- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 10 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 29 October 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-30288 on 18 October 2002, why the breakdown of fees payable to consultants involved in the Holyrood project was commercially confidential, given that the breakdown of fees payable to Davis Langdon & Everest, EMBT/RMJM Ltd, Ove Arup and Partners, RMJM Scotland Limited and Bovis Lend Lease (Scotland) Limited was disclosed in the Auditor's General's report The New Scottish Parliament Building - An examination of the management of the Holyrood Project (AGS/2000/2) and whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body considers that information on consultants' fees is in the public interest.
Answer
The SPCB regards the amount of fees paid to individual consultants as commercially confidential. Publication of such information by the Parliament would generally be considered as something that might impede fair competition between them and their competitors and/or prejudice the consultants', or the Parliament's, future negotiating position. Disclosure would also be in breach of the individual tender agreements between the Parliament and the consultants, which were agreed on a commercially confidential basis and could not be made without the agreement of the firms involved. I understand from the Convener of the Holyrood Progress Group that the Auditor General was required to obtain the specific approval of the respective consultants before authority for publication of the figures was given under the particular circumstances. The Parliament would not normally release such information unilaterally and that is only proper. It is the case that certain elements of fee agreements are still under discussion, however, once outstanding negotiations have been concluded and subject to clearance with the Parliament's legal office, we would expect to secure the agreement of the consultants involved and make these details available.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 02 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 29 October 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-29132 on 24 September 2002, how many works packages were let as part of the Holyrood project; what other mechanism, other than a performance bond, was sought and in respect of which works packages; whether a parent company guarantee was used and, if so, in respect of which package, and what the value of each contract was.
Answer
To date, a total of 60 Trade Package contracts have been awarded. Other than a Performance Bond, the SPCB is entitled, under the terms of each contract, to request a Parent Company Guarantee as advised by the Construction Manager. In addition, there are a number of performance management tools in place throughout all Trade Packages which ensure that the client's interests are suitably protected. These are:1. The Construction Managers monitor on a daily basis that work is being carried out to the required standard set out in the detailed specification for materials and workmanship, and performance delivery is measured against the construction programme.2. Action is taken as necessary to ensure that no payment for sub-standard work is made and steps are taken to encourage improved levels of performance.3. Three per cent of the gross value of all payments due to contractors is retained and released only when the client is satisfied that the contract has been completed and any defects rectified to the required standard. To date, with the exception of the contract with Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) Ltd, no recovery has been sought against a Parent Company Guarantee in relation to any of the Trade Packages let. The value of the original contract with Flour City Architectural Metals (UK) package was £7,157,281.29.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Wednesday, 02 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by David Steel on 29 October 2002
To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-29132 on 24 September 2002, what the (a) names are of the contractors for the 16 works packages let as part of the Holyrood project where a performance bond is outstanding and (b) total value was of the package awarded to each of these contractors and whether there will be any claim or possible claim in relation to the eight packages let as part of the Holyrood project where a performance bond is no longer required.
Answer
Negotiations on Trade Contracts for the new Scottish Parliament building at Holyrood are carried out on a commercially confidential basis and it would not be appropriate to name publicly those contractors who have yet to provide a Performance Bond, particularly as most contracts in this category have only recently been awarded. The Convener of the Holyrood Progress Group has informed me that there are currently no claims under consideration relating to those Trade Contracts where a Performance Bond is no longer required.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 07 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Elaine Murray on 28 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is still considering the establishment of a school sport alliance; what the reasons are for its position on this matter, and when it will make an announcement on the issue.
Answer
I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-26945 on 4 July 2002. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/search_wa.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 08 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 28 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what the cost of the Water Industry Commissioner for Scotland and his department has been since inception.
Answer
The office of the Water Industry Commissioner for Scotland is funded through a levy on Scottish Water. The levy from Scottish Water including establishment costs of the Water Industry Commissioner's office has been £5,170,599 covering the period from 1 November 1999 to March 2003.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Tuesday, 08 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Ross Finnie on 28 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether there should be further relaxations to the 20-day standstill rule on livestock movements; whether the detailed risk assessment and wide ranging cost-benefit analysis as recommended in Foot and Mouth Disease 2001: Lessons to be Learned Inquiry has been completed, and whether any measures will be introduced regarding the 20-day rule in the current year.
Answer
The Scottish Executive has no immediate plans to revise the current interim movement regime. The present arrangements will be reviewed with industry stakeholders once the results of the detailed veterinary risk assessment and associated cost-benefit analysis, as recommended by the Lessons to be Learned Inquiry, are known. Findings from these studies will be available in the New Year.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 07 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Elaine Murray on 24 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive when sportscotland will next meet the Scottish School Sports Federation.
Answer
This is an operational matter for sportscotland. However, I understand that sportscotland has arranged to meet Federation representatives tomorrow.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 07 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Elaine Murray on 24 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to continue funding for the Scottish Teacher Release Scheme should funding for that scheme expire and what its position is on the need to ensure that teachers who participate in the scheme can continue to be released from their duties in order to ensure that children are able to participate in their chosen sport.
Answer
The Teacher Release Scheme operated by sportscotland is in the final year of a three year funding commitment. Sportscotland will be reviewing the scheme in consultation with interested parties over the next few months.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Monday, 07 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Elaine Murray on 24 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will recommend to sportscotland that it should, in consultation with the appropriate representative sport associations in Scotland and Ireland, seek to form an international federation that would permit an annual shinty/hurley fixture between Scotland and Ireland to be acknowledged and recognised as an international fixture.
Answer
It is not part of sportscotland's responsibilities to seek to establish international sporting federations. Shinty/hurling is not a single sport: the annual shinty/hurling fixture is a one-off hybrid event played under composite rules. So far as shinty is concerned, it would be for the Camanachd Association to seek to identify other countries where shinty is played and then explore with interested parties there the formation of an international governing body for the sport.
- Asked by: Fergus Ewing, MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, Scottish National Party
-
Date lodged: Thursday, 03 October 2002
-
Current Status:
Answered by Mary Mulligan on 21 October 2002
To ask the Scottish Executive, with regard to the Rural Affairs Committees 2nd Report, 1999: Impact of Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning on the Fisheries Sector, whether any further money was made available for research into the causes of shellfish toxicity; what funding has been made available for such research in each subsequent financial year; whether continuing funding was made available to develop monitoring and testing regimes and, if so, how much such funding has been made available in each financial year since the publication of the report, and whether any research has taken place into the alleged link between fin fish farms and outbreaks of amnesic shellfish poisoning and, if so, whether it will detail what specific research has taken place.
Answer
I am advised by the Food Standards Agency that new research into the relationship between phytoplankton and algal toxin levels is due to run between January 2000 and September 2003, with costs of £450,275 spread over that period. On continuing funding to develop testing regimes, between August 2000 and August 2002, £266,779 was made available for assessment of new system for rapid detection of ASP and DSP (MIST AlertTM). In addition, the FSAS algal toxin shellfish monitoring programme was launched in January 2001 and is set to run until March 2005, at a total cost of £2,012,954 plus approximately £250,000 per annum for charter vessels required to collect samples. No new research has taken place into the alleged link between fish farms and outbreaks of ASP.