- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 09 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Patricia Ferguson on 17 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-8985 by Patricia Ferguson on 5 July 2004 on the provision of information to the Holyrood Inquiry before 1 September 2003, why material has been provided to the Inquiry relating to the factual position of the Holyrood project after 1 September 2003, such as inquiry document SE 9 218 on landscaping; whether it will now place copies of reports made by the Chief Executive of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and Head of Legal and Parliamentary Services to the Executive, any individual minister and the First Minister in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre; whether it remains Executive policy that, in respect of the Holyrood Inquiry, no questions must remain unanswered; where in the remit of the inquiry there is reference to 1 September 2003; why, if that date is of significance for the inquiry, it is not treated as significant in the report prepared for the Auditor General, Management of the Holyrood building project, and what the reason is for stating in that answer that the non-disclosure of reports by the Chief Executive of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and Head of Legal and Parliamentary Services to the Executive after August 2003 was normal practice.The member has provided the following Gaelic translation:S2W-09600 Fearghas Ewing (Inbhir Nis an Ear, Inbhir Narann agus Loch Abar) (SNP): A dh' fhaighneachd do Riaghaltas na h-Alba, as dhidh dhaibh ceist S2W-8985 le Patricia Nic Fhearghais air 5 Iuchar 2004 a fhreagairt mu sholaradh fiosrachaidh do Rannsachadh Taigh an Rrid ro 1 Sultain 2003, carson an deach fiosrachadh a sholaradh dhan Rannsachadh a thaobh flor shuidheachadh Taigh an Rrid as dhidh 1 Sultain 2003, mar eiseimpleir foillseachadh an rannsachaidh SE 9218 mu gh`irnealaireachd; ma bheir e lethbhreacan de dh' aithisgean, air an dhanamh le @rd-oifigear Oifis a' Chryin agus Seirbheis Luchd-casaid a' Chryin agus Ceannard Sheirbheisean Laghal agus P`rlamaideach dhan Riaghaltas, le ministear sam bith agus leis a' Phrlomh Mhinistear anns an Ionad Fiosrachaidh P`rlamaid na h-Alba (SPICe); mas e poileasaidh Riaghaltas na h-Alba fhathast, a thaobh Rannsachadh Taigh an Rrid, gum bu chrir do na ceistean uile a bhith air am freagairt; far a bheil sgeul ann mu 1 Sultain ann an raon-yghdarrais an Rannsachaidh; carson, ma tha cudthrom sam bith air a' cheann-latha seo airson an Rannsachaidh, nach eilear a' l`imhseachadh mar rud cudthromach anns an aithisg air ullachadh dhan @rd-neach-sgrydaidh, Stiyireadh Prriseact Togalach Taigh an Rrid, agus dh an t-adhbhar a tha ann a dh' innse anns an fhreagairt sin gur e drighean-obrach abhaisteach a bh' annta nuair nach deach na h-aithisgean fhoillseachadh le @rd-oifigear Oifis a' Chryin agus Seirbheis Neach-casaid a' Chryin agus Ceannard Sheirbheisean Laghal agus P`rlamaideach dhan Riaghaltas
Answer
Document SE/9/218 on the HolyroodInquiry website has been recorded incorrectly as dating from February 2004. As thetext of the document makes clear, the document is dated 26 October 2001.
The remit of the inquiry doesnot refer to 1 September 2003. However, that date is significant to the extent thatit is the date on which the agreed terms of reference and letter of appointmentto conduct the inquiry were issued to Lord Fraser. The Executive lodged copies ofdocuments relevant to Holyrood Progress Group meetings up to 15 August 2003, beingthe date of the last report to ministers prior to 1 September, taking the view thatthat date was appropriate in relation to the terms of reference as being the datefrom which the inquiry commenced. That course of action has met with no objectionor request for further information from the inquiry.
Itis for the Auditor General to determine the bounds of relevance in investigationsjust as it is for Lord Fraser to determine what he considers to be relevant materialfor consideration by him. The Executive continues to co-operate fully with the inquiry.
The Executive has provided the following Gaelic translation:
Chaidh mearachd a dhèanamh annan clà radh ceann-là an Sgrìobhainn SE/9/218 air Là rach-lìn Rannsachadh Holyroodmar Gearran 2004. Mar a tha teacsa an sgrìobhainn a’ dèanamh soilleir, ‘s ann bho26 Dà mhair 2001 a tha an sgrìobhainn.
Chan eil raon-ùghdarraisan rannsachaidh a’ beantainn ri 1 Sultain 2003. Ach, tha an ceann-là seo sònraichteleis gur e an ceann-là air an deach na cumhachan iomraidh aontaichte agus an litircur-an-dreuchd airson an rannsachadh a stiùireadh a lìbhrigeadh don Mhorair Friseal.Chuir an Riaghaltas a-steach lethbhreacan de sgrìobhainnean a bha a’ beantainn ricoinneamhan HPG suas chun 15mh Lùnastal 2003, oir b’ e seo ceann-là na h-aithisgmu dheireadh gu na Ministearan ro 1 Sultain, a’ gabhail ris a’ bheachd gun robhan ceann-là sin iomchaidh a rèir nan cumhachan iomraidh mar an ceann-là air an dothòisich an rannsachadh. Cha deach gearanno iarrtas airson tuilleadh fiosrachaidh iarraidh on Rannsachadh mar thoradh aira’ ghnìomh sin.
 ‘S e an Àrd-neach Sgrùdaidha dhearbhas crìochan buntainneas ann an rannsachaidhean dìreach mar a tha e an urraris a’ Mhorar Fhriseal dearbhadh dè a tha esan a’ meas a tha na stuth buntainneachair am bu chòir dhà san beachdachadh. Tha an Riaghaltas a’ leantainn air a’ là n cho-obrachadhris an Rannsachadh.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 16 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive what regard it has had, in relation to the new arrangements for payments to farmers, to the interests and particular needs of west Highland farmers who do not keep calves for the whole year but who “sell on the white”; how their interests will be taken account of under the new regime, and whether the new regime and rules will have any impact on the continuance of beef farming in the west coast areas, for example by acting as a disincentive to continuing beef farming.The member has provided the following Gaelic translation:S2W-09687 Fearghas Ewing (Inbhir Nis an Ear, Inbhir Narann agus Loch Abar) (SNP): A dh' fhaighneachd de Riaghaltas na h-Alba dh an aire a thug e, a thaobh rianan yra airson ph`ighidhean do thuathanaich, do na com-p`irtean agus do na feuman srnraichte aig tuathanaich ann an taobh an iar na Gaidhealtachd nach bi a' cumail laoigh fad na bliadhna, ach a bhios gan reic air a' gheal (“sell on the white”); mar a bheirear aire don chom-p`irt aca fon rhim yr agus ma bhios buaidh sam bith aig an rhim agus na riaghaltean yra air leantainneachd an tuathanachas mairtfheolach ann an sglrean an Taobh Siar, mar eiseimpleir, nam biodh seo na mhl-bhrosnachadh do leantainneachd tuathanachais mairtfheolich.
Answer
TheExecutive has considered the interests and needs of all Scottish farmers, includingthose in the west Highlands, when deciding how best to implement the new CommonAgricultural Policy arrangements. The arrangements for the beef national envelope- announced recently - will provide an incentive for the continued production ofbeef bred calves in Scotland; they will be to the particular advantage of store cattleproducers who are not able to fatten their calves and young stock and who wouldbe affected by the expected fall in price of store animals. Many of these storeproducers are smaller producers in the north and west. A higher rate payment ofapproximately £70 will apply to the first 10 calves on each holding, with approximately£35 to be paid on all other calves. Smaller producers in the more remote areas willbenefit from receiving the higher payment for a greater proportion of their calves.
The Executive has provided the following Gaelic translation:
Thug Riaghaltas na h-Alba airbeachdachadh air ùidhean ‘s feuman gach tuathanach an Alba, a’ gabhail a-staighan fheadhainn air taobh siar na Gà idhealtachd, ann an co-dhùnadh dè an dòigh asfheà rr air ullachaidhean ùra Poileasaidh Coitcheann an Àiteachais a bhuileachadh.Bidh na h-ullachaidhean airson cèis nà iseanta na mairtfheòla – a chaidh fhoillseachadho chionn ghoirid – na brosnachadh airson cumail a’ dol ag à rach laoigh airson mairtfheoilan Alba; bidh iad air leth buannachdail do thuathanaich stuic nach urrainn an laoighagus an stoc òg a reamhrachadh agus air am biodh buaidh aig an lùghdachadh a thathara’ sùileachadh ann am prìs stuic. ’S e gnìomhachasan beaga air an taobh tuath agusan taobh an iar a tha aig mòran de na tuathanaich stuic sin. Gheibhear pà igheadhaig ìre nas à irde de mu £70 airson a’ chiad 10 laoigh air gach fearann, le mu £35ri phà igheadh airson a h-uile laogh eile. Gheibh tuathanaich bheaga sna sgìreanas iomallaiche buannachd a’ phà ighidh as à irde airson a’ chuid as motha de na laoighaca.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 June 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 12 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has confidence in the Water Industry Commissioner.
Answer
The Water Industry Commissioner has shown himself to be an effective economic regulator by providing detailed comparative analysis of the performance of Scottish Water and its predecessor bodies in, for example, such key areas as capital procurement, capital maintenance and operational efficiency and by setting efficiency targets for 2002-06 which are already delivering £1 million per week in operational savings.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 15 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Andy Kerr on 12 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-9478 by Mr Andy Kerr on 30 June 2004, whether the local government finance review will be requested to complete its work within a particular timescale and, if so, what that timescale will be.
Answer
We have set no specific target date for the completion of the review but I currently expect it to take between one and two years to complete.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 June 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 10 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive whether, with reference to the report in the Sunday Mail on 27 June 2004 that a claim made to an industrial tribunal, based on allegations of religious and racial bias, against the Water Industry Commissioner, Alan Sutherland, brought by former employee, William Hetherington, has been settled by a payment to Mr Hetherington of “nearly #30,000”, (a) the Executive will make a full statement on the matter, (b) the Executive's policy of 'ero tolerance towards racial or religious discrimination, such as remarks and abuse, applies to those who hold senior public sector posts, such as that of the Water Industry Commissioner and, if so, whether it has sought any explanation from the commissioner regarding this matter and, if so, on what date or dates, (c) whether such explanation was (i) sought and (ii) obtained before the commissioner was reappointed, (d) what sum has been agreed to be paid to the employee, (e) who will be responsible for paying the agreed sum, (f) whether Mr Sutherland will be responsible for paying the agreed sum and, if not, what the reasons are for the taxpayer meeting the cost and whether it is Executive policy that the taxpayer should pay the consequences of any racial or religious bias by public sector management and (g) whether there is any legal means by which an individual can be held personally responsible for the consequences and, in particular, the financial consequences of racial or religious bias and what steps the Executive will take to address this position, including whether a clause to this effect can be inserted into the contract of employment of such employees.
Answer
The Executive expects the Water Industry Commissioner to act in accordance with his responsibilities under the law and the code of conduct under the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc (Scotland) Act 2000. Ministers may terminate this appointment on a range of grounds including gross misconduct in the discharge of the appointee’s duties or conviction for a criminal offence. However, the allegations referred to above were neither the subject of a formal complaint made to the Executive nor were they substantiated through the appropriate due legal process. I understand the claim to the tribunal was withdrawn and a final settlement was agreed by both parties.
Any costs involved in reaching such a settlement must be met within the commissioner’s budget. The Race Relations Act 1976 provides for penalties (including financial penalties) where an individual is discriminated against by another person.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 02 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 10 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive when it will meet representatives of the Scottish Gamekeepers Association to discuss the report, Operations involving the Deer Commission for Scotland in Glenfeshie and Strathglass.
Answer
When I wrote to the Scottish Gamekeepers Association (SGA) on 9 June providing an advance copy of the official report into the operations at Glenfeshie and Strathglass I asked that as a first step they reflect on the conclusions drawn by the report, my response and the steps which the Deer Commission for Scotland propose to take to follow up the concerns identified. Andrew Raven’s response, dated 16 July and copied to all key industry bodies including SGA, has now been received and I am considering its contents. I would look to SGA and the wider deer industry to do likewise.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 02 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 10 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive what the factual basis is for the conclusion in the report, Operations involving the Deer Commission for Scotland in Glenfeshie and Strathglass, that it is “not uncommon during traditional culling operations” for there to be delays of 15 minutes from hinds being wounded until they are despatched and what examples it can provide of where this has occurred.
Answer
The report noted that there had been delays of up to 15 minutes in respect of two of the deer culled and concluded that such delays, whilst unfortunate, were not uncommon during traditional culling operations. There are a number of relevant research findings. In particular, the Survey of permanent wound tracts in the carcases of culled wild deer in Scotland published by K Urquhart and I McKendrick (The Veterinary Record, 19 April 2003) identified that 14% of carcases had two or more bullet wounds and that in some cases the level was as high as 27%. Based on research carried out, the Burns Hunting Inquiry (into hunting with dogs, June 2000) records that of deer shot by stalking about 2% of wounded deer then escaped. The report also records (paragraph 6.36) that about 10% of deer required two or more shots and that a conservative estimate was that about half of the wounded deer escaped detection (copies of this document are available in the Parliament’s Reference Centre, Bib. number 28910).
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 06 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Frank McAveety on 10 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-9319 by Mr Frank McAveety on 5 July 2004, whether the decision regarding the application for the restoration of Castle Tioram was taken by the minister or by Historic Scotland under delegated authority and, if the decision was taken by Historic Scotland, what publicity was given to this fact at the time the decision was made and subsequently.
Answer
Historic Scotland is an Agency of the Scottish Executive and all functions it performs are carried out on behalf of the Scottish ministers.
 The decision to accept the independent Inquiry Reporter's recommendation that the application for scheduled monument consent in respect of Castle Tioram should be refused was taken under delegated powers.
Since 2002, all recommendations made by Inquiry Reporters in respect of listed building, conservation area or scheduled monument consent applications have been decided by ministers.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 06 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Frank McAveety on 10 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will agree to hold a local referendum inviting local residents to express their views on whether they support the plans for restoration, consolidation or taking no action in respect of Castle Tioram and, if so, whether it will invite the Electoral Reform Society to carry out such a referendum and what its reasons are for its position on the matter, and what regard it has for the views of the elected Scottish parliamentary representatives of the area on the issue.
Answer
No. The owners' application for scheduled monument consent for the restoration of Castle Tioram has completed all the necessary statutory procedures, including being the subject of a public local inquiry held in the area over 29 days at which local residents were given an opportunity to express their views. The independent Inquiry Reporter recommended that consent be refused and that recommendation was accepted by Scottish ministers.
I had a meeting in March this year with a group of Highland ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ, who expressed views that the Castle could play an active role in supporting the local economy. Following that meeting, my officials in Historic Scotland met the Castle's owner. Since then, I have requested an update on the condition of the Castle and the commissioning of a proper Statement of Cultural Significance, which would address the gaps identified by the Inquiry Reporter. Any future decisions that require to be made by Scottish ministers will be informedby these reports.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 07 July 2004
-
Current Status:
Answered by Allan Wilson on 10 August 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive when the Scottish Aquaculture Research Forum came into existence; how much funding for research it has (a) considered and (b) approved to date and, if no funding has been considered or approved to date, whether the Executive is satisfied with the forum's performance and when the forum will commence fulfilling its intended function.
Answer
The Scottish Aquaculture Research Forum (SARF) was formally established as a charitable company limited by guarantee on 28 April 2004. It has made good progress since establishment, member organisations have committed resources, both in cash and in kind, to SARF for research and have identified research priorities. An administrator responsible for managing SARF affairs on a day-to-day basis has recently been appointed. The administrator will shortly publish a call for research proposals based on member’s research priorities. It is anticipated that the call will be issued in August 2004 and will be availableon the SARF website () together with other recognised sources of research funding opportunities. The forum should provide an effective mechanism for funding targeted research, both independently and in collaboration with other funding bodies.
