- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 14 June 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Tom McCabe on 2 November 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-6319 by Mr Tom McCabe on 9 May 2000, whether its investigation has established the reason for the delay in answering question S1W-3953 yet; if so, what this reason is and when it now expects to answer question S1W-3953.
Answer
PQ S1W-3953 was answered on 8 September.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 14 September 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 30 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Forth Road Bridge Joint Board and the Tay Road Bridge Joint Board report to it annually; what the cost to its budget would be if, in the current three-year spending cycle, tolls on (a) the Forth Road Bridge and (b) the Tay Road Bridge were removed and existing maintenance commitments honoured, and whether it will identify for each bridge any other costs which would be involved in removing tolls.
Answer
The Forth Road Bridge and the Tay Road Bridge Joint Boards do not report to the Scottish Executive. The boards publish annual accounts, which may contain some of the information sought. The Executive is not aware of the future expenditure plans of the Joint Boards nor if the boards have estimates of any costs associated with cessation of tolling.
The Executive has not considered any matters relating to the cessation of tolling, including in particular on which bodies and budgets the responsibility for maintenance, management and operation of the bridges would fall.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 02 October 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 27 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-9784 by Sarah Boyack on 22 September 2000, whether it will clarify (a) how many funds are administered under the Powershift programme for Scotland, (b) whether a separate fund is available for applicants only from the Highlands and Islands, (c) whether a separate fund is maintained for applicants from other rural areas of Scotland, (d) how a priority for rural motorists is otherwise defined and administered and (e) how rural motorists are defined.
Answer
There is a single fund for Powershift in Scotland. In respect of the additional £310,000 which I recently made available for Powershift, priority will be given to applications from rural areas of Scotland. I am presently considering with Powershift criteria for defining which areas should be targeted for these extra resources.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 02 October 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 25 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will consider allowing local authorities to retain income from fines for litter offences to offset enforcement costs and to fund anti-litter initiatives.
Answer
Local authorities may retain the proceeds of litter fixed penalty notices. The amount of the fixed penalty is currently set at £25. Fines imposed by the district court following prosecution are retained by the court. We have no plans to introduce any changes.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 04 October 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Tom McCabe on 25 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has been asked for, and has supplied, any information on the costs of construction of its headquarters office at Victoria Quay to Mr John Spencely or EMBT-RMJM Ltd. in the context of work undertaken for the Scottish Parliament, Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body or Holyrood Progress Group and, if so, whether it will make any such information public.
Answer
No such information has been requested or supplied. RMJM were the developer's architects for the Victoria Quay project.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 11 September 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 25 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive what is the breakdown of responsibilities between it and The Scotland Office in establishing and funding any subsidised ferry routes between Campbeltown and Ballycastle.
Answer
Scottish Ministers have powers under the Highlands and Islands Shipping Services Act 1960 to maintain and improve sea transport services serving the Highlands and Islands and those powers are used to support lifeline services currently provided by Caledonian MacBrayne and P&O. Under the terms of the Scotland Act 1998, Scottish Ministers do not have powers to award financial assistance to public transport ferry services which start or finish or both outside Scotland. Financial assistance for such services is therefore a matter for the Scotland Office.
However, given the prospect that re-establishment of the ferry service between Campbeltown and Ballycastle could provide economic benefits to the Campbeltown area, Scottish Ministers support current efforts led by Scotland Office Ministers to re-establish this route; and to seek the European Commission's agreement that it should be operated on a public service obligation basis, enabling public subsidy to be made available in compliance with state aid rules.
Detailed arrangements for the provision of subsidy are dependent on agreement that the service may be operated on a public service obligation basis. The Scotland Office and other interested parties are presently considering an appropriate funding mechanism that would be consistent with state aid rules.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 15 September 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Susan Deacon on 24 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has powers to lift spinal cord removal restrictions on ewes in Scotland and, if so, whether it has any plans to do so.
Answer
The Food Standards Agency advises Ministers in relation to Scottish Regulations safeguarding the food chain, including the requirement to remove the spinal cord in sheep as Specified Risk Material.
New Regulations came into force on 1 October giving effect to a recent Commission Decision (00/418/EC, agreed on 29 June) on EU-wide controls over Specified Risk Material. These continue the provisions of previous national legislation that spinal cord should be removed from all sheep over 12 months old or those that have a permanent incisor erupted through the gum.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 21 September 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 20 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-5884 by Sarah Boyack on 22 June 2000, what carry forward expenditure is budgeted for each of the 49 projects for any subsequent years for which figures are available.
Answer
Current estimates for expenditure on each of the 49 schemes are as follows:
Schemes
| 2000-01 | 2001-02 | 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 |
| £ million |
A1 Haddington to Dunbar | 0.182 | 10.593 | 21.100 | 5.635 | 0.000 |
A78 Ardrossan, Saltcoats and Stevenston Bypass | 0.220 | 0.450 | 7.430 | 14.400 | 7.000 |
A830 Arisaig to Kinsadel | 2.173 | 5.095 | 2.660 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A96 Fochabers and Mosstodloch Bypass | 0.242 | 0.210 | 1.450 | 9.000 | 3.000 |
M77 Malletsheugh to Fenwick | 2.054 | 1.950 | 0.500 | 0.800 | 1.500 |
A876 Kincardine Bridge Studies | 1.350 | 0.460 | 0.110 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A1 Howburn to Houndwood / Bowerhouse to Spott Rd | 0.130 | 6.032 | 0.278 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A7 Hawick Traffic Relief Scheme | 2.703 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A68 Soutra | 1.311 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A75 Cairntop to Barlae | 0.209 | 0.108 | 1.604 | 1.430 | 0.000 |
A75 Chapelton to Bush o' Bield | 0.145 | 1.921 | 0.004 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A76 Crossroads | 0.087 | 1.090 | 0.015 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A76 Gateside | 0.050 | 0.593 | 0.010 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A90 Forfar - Kirriemuir | 0.032 | 1.900 | 0.050 | 0.025 | 0.000 |
A90 Forfar - Glamis | 0.041 | 1.700 | 0.030 | 0.050 | 0.000 |
A90 Glendoick | 0.016 | 0.194 | 0.136 | 4.000 | 0.000 |
A90 Kinfauns | 0.106 | 0.194 | 0.136 | 3.666 | 0.000 |
A90 Inchture | 0.114 | 3.840 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A96 Coachford | 0.103 | 0.602 | 2.500 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A96 Newtongarry | 0.055 | 2.500 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A720 Edinburgh City Bypass Phases 2 and 3 | 6.407 | 1.073 | 2.500 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A8 Baillieston to Shotts Phase 1 | 0.400 | 5.450 | 9.620 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A90 Inchmichael | 2.000 | 2.101 | 0.060 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A77 Turnberry | 0.100 | 0.600 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A77 Central Reservation | 0.750 | 0.010 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A77 Hansell Village Footbridge | 0.035 | 0.450 | 0.015 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A9 Bankfoot | 0.020 | 0.500 | 0.500 | 0.020 | 0.000 |
A9 North Kessock | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| A90 Bridge of Dee to Ellon Road pedestrian improvements | 0.075 | 0.177 | 0.321 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
A90 Hatton Bends | 0.150 | 0.300 | 0.250 | 0.020 | 0.000 |
A95 Cromdale | 0.154 | 0.410 | 0.750 | 0.060 | 0.000 |
A95 Advie Bridge replacement | 0.010 | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.020 | 0.000 |
A90 St Annes to Careston | 0.700 | 0.014 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A92 Tay Bridge Approach Road | 0.700 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A985 Admiralty Road, Rosyth | 1.100 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M8 Claylands to Livingston | 2.500 | 0.050 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M8 Cumbernauld Road to Provan | 1.750 | 0.035 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M9 Almond Bridge | 1.000 | 0.020 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M73 Manse Road to Lochend | 1.200 | 0.024 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M73 Maryville to Baillieston | 1.500 | 0.030 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M74 Raith Interchange | 0.650 | 0.015 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
M8 Kingston Bridge | 10.000 | 10.000 | 4.670 | 9.260 | n/k |
A9 Millennium Cycle Route | 2.150 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Skye Bridge discount scheme and freezing of tolls | 1.000 | 1.100 | 1.300 | 1.300 | 1.300 |
A90 Kinfauns (Phase 2) | 0.000 | 0.100 | 1.200 | 0.020 | 0.000 |
A68 Drygrange Bridge | 0.320 | 0.200 | 0.004 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A76 Afton Bridge | 0.600 | 0.008 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
A78 Inverkip Street Rail Bridge | 0.050 | 0.300 | 1.850 | 0.030 | 0.000 |
A87 Shiel Bridge | 0.240 | 0.240 | 0.020 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 20 September 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Tom McCabe on 4 October 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it plans to set an advisory cost limit on answers to parliamentary questions, what any advisory cost limit would be, what research it has carried out into the cost of answers, how many questions it estimates have exceeded any proposed cost limit to date, and what potential savings it calculates could be achieved as a result of setting an advisory cost limit.
Answer
A major study to establish the average cost of dealing with Scottish parliamentary questions is close to completion. Once the full results of this study are available, the question of whether to establish an advisory cost limit, and if so at what level, will be considered.
- Asked by: Murray Tosh, MSP for South of Scotland, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 15 May 2000
-
Current Status:
Answered by Sarah Boyack on 29 September 2000
To ask the Scottish Executive whether a viable route has now been identified for the proposed Selkirk bypass which will take into account current road design standards.
Answer
The A6091/A7 Route Action Plan study has considered several alignments for a Selkirk bypass. However, the preliminary assessment of a Selkirk bypass option indicated that any benefits accrued are outweighed by the high construction costs.
