This search includes all content on the Scottish Parliament website, except for Votes and Motions. All Official Reports (what has been said in Parliament) and Questions and Answers are available from 1999. You can refine your search by adding and removing filters.
Members will recall that, at our meeting on 7 February, the committee agreed to consider the bill at stage 2 in the following order: section 3, section 4, section 1, section 2 and section 5.
I am not sure whether this is a procedural point or one that will follow later. Is there capacity to separate out the Finnish contracts from the Ferguson contracts so that we can allow the work to proceed in the Finnish shipyards while still holding out some prospect of Fergusons in Port Glasgow getting the other contract?
However, we do not suggest that there should be a register of false accusations of fraud. That is a dangerous route to follow. That was the view taken by the committee when we discussed the matter.
That can be as soon as May next year and as far away as May the following year, with the resulting act not coming into force until considerably later in 2002.
On the issue of the investment that was possible following the write-off of debts, the Scottish water authorities gained a higher proportionate write-off than those in England and Wales.
However, it recommended other things— measures that must be taken further. We would do well to follow Frank Dobson, who last September announced a Government task force to tackle violence against social work staff in England.