Questions and answers

Question reference: S2W-32436

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 March 2007
Current Status: Answered by Andy Kerr on 27 March 2007

To ask the Scottish Executive whether there was a working group on the licensing of skin piercing and tattooing and, if so, who its members were, what the background was of each member and on what basis they were appointed to the group.

The Scottish Licensing of SkinPiercing and Tattooing Working Group was established in June 2006, in responseto the introduction of the licensing of skin piercing and tattooing in Scotland.

Thecore membership of the working group was based on the existing Royal EnvironmentalHealth Institute of Scotland group who have professional responsibility forthis area. Additional members were invited from Health Protection Scotland,Scottish Executive and the 32 local authorities in Scotland.

MoragSangster and Mark Perry from the Tattooing and Piercing Industry Union (TPI);Julian Ball from Prestige Medical Ltd and John Manolakis from the Ear PiercingManufacturers of Europe Ltd participated in an advisory role.

Themembership of the group is as follows:

MrGraham Robertson (Chair), Executive Council Member, REHIS

DrCarole McRae, Epidemiologist,Health Protection Scotland

MrsKerry Chalmers, Public Health Team, Scottish Executive

MrSimon Brownlee, East Dunbarton Council, West of Scotland Liaison Group

MrSteve Dunn, Perth and Kinross Council, Central, Fife and Tayside Group

MissRuth Ewing, Dundee City Council, Central, Fife and Tayside Group

MrMartin Gibb, Glasgow City Council, West of Scotland Liaison Group

Mr JohnLee, Highland Council, North of Scotland Liaison Group

MsLorrainne MacGillivray, West Dunbarton Council, West of Scotland Group

Mr IainMcCluskey, West Lothian Council, Lothian and Borders Group

MissHeather Taylor, Edinburgh City Council, Lothian and Borders Group.

As a result of the Working Groupamendments were made to the licensing regulation in Scotland, a nationaltraining event was held and national conditions and guidance were produced.

Question reference: S2W-32444

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Friday, 16 March 2007
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 26 March 2007

To ask the Scottish Executive whether an offence of “negligent misstatement” exists in Scots law.

There is no offence of “negligentmisstatement” in Scots law. Whether the making of a false statement constitutesan offence, such as the common law offence of fraud, will depend on the facts andcircumstances of a particular case.

The question of whether criminalproceedings are appropriate in any case is a matter for the Lord Advocate who cannotraise criminal proceedings unless there is sufficient reliable and credible evidenceand it is in the public interest to prosecute.

Question reference: S2W-32513

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Friday, 16 March 2007
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 26 March 2007

To ask the Scottish Executive whether a prisoner who is domiciled in Scotland but is serving a custodial sentence in an English prison can, on reaching the point in their sentence at which they qualify for Home Detention Curfew (HDC), return to their home in Scotland to serve the remainder of their sentence under HDC and what the reason is for the position.

Question reference: S2W-32445

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Friday, 16 March 2007
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 26 March 2007

To ask the Scottish Executive what offence or offences would be committed by a Scottish company that, in bidding for a publicly-funded contract, misrepresented the status and financial standing of the company and deliberately made false statements (a) about being a subsidiary of a major overseas organisation (b) when naming supporting referees, (c) when naming people and companies supposedly supporting the company’s bid and (d) when stating company equity and naming shareholders.

Depending on the facts and circumstancesof an individual case, conduct such as that referred to may constitute part of thecommon law offence of fraud, which requires a practical result attributable to themisrepresentation, or one of a number of offences under the Companies Acts.

The question of whether criminalproceedings are appropriate in any case is a matter for the Lord Advocate, who cannotraise criminal proceedings unless there is sufficient reliable and credible evidenceand it is in the public interest to prosecute.

Question reference: S2W-30172

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Friday, 24 November 2006
Current Status: Answered by Cathy Jamieson on 18 December 2006

To ask the Scottish Executive what the impact has been of a reduction in policing levels over the last 10 years in the Ayrshire village of West Kilbride, from one sergeant and five constables to one community police officer, on the service provided to the community by Strathclyde Police and, in particular, what the impact has been on clear-up rates for vandalism and drug-related crime in the area and what action the Executive will take to reassure the West Kilbride population that they are protected by the police.

Question reference: S2W-29685

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Wednesday, 08 November 2006
Current Status: Answered by Tom McCabe on 17 November 2006

To ask the Scottish Executive what constitutes a common good asset and how such assets differ from property or land owned by a local authority.

The Common Good originated asrevenues from properties belonging to the early Burghs of Scotland. The Common Good,as these revenues were then termed, is of great antiquity and there is no equivalentin English local government although the term remains current in Scotland. Essentially,the Common Good denoted all property of a Burgh not acquired under statutory powersor held under special trusts. Historically, the Common Good became a useful additionto the main revenues and the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1947 empowered Countiesand Burghs without a Common Good fund to set up a reserve to promote the generalgood of the inhabitants or dignity of the Burgh.

Common good assets belongingto the Burghs of Scotland were incorporated into the new local government bodiesset up under local government reform in 1975 and 1994 when the Burghs became partof District and Regional Councils and then councils.

Dueto the historical, non-statutory, nature of the Common Good, views on what may constitutea common good asset, as opposed to other property or land owned by a local authority,may in particular disputed cases have to be resolved. Section 75 of the Local Government(Scotland) Act 1973 provides that if a local authority wants to dispose of landforming part of the common good, where thereis a question as to the right of the council to dispose of the land, the council may apply to the Court of Session or the sheriffcourt to authorise the council to dispose of the land. The court have discretionto authorise disposal, subject to such conditions as they may impose. This statutoryprovision applies to common good land, not other land held by a council.

All local authorities are required,by the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003, to adhere to proper accounting practicesand the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom– Statement of Recommended Practice requires that common good accounts shouldbe shown separately.

Question reference: S2W-28998

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Tuesday, 10 October 2006
Current Status: Answered by Tavish Scott on 9 November 2006

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-28407 by Tavish Scott on 6 October 2006, what the reasons are for the delay in the commencement date of the construction of an off-line improvement to the carriageway of the A737 at the Den, between Dalry and Beith; what the Executive’s source was for the earlier anticipated commencement date of June 2006, as referred to in the Minister for Transport’s letter to me dated 12 September 2005, and how many of the decisions referred to in the answer to question S2W-28407 had been reached prior to June 2006.

The A737 Den Improvement Schemeis being promoted and funded by North Ayrshire Council.

The scheme programme, and measuringprogress against it, is the responsibility of North Ayrshire Council and requiresto fit in with other planned improvements on the route in order to manage the levelof disruption to the travelling public.

The scheme at the Den could bebrought forward if the scheme planned at Barrmill Road slips due to objections andno objections to the Den Orders are received. Progressing Transport Scotland’s elementsis dependent on the timely supply of all the necessary material from the councilincluding draft Orders, Environmental Report, draft Record of Determination, draftEnvironmental Statement (if required) Geotechnical Certification and design andconstruction details.

The Scottish Executive’s sourcefor the earlier anticipated start date of June 2006 advised to you in September2005 was North Ayrshire Council, and based on its anticipated programme at thattime.

Decisions relating to the principleof the council proceeding with the scheme on the Trunk Road were reached in May2003. Decisions taken relating to technical aspects, environmental and statutoryprocesses and programming have been on-going both prior to and since June 2006.This will continue as the council works through its programme until constructionof the scheme is complete.

Transport Scotland hasthe operational responsibility for this area, and can be contacted for more informationif required.

Question reference: S2W-29071

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Friday, 13 October 2006
Current Status: Answered by Allan Wilson on 30 October 2006

To ask the Scottish Executive when ministers received an application for consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for the development of a wind farm at Corlic Hill, Greenock; what the reasons are for it not yet having reached a decision on the matter; when it expects to reach a decision, and whether, should further evidence on the subject be presented, it will support the re-opening of the public inquiry.

A section 36 application forthe Corlick Hill, Greenock wind farm was received on 9 May 2003. Following objectionsfrom Inverclyde Council and other consultees, a Public Inquiry was held in March2005.

Under the Electricity Act 1989,Scottish ministers must fully consider all material issues, including the conclusionsand recommendations made by the Public Inquiry reporter. There is no set timescalefor the overall decision making process. In the event of further relevant evidencebeing presented which has not been addressed by the reporter and which would leadto the Scottish ministers disagreeing with the reporter’s recommendation, ministerswould re-open the Public Inquiry.

Question reference: S2W-28407

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Friday, 15 September 2006
Current Status: Answered by Tavish Scott on 6 October 2006

To ask the Scottish Executive, since agreeing with North Ayrshire Council that part of the revenue support grant provided to the council should be used to fund an off-line improvement to the A737 trunk road at the Den, between Dalry and Beith, what contact or communication there has been between the Executive or its agencies and the local authority on this matter, including the date and nature of the contact or communication; what decisions have been reached, and when the Executive expects the agreed off-line improvement to be carried out.

Over the last two years the ScottishExecutive and Transport Scotland have been in regular contact with North Ayrshire Councilabout the Den improvement scheme. This has included telephone calls, e-mails, lettersand meetings; the most recent meeting took place on 20 September 2006.

Decisions have been reached on:(i) confirming the principle for North Ayrshire Council to proceed with the schemebased on it’s merits; (ii) the technical aspects of the design, trunk road standards,environmental assessment and geotechnical certification; (iii) the legal aspectsof the statutory process and the format of the legal authority under which thecouncil can procure the scheme on a trunk road, and (iv) programming.

As the improvement is the responsibilityof North Ayrshire Council the programme for delivery is dependant on thecouncil. The scheme is currently expected to be constructed later in 2008 but thisis subject to the satisfactory completion of statutory procedures and the schedulingof the other improvements planned for the A737 trunk road.

Transport Scotland hasoperational responsibility for this area, and can be contacted for more informationif required.

Question reference: S2W-28483

Asked by: Campbell Martin, MSP for West of Scotland, Independent
Date lodged: Tuesday, 19 September 2006
Current Status: Answered by Malcolm Chisholm on 3 October 2006

To ask the Scottish Executive what protection tenants have from being disadvantaged in terms of their right to buy in the event of a local authority issuing a notice of refusal to a sitting tenant in relation to the purchase of a house built by a local authority on land which is subsequently discovered to be outwith the ownership of the authority.

The seller of a right-to-buy house is legally obliged to“deliver a good and marketable title” to the purchaser under conditions of sale,as set out in section 64 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987. This protects the tenant from any legal difficultieswhich might be encountered if the landlord tries to sell a house in which ownershipcould subsequently be disputed. Where the landlord is not the owner of the landon which the house stands, the right-to-buy does not apply.

On the extremely rare occasionswhen a landlord discovers that it does not hold title to the land on which the housestands, the landlord may seek to open negotiations with the owner of the land toobtain title. Where this is not possible, for example, because the owner or theirrepresentative cannot be traced, then a local authority can propose to purchasethe land compulsorily, subject to Scottish ministers’ approval, through a CompulsoryPurchase Order.

Where the market value of thehouse has significantly increased, after title has successfully been obtained, thetenant could ask the landlord to consider a voluntary sale under section 14 of theHousing (Scotland) Act 1987. These powers are entirely discretionary, andit would be a matter for the landlord to determine and agree to sell, perhaps atthe market value which would have applied at the time of the original applicationto buy. Consents under section 14 of 1987 act also require the Scottishministers’ approval.

Chamber and committees