- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 17 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 14 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer, with regard to the statement by Paul Grice that there was a reduction to the cost of works packages where no performance bond was received in cases where such a bond was to have been provided (Official Report, Finance Committee, 8 October 2002, c 2231), whether he will list those contracts where a reduction in the price was achieved, giving the amount of the reduction in each case.
Answer
For reasons of commercial confidentiality, I am unable to provide such a list of contracts. I can confirm, however, that payment for a bond is only authorised when the client is in receipt of an agreed and signed bond from the trade contractor's surety; if this is not received either through choice or delay no payment is made. In the event that the client chooses not to proceed with the requirement for the bond, a net saving on the contract sum is achieved.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 17 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 14 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer whether the estimated losses arising from the insolvency of Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) Ltd have now been assessed at #3.5 million, as stated by Sarah Davidson (Official Report, Finance Committee, 8 October 2002, c 2230), or #3.85 million, as stated by the Presiding Officer in his answer to question S1W-27248 on 2 August 2002, and whether, in the light of Sarah Davidson's evidence referring to some of the elements comprised within the estimated losses arising from the insolvency, he will now provide a detailed breakdown of the computation of such losses.
Answer
There is no change to the previously reported cost to the project of £3.85 million, arising from the insolvency of Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) Ltd. The breakdown is as follows:
| Additional Costs Associated with Flour City Insolvency | £000 |
| Net payments to Flour City | £854 |
| Stone Cladding | -£326 |
| East stainless steel vent Pods | £1,729 |
| Window Units | £120 |
| Timber and precast mullions and louvres and stone panels | -£61 |
| East elevation support steelwork | £497 |
| Bay Windows | £937 |
| MSP Roofing | £100 |
| £3,850 |
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 17 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 14 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-29484 by Lewis Macdonald on 14 October 2002, what information it holds on the number of persons eligible for payments under the Scottish Transport Group pension schemes and what its estimate is of the total number of such persons based on the records it has.
Answer
The initial records showed 13,369 potential beneficiaries satisfying the conditions for an ex-gratia payment. We have been notified of a number of deaths of which the majority have led to payments to dependants. We are seeking to identify any additional beneficiaries before completing payments to those already identified.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 13 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1O-5716 by Lewis Macdonald on 10 October 2002, whether there were any significant differences between the Scottish Transport Group (STG) and National Bus Company (NBC) pension schemes and, in particular, whether (a) the STG scheme members (i) worked for more years and (ii) made more contributions than NBC scheme members and (b) the surplus of the STG schemes was larger pro rata than that of the NBC schemes and, if this is not the case, what conclusions it has reached in respect of each of these matters.
Answer
I refer the member to my letter of 12 June 2002 to the Convener of the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee (PE500). I understand that a copy of my letter was passed to the member by the convener for his information.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 13 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1O-5716 by Lewis Macdonald on 10 October 2002, whether it will make any further representations to Her Majesty's Government for the granting of a concession by the Inland Revenue to allow ex-gratia payments in respect of the Scottish Transport Group pension schemes to be made as tax-free lump sum payments, given that the Inland Revenue has allowed tax-free lump sum payments to members of the National Bus Company pension scheme.
Answer
I refer the member to my letter of 1 November 2002 to the Convener of the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee (PE500). I understand that a copy of my letter has been passed to the member by the convener for his information.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 29 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 13 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will reconsider the decision to restrict ex-gratia payments to widows or widowers of members of the Scottish Transport Group pension schemes that died before 18 December 2002 to 50% of the amount that their spouse or partner would have received in order to extend to such widows and widowers the entitlement to 100% of such amounts, currently available to the widows and widowers of members of the schemes that died on or after 18 December 2002, and, if it will not reconsider the decision, what the rationale is for making payment of the whole amount to some widows and widowers and 50% of the payment to others.
Answer
I refer the member to my letter of 9 August 2002 to the Convener of the Scottish Parliament's Public Petitions Committee (PE500). I understand that a copy of my letter has been passed to the member by the convener for his information.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 17 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Lewis Macdonald on 13 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what follow-up action is taken to encourage and assist the return of application forms in respect of ex-gratia payments from the Scottish Transport Group pension schemes.
Answer
We will be making a further effort to trace all the individuals who have not replied using the Department of Works and Pensions tracing service.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Friday, 11 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 12 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it stands by the statement in its announcement on 22 August 2002 by the Minister for Environment and Rural Development on proposals for the protection of the scallop industry that a majority of the scallop industry supports its proposals
Answer
In my statement of 22 August, I did not say that a majority of the scallop industry supported our proposals for scallop conservation. I said that a majority of the industry supported our proposals. That reflected the fact that our consultation exercises were addressed to the Scottish fishing industry as a whole, not just to scallop fishermen, and that the responses showed the Scottish fishing industry as a whole to be supportive of our proposals. I stand by this interpretation of the responses to our consultation exercises, and by the need for additional conservation measures. However, what has since become clear is the strength of opposition from parts of the scallop sector in particular. That is something on which I am reflecting in my continuing discussions with the Rural Development Committee.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 15 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 12 November 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will list, for each works package under the Holyrood project where no performance bond was obtained, (a) the name of the company awarded the contract, (b) details of the work involved, (c) the total value of the contract as awarded and (d) whether there was any other form of protection other than a performance bond required from the party awarded the contract such as a parent company guarantee; if so, whether it will detail what protection was to be obtained and whether it was obtained and, where no form of protection was required, on what basis that decision was reached.
Answer
My answer to question S1W-30170 on 16 October 2002, explained that negotiations on trade contracts for the new Scottish Parliament building at Holyrood are carried out on a commercially confidential basis, and that it would not be appropriate to name publicly those contractors who have yet to provide a performance bond. The same principle applies to all contractors and I am therefore unable to list those contractors, or provide any of the associated information requested, on this occasion.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 30 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 11 November 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what information it has received on why no submission was made to the European Commission from the UK to receive a share of its financial package to fight transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE) and other animal diseases in the EU in 2003.
Answer
EU legislation requires member states to submit applications for such funding by 1 June. The Executive is aware that due to an administrative oversight a submission from the UK was not submitted by that deadline. Administrative procedures have been amended to avoid a repetition in the future. Discussions are currently under way with Commission officials to establish whether there is any scope to consider an EU contribution to the 2003 TSE surveillance programme costs.
