Release SE0818/2001 in each year from 2001-02 to 2005-06.

The information requested is set out in the following table. These estimates may vary as procurement proceeds.

Motorway and Trunk Road Schemes Estimated Costs	2001-02 £000	2002-03 £000		2003-04 £000		2004-05 £000		2005-06 £000
A68 Soutra	1,295		0		0		0		0
A726 West Mains to Peel Park Roundabout	530		20		0		0		0
A76 Enterkinfoot (Phase 6)	525		0		0		0		0
A77 Hansel Village Footbridge	600		13		0		0		0
A77 Sandyford Roundabout	600		30		0		0		0
A77 Turnberry Climbing Lane	1,200		50		0		0		0
A87 Shiel Bridge Deck Replacement¹	182		7		0		0		0
A9 North Kessock Junction	50		450		0		0		0
A90 Bridge of Dee to Ellon Road	177		400		10		0		0
A90 Hatton Bends	250		750		20		0		0
A90 Inchmichael	3,900		60		60		80		0
A90 Kinfauns (Phase 1)	1,350		75		0		0		0
A90 Cammachmore	600		20		0		0		0
A90 North Anderson Drive	570		7		0		0		0
A95 Advie Bridge Replacement¹	280		5		0		0		0
A95 Cromdale¹	140		3		0		0		0
A95 Gaich to Craggan	1,085		15		0		0		0
M73 Drumcavel to Mollinsburn	610		20		0		0		0
M80 A80 to M876 Jn. 5	600		20		0		0		0
M876 Bowtrees to Kinnaird	640		20		0		0		0
A828 Connel Bridge	600		610		410		50		0
A876 Erskine Bridge	1,500		500		30		0		0
M90 Friarton Bridge	600		9		0		0		0
A1 Bowerhouse to Spott Road	3,218		170		152		79		74
A1 Howburn to Houndwood	3,120		1,116		130		81		76
A9 Bankfoot¹	10		350		20		0		0
A75 Chapelton to Bush o' Bield²	300		1,700		0		0		0
A76 Crossroads	1,190		15		0		0		0
A76 Gateside	1,500		0		0		0		0
A77 Blackneuk Improvements	100		500		0		0		0
A77 Symington Roundabout	50		600		15		0		0
A92 Preston to Balfarg	50		2,670		20		20		0
A96 Newtongarry	1,020		1,500		0		0		0
A830 Arisaig to Kinsadel	6,900		3,400		261		124		155
M8 in Glasgow (Jn. 22)	50		600		25		0		0
A90 Inchture	1,700		2,900		55		5		0
A737 Roadhead Roundabout	100		600		500		50		0
A75 Barfill to Bettyknowes ²	32		95		1,741		0		0
A75 Cairntop to Barlae²	108		1,604		1,638		0		0
A75 Newton Stewart²	25		75		1,216		0		0
A76 Enterkinfoot (Phase 7)	10		500		500		50		0
A77 Burnside Improvement	50		500		500		50		0
A78 Inverkip Street Rail Bridge	300		1,900		35		0		0
A8 Baillieston to Newhouse	352		16,000		7,500		488		0
A82 Dumbuck Junction	0		50		850		50		0
A90 Glamis	500		2,100		50		50		0
A90 Kirriemuir	500		2,100		50		50		0
A96 Coachford	105		2,602		500		0		0
M8 Gantry Refurbishment	350		350		350		30		0
M8 High Mast Lighting	500		500		500		30		0
M8 Kingston Bridge	4,000		6,500		9,000		1,000		500
A1 Haddington to Dunbar	950		24,360		10,980		1,075		585
A1 Thistly Cross to Bowerhouse	35		11		50		3,000		50
A75 Dunragit Bypass²	68		340		340		231		231
A75 Hardgrove²	24		88		88		88		88
A78 Ardrossan, Saltcoats and Stevenston Bypass	475		3,780		15,850		13,000		0
A876 Kincardine Bridge Eastern Link	50		50		2,750		4,000		0
A876 Kincardine Bridge³	510		210		500		18,000		18,000
A90 Glendoick	194		53		53		4,500		0
A90 Kinfauns	194		83		53		4,000		0
A96 Fochabers and Mosstodloch Bypass	260		750		5,250		11,000		0
M74 Northern Extension⁴	2,000		3,000		19,000		30,000		50,000
M77 Malletsheugh to Fenwick⁵	2,010		500		0		0		0

Notes:1. Some expenditure incurred in prior years, with the exception of the A9 Bankfoot. This originally appeared in the announcement in March 2000 as a scheme greater than £0.5 million but the present estimate is lower.

2. These estimates are based on the Route Action Plan costs and are likely to change once detailed appraisal and development has been completed. Some costs are also expected after 2005-06.

3. Costs will be incurred beyond 2005-06.

4. The profile of spend will be reviewed as the scheme is developed and decisions taken on procurement. Costs will be incurred beyond 2005-06.5. The costs shown are for scheme preparation, advance works and land only. Procurement is assumed to be Public/Private Partnership (PPP) jointly with the Glasgow Southern Orbital Road. The annual service charge in respect of the PPP will commence on completion and the Executive's share will fall on the Motorway and Trunk Road Programme.

Question reference: S1W-12511

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 16 January 2001
Current Status: Answer expected on 30 January 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-8804 by Sarah Boyack on 25 August 2000, whether the work on the viability of the proposed Public/Private Partnership (PPP) in respect of the M77 Fenwick to Malletsheugh scheme has been completed; if so, whether tender documents for this PPP are expected to be issued and, if so, when.

Question reference: S1W-14665

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 29 March 2001
Current Status: Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 12 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive what instructions or guidance it has issued or plans to issue to local authorities to streamline and manage development plans in the light of the Research Paper 1998/50, Review of Development Planning in Scotland, by Hillier Parker, Dundas & Wilson.

The revised NPPG 1: The Planning System, published in November 2000, includes guidance on the need for brevity, clarity and precision when preparing development plans and on the importance of managing the process of the preparation of plans more efficiently. It also encourages planning authorities to set and publish demanding timetables for the preparation of plans, and gives examples of what those timetables should be. This guidance echoes a number of the research recommendations.The researchers' emphasis on the need for better management of the process is also reflected in the shift in focus of the work of the Scottish Executive Planning Audit Unit (PAU) from development control to development planning. The PAU has carried out pilot audits of three planning authorities' development plan procedures, to identify best practice and changes that might be made to improve procedures. An overview of preliminary findings is contained in the Third Annual Report of the Planning Audit Unit, which was published on 30 March and copies are available from the Parliament's Reference Centre. The findings will be fed into the current review of strategic planning. Consultation will take place this summer on the review.

Question reference: S1W-14491

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Friday, 23 March 2001
Current Status: Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 6 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it proposes to take on the recommendations made in the recently published research report, Obsolete Commercial and Industry Property, prepared by Ekos and Ryden Property Consultants for the Central Research Unit.

Question reference: S1W-14377

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 22 March 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sarah Boyack on 5 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-3338 by Sarah Boyack on 18 January 2000, what action it proposes to take to upgrade or replace bridges then and subsequently identified as being unsuitable for reassessment.

Sub-standard bridges will be strengthened or replaced on a prioritised basis as part of the annual trunk road bridge maintenance programme. It is expected this work will take 5 years to complete but the actual timescale will depend on competing priorities and the availability of funding.Not included in this programme are 4 sub-standard bridges that will be replaced as part of other proposed schemes involving the improvement or realignment of the existing trunk road. These structures have been strengthened by propping as an interim measure pending their replacement.

Question reference: S1W-14378

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 22 March 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sarah Boyack on 5 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-1419 by Sarah Boyack on 27 September 1999, what its estimate is of the capital value of the trunk road and motorway network at 1 April 2001.

Question reference: S1W-14376

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 22 March 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sarah Boyack on 5 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-3338 by Sarah Boyack on 18 January 2000, how many of the 20 confirmed sub-standard bridges have now been brought up to standard or placed on a firm programme of works for upgrading; what the re-assessment of the remaining bridges has shown, and which of these bridges will be included in further upgrading programmes.

Four of the 20 bridges have been strengthened and 6 reassessed as adequate. With the exception of the A8 Orchard Farm Rail bridge, which has been strengthened by propping as an interim measure pending the outcome of further studies into the options for M8 Baillieston-Newhouse, the remainder have been included in the trunk road bridge strengthening programme.Of the other 53 bridges, 24 have been reassessed as adequate, 26 were confirmed as sub-standard, of which 7 have subsequently been strengthened. The reassessment of 3 structures is in progress.The following 25 bridges will therefore be strengthened in the programme:

A76 Marchburn	A82 Achtriochtan	M8 Deans Road
A78 Inverkip Street Rail	A82 Achnambeithach	M8 Starlaw
A82 Allt Chonoglais	A82 Allt Fhiodhan	M8 Arkleston
A82 Ba	A87 Bunan	M8 White Cart
A82 Allt Molach	A87 Broadford	M8 St James Interchange (East)
A82 Creagdubh¹	A898 Erskine	M8 St James Interchange (West)
A82 Allt Nan Guibhas	A9 Kessock	M8 Black Cart
A82 Lairig Eilde	M74 Raith	M9 Hill Overbridge
A82 Altanrigh		M9 River Avon

^{1Originally listed as adequate, further investigation resulted in this bridge being regraded as sub-standard. Not included in this list are 3 bridges which are to be bypassed by proposed trunk road schemes. These structures have been strengthened by propping as an interim measure pending their replacement.}

Question reference: S1W-12739

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 23 January 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sarah Boyack on 4 April 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the decision to tender the contracts for the management and maintenance of the trunk road network was required by either European or British law; whether it is legally necessary to award the contracts as tendered or whether it is possible to review and re-tender them, and whether it would be legally competent to continue with the existing contracts or to replace them with a temporary negotiated arrangement with the existing providers, to allow for any new contracts to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny.

The tendering of the contracts was required by the relevant EC Directive implemented in domestic law by the 1991 Regulations. Failure to award the contracts as tendered could expose the Scottish Executive to damages claims. Only the 5 existing Managing Agent contracts under which two private sector and three local authority consortia provide management services for the rural networks outwith the central belt, can clearly be extended. Such an extension would not deliver maintenance services of itself.

Question reference: S1W-12744

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Tuesday, 23 January 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sam Galbraith on 20 March 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive what auditing has been carried out of the use by local authorities of section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 or former section 50 agreements; whether any evidence has been found either of local authorities seeking benefits unrelated in nature, scale or kind to proposed developments or of developers offering unrelated benefits or inducements to obtain favourable decisions and whether any such evidence would require the development of notification procedures for the proposed use of section 75 agreements.

The most recent analysis of information held by the Executive relating to section 75 agreements was published in the Report of the Targets Working Group in October 1999. A copy of the report is available in the Parliaments Reference Centre.

The Executive commissioned research into The Use and Effectiveness of Planning Agreements in July 2000. Output from this research should be available within the next few months.The Executive has no present evidence of inappropriate use of such agreements.

Question reference: S1W-13200

Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
Date lodged: Thursday, 08 February 2001
Current Status: Answered by Sam Galbraith on 19 March 2001

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the judgement in the case of the City of Edinburgh versus the Secretary of State for Scotland 1998 SLT 120 applies equally to Scottish Ministers in cases where they decide not to exercise their powers to call in for determination notifiable applications and notices of intention to develop submitted to them by planning authorities.

Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (formerly section 18A of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1972) requires that where, in making any determination under the planning Acts, regard is to be had to the development plan, the determination shall be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The House of Lords decision in the case of the City of Edinburgh Council v Secretary of State for Scotland 1998 SLT 120 decided inter alia the effect of section 18A and how it should be applied.The question appears to ask whether that particular part of the judgement applies in circumstances where the Scottish Ministers decide not to call in for their own determination notifiable applications or notices of intention to develop. There is no statutory provision requiring the Scottish Ministers, in making such a decision, to have regard to the development plan. Section 25 does not, therefore, apply in these circumstances, accordingly the House of Lords judgement referred to would similarly not apply.

Chamber and committees