- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 13 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by Mike Watson on 24 February 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive whether brown tourist signage indicating accommodation is sufficiently informative in relation to the type of accommodation available, given that such signs do not specify what type of accommodation is available and whether this practice is consistent with the Executive's position in respect of grading hostel accommodation from one to five stars.
Answer
Commercial names on Thistle tourism signs are now being widely used to indicate the type of tourist accommodation or attraction being signposted. Only accommodation and other tourist facilities which are accredited under the VisitScotland Quality Assurance scheme can be signposted in this way; the VisitScotland Thistle logo is used to denote this.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 13 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by Mike Watson on 24 February 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-30425 by Mike Watson on 25 November 2002, how many people have visited Scotland on holiday to participate in outdoor pursuits in each month of 2003 to date and what its estimate is of the total number of such visitors in 2002.
Answer
The information requested is not available for each month. Complete statistical information on tourism in 2002 should be available early in April.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by Frank McAveety on 18 February 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive how many adverse incidents regarding the use of Factor VIII and Factor IX blood products in the treatment of haemophiliacs were reported in each year from 1970 to 1987.
Answer
The number of adverse incidents relating to the use of SNBTS Factor VIII and Factor IX concentrates reported to SNBTS between the years 1970 to 1987 are as follows:
| Factor VIII | Factor IX |
| 1970 | 0 | 0 |
| 1971 | 0 | 0 |
| 1972 | 0 | 0 |
| 1973 | 0 | 0 |
| 1974 | 0 | 0 |
| 1975 | 2 | 0 |
| 1976 | 6 | 1 |
| 1977 | 1 | 3 |
| 1978 | 2 | 0 |
| 1979 | 0 | 1 |
| 1980 | 1 | 2 |
| 1981 | 1 | 0 |
| 1982 | 1 | 1 |
| 1983 | 4 | 1 |
| 1984 | 16 | 1 |
| 1985 | 4 | 0 |
| 1986 | 0 | 0 |
| 1987 | 1 | 0 |
| Total | 39 | 10 |
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 04 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 17 February 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will transfer all cases relating to agricultural holdings disputes within the jurisdiction of the sheriff courts to the Scottish Land Court and, in particular, whether it will transfer jurisdiction of such matters in relation to section 1 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1940.
Answer
Sections 59 and 62 of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Bill provide that the Scottish Land Court shall have jurisdiction for all disputes between a tenant and a landlord relating to an agricultural holding that arise in future. The Land Court will be able to exercise the powers of enforcement that are available under section 1 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1940 in relation to all decrees that it issues.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 04 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 17 February 2003
To ask the Scottish Executive how many orders were (a) sought and (b) granted under (i) section 1(1) and (ii) section 1(2) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1940 and how many such orders related to disputes regarding agricultural holdings in each case in each year since the act came into force.
Answer
The number of applications for civil imprisonment relating to decrees
ad factum praestandum in the years 1979 to 2001 were as follows:
| Year | Number of Applications |
| 1979 | 2 |
| 1980 | 10 |
| 1981 | 5 |
| 1982 | 3 |
| 1983 | 14 |
| 1984 | 8 |
| 1985 | 8 |
| 1986 | 9 |
| 1987 | 6 |
| 1988 | 15 |
| 1989 | 0 |
| 1990 | 59 |
| 1991 | 14 |
| 1992 | 15 |
| 1993 | 7 |
| 1994 | 5 |
| 1995 | 1 |
| 1996 | 0 |
| 1997 | 4 |
| 1998 | 8 |
| 1999 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
| 2001 | 2 |
Source: Civil Judicial Statistics.The figures in the table cover all applications based on decrees ad factum praestandum. We do not know how many of these applications relate to disputes regarding agricultural holdings.No figures are available in relation to the following:(a) the number of applications for civil imprisonment based on decrees
ad factum praestandum prior to 1979, and(b) how many of the applications were granted, either as a warrant for civil imprisonment under section 1(1) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1940 or as another order in lieu of imprisonment by virtue of section 1(2) of that act.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 February 2003
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-23571 on 13 March 2002, whether the cost of completing design services that Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) Ltd was under contract to provide but did not complete has now been ascertained and, if so, what the current estimated total cost is of such works and services; whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will provide a breakdown of this estimate, and what the reasons are for any variance between the current estimated total cost and the original estimate of #117,500.
Answer
The Corporate Body has noted that these 36 questions are in addition to the 113 the member has already asked about the Holyrood Project. Accordingly, I shall write at length to the member in due course, placing a copy in SPICe.The following is a further answer (published on 13 March 2003); see below.Sir David Steel: Pursuant to my Answer of 12 February 2003. I have written to the Member and placed a copy of my letter in the Parliament's Information Centre (Bib. number 26936).
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 February 2003
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-8962 on 21 August 2000, whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will give in relation to each works package for the Holyrood project and in tabular form, (a) the identity of the contractor, (b) the actual, or projected, date of (i) contract award, (ii) site start and (iii) completion, (c) the original estimated (1) cost and (2) value of the contract and the increase in each such figure and (d) the current total estimate and, in respect of any packages for which there is no estimated completion date, what the reasons are for the position on this matter.
Answer
The Corporate Body has noted that these 36 questions are in addition to the 113 the member has already asked about the Holyrood Project. Accordingly, I shall write at length to the member in due course, placing a copy in SPICe.The following is a further answer (published on 13 March 2003); see below.Sir David Steel: Pursuant to my Answer of 12 February 2003. I have written to the Member and placed a copy of my letter in the Parliament's Information Centre (Bib. number 26936).
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 February 2003
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-5674 on 13 April 2000, how much VAT is currently expected to be paid in total to Her Majesty's Treasury from the Holyrood project and what proportion of the overall costs of the project this sum represents, showing the estimates given in the answer to question S1W-5674 as comparative figures.
Answer
The Corporate Body has noted that these 36 questions are in addition to the 113 the member has already asked about the Holyrood Project. Accordingly, I shall write at length to the member in due course, placing a copy in SPICe.The following is a further answer (published on 13 March 2003); see below.Sir David Steel: Pursuant to my Answer of 12 February 2003. I have written to the Member and placed a copy of my letter in the Parliament's Information Centre (Bib. number 26936).
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 February 2003
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-22306 on 31 January 2002, whether copies of the Letter of Intent and formal contract with Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) Ltd will now be placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre; if they will not, what the reasons are for the position on this matter; if the reasons are that the letter and contract are commercially confidential, on what grounds this conclusion is based; in particular, whether potential prejudicing of any future court action against Flour City International Inc is one such ground and, if so, how disclosing the letter and contract could prejudice any such action, and, if there are other reasons for not disclosing these documents, what they are in detail.
Answer
The Corporate Body has noted that these 36 questions are in addition to the 113 the member has already asked about the Holyrood Project. Accordingly, I shall write at length to the member in due course, placing a copy in SPICe. The following is a further answer (published on 13 March 2003); see below.Sir David Steel: Pursuant to my Answer of 12 February 2003. I have written to the Member and placed a copy of my letter in the Parliament's Information Centre (Bib. number 26936).
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 06 February 2003
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 February 2003
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-9467 on 19 September 2000, whether the matter of the financial costs of the new Parliament building at Holyrood is of greater controversy than it was in March 2000; whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) will now provide to the public all available financial information; what the reasons are for the position on this matter in the light of the position given in the answer to question S1W-9467; whether it will continue to be the position that documents in relation to the package awarded to Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) Ltd will not be disclosed; if so, whether the SPCB will review this position and what the reasons are for the position on this matter, and, if such reasons relate to potential prejudice to any legal action, how any such action could be prejudiced or damaged by such disclosure, given that the legal liability will already have been set and cannot be in any way altered by such disclosure.
Answer
The Corporate Body has noted that these 36 questions are in addition to the 113 the member has already asked about the Holyrood Project. Accordingly, I shall write at length to the member in due course, placing a copy in SPICe.The following is a further answer (published on 13 March 2003); see below.Sir David Steel: Pursuant to my Answer of 12 February 2003. I have written to the Member and placed a copy of my letter in the Parliament's Information Centre (Bib. number 26936).
