25 September 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether adjustments have been made to its Rural Directorate budget this year that required adjustments to the budget of any of its agencies and, if so, how much and what adjustments were made.

Michael Russell : No such adjustments have been made. The budget lines set out in the Scottish Budget: Spending Review 2007, including the current year''s budget, have been re-aligned in the Scottish Budget: Draft Budget 2009-10 to reflect more clearly the portfolio directorate structures and programmes, but no adjustments have been made to the budget of any of the organisations sponsored by Rural Directorate.

23 September 2008

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether CalMac Ferries Ltd can enter leasing arrangements on the open market for vessels or for vessels and vessel operating services in the provision of its services.

Stewart Stevenson : CalMac Ferries Ltd can enter leasing arrangements on the open market for vessels or for vessels and vessel operating services in the provision of services. This is provided they continue to deliver the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services as per the terms of the public service contract with the Scottish Government.

However, where the value of the contract exceeds the European Union procurement thresholds CalMac Ferries Ltd, as a publicly-owned company, could only do so on completion of an open and transparent procurement process. Procurement processes such as this can typically take a year or more to complete.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether CalMac Ferries Ltd could be authorised or has the power to enter into arrangements with others for the provision of services or to assist with the provision of services for which they hold contracts.

Stewart Stevenson : CalMac Ferries Ltd are able to enter into arrangements with others for the provision of services or to assist with the provision of services for which they hold contracts. This is provided they continue to deliver the Clyde and Hebrides ferry service as per the terms of the public service contract with the Scottish Government.

However, where the value of the contracts exceed the European Union procurement thresholds, CalMac Ferries Ltd, as a publicly-owned company, could only do so on completion of an open and transparent procurement process. Tendering processes such as this can typically take a year or more to complete.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-15433 by Stewart Stevenson on 3 September 2008, under what provisions the need for an open and transparent tendering process arises.

Stewart Stevenson : I referred in my answer to question S3W-15433 to the tendering of a subsidised ferry service in an open and transparent procurement process. A requirement for an open and transparent procurement process can arise as a result of the operation of general principles of European Union and domestic procurement law, the provisions of the European Union Maritime Cabotage Regulation, or European Union rules on state aid.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the decision to proceed with a ferry services review has any bearing on the timescales for making a decision about the proposed Lochboisdale to Mallaig ferry service.

Stewart Stevenson : The decision to proceed with a ferry services review has no bearing on the timing of current deliberations regarding the proposed Lochboisdale to Mallaig ferry service.

17 September 2008

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will publish a list of small units eligible for consideration under the Small Units Initiative and provide dates when their location may become due for review.

John Swinney : The identification of individual small units that are potential candidates for relocation under the Small Units Initiative will be an on-going process influenced by a range of factors including value for money, operational effectiveness, organisational restructuring opportunities and human resource issues. Given the rolling nature of the process it would not therefore be possible to publish a list of small units.

The government is committed to ensuring that decisions about the relocation of individual bodies will follow an open and transparent process that shows that there are efficiencies for Scotland.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether it plans to change the criteria defining a small unit under the Small Units Initiative.

John Swinney : There are no plans to review the interpretation of small units for the purposes of the Small Units Initiative.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive how many relocations of government or agency jobs to the Highlands and Islands are currently being considered.

John Swinney: The new approach to relocation policy announced by the Scottish Government in January 2008 set out the criteria which would lead to consideration of relocation for individual organisations. The application of those criteria to individual relocations is kept under constant review.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive what benefits previous relocations of government or agency jobs have brought to rural areas, such as Tiree.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether a case study has been carried out to assess the economic benefit gained by rural areas where government jobs have been relocated.

John Swinney : No case studies were commissioned by the previous administration in respect of the impact of its relocation policy. The new government''s policy recognised that relocations under the Small Units Initiative had brought high quality jobs to remote and rural areas and on that basis the government therefore remain committed to considering the potential relocation of small units.

16 September 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it was aware of a report by RPS Ecology on the ornithology of the site associated with the Gordonbush wind farm planning application when granting that application consent and whether it believes that the granting of consent is consistent with the findings of the report.

Jim Mather : Scottish ministers received a copy of the RPS Ecology report commissioned by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) on its publication in June 2006. At that time, SNH objected to the proposal. Subsequently the developer submitted further information which enabled SNH to lift their objection, subject to conditions being imposed. Scottish ministers determined the Gordonbush application, taking into account the subsequent SNH advice and other relevant consultee responses.

17 September 2008

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether it recommends the In Control project approach to the provision of services for adults with learning disabilities as being capable of providing for all adults with learning disabilities.

Shona Robison : In Control is an organisation, independent of central government, which some local authorities are funding to promote personalised support for adults, including those with a learning disability. It is, therefore, not for central government to recommend but for local authorities to decide whether the product is something which helps them to meet the needs of those they serve. The Scottish Government has reissued national guidance on self-directed support which In Control has adopted in part.

Peter Peacock :To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that adults with more complex support needs will form a greater proportion of all adults with learning disabilities in future years.

6 August 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether there is any form of NPD model referred to in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust which is not also a PPP.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the envisaged NPD approach referred to in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust is a PPP.

John Swinney: The NPD approach set out in "Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust" is a non-profit distributing initiative.

1 August 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what its estimate is of the number of job opportunities that will be lost if the minimum import price arrangements relating to Norwegian salmon are ended.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government submitted a paper, jointly with Ireland, to the European Commission on 25 February 2008. That joint paper, The likely effects of removing the MIP on imports of Norwegian salmon into the EU, contained a number of estimates about the potential future economic impact of the loss of the minimum import price (MIP). A copy of this paper has been placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 46125).

In a "worse-case" scenario, where the removal of the MIP results in future dramatic price falls for farmed salmon, and puts at jeopardy profitability in the sector, it is estimated that some 773 potential future job opportunities could be lost in salmon and smolt production in Scotland. This figure has been calculated by comparing the potential for growth in the sector in a ‘best-case’ scenario, assuming high continuing rates of growth in the Scottish aquaculture industry over a forward five to 10-year period to the point where salmon production grows from the current estimated production of 139,000 tonnes per annum to an assumed maximum of some 210,000 tonnes of salmon (the theoretical carrying capacity of existing sites) against a "worse-case" scenario where annual production falls from 139,000 tonnes to some 110,000 tonnes, were the removal of the MIP to cause future dramatic price falls. However all such forecasts are merely speculative and the development of a new strategic approach involving all parts of the industry, which is presently under discussion, will, it is hoped, ameliorate the effect of the end of the present MIP.

31 July 2008

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive how much public funding has been awarded to the Connected Communities project annually since its inception.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive how much public funding is budgeted for the Connected Communities project for 2008-09.

Jim Mather: Connected Communities is led by Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) and it is HIE who deal with all operational matters around its funding and delivery.

31 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any concerns over the findings in the report, A Conservation Framework for Golden Eagles: implications for their conservation and Management in Scotland.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government is concerned about the findings contained in this report. The report concluded that the conservation status of golden eagle populations was favourable in only three of 16 regions where eagles have occupied territories since 1982. These are all in western areas. The most serious failures to meet favourable conservation status tests were in the central and eastern Highlands where less than half of all known territories were occupied.

30 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what advice it has received about the implications for Scottish jobs of losing the minimum import price arrangements relating to Norwegian salmon; when it received any such advice, and whether it will publish it.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Executive commissioned internal economic advice in January 2008. This advice was then incorporated into a joint paper from Scotland and Ireland which was submitted to the European Commission as evidence in the interim review on 25 February 2008. A copy of this advice has been made available in the joint paper, The likely effects of removing the MIP on imports of Norwegian salmon into the EU: a paper from Scotland and Ireland, a copy of which has been placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 46125). However, all such forecasts are merely speculative and the development of a new strategic approach involving all parts of the industry, which is presently under discussion, will, it is hoped, ameliorate the effect of the end of the present minimum import price.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what action it has taken as a result of advice on the implications of ending minimum import price arrangements and when it took such action.

Michael Russell: Following the receipt of economic advice on the implications of the repeal of the minimum import price, the Scottish Executive in conjunction with the UK Government continued to lobby the European Commission at the highest level, the need for continuation of the minimum import price (MIP).Following the decision by member states to repeal the MIP, I organised a "Fresh Start on Salmon" summit for the salmon production industry in Edinburgh on 10 June 2008. This event provided an opportunity to discuss the most positive way forward for the industry, particularly in light of potentially difficult trading conditions. It discussed the practical support that the Scottish Government (and Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Scottish Enterprise) could provide to companies, steps to assist the industry, options for further action in Europe to safeguard Scottish interests and co-operation with other key national players with regard to issues of joint and pressing interest.

Discussions have also taken place on securing a possible bilateral agreement on closer collaboration on areas of mutual interest between Scotland and Norway. Meetings have taken place since mid-March 2008. These discussions are on-going. These steps forward will, it is hoped, lean to a new strategic approach, involving all parts of the industry which will ameliorate the effect of the end of the MIP.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions Scottish ministers and officials have had with Irish ministers and officials regarding the continuation of minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government has had a continuing dialogue with Irish ministers and officials throughout the period when the minimum import price has remained in place. Following the announcement of the commission’s interim review in March 2008, Scotland, the UK and Ireland prepared evidence to show that there was no case for a review of the measures. A joint paper was submitted to member states and the commission. During the interim review, our dialogue focused on the preparation of evidence to support the continuance of the minimum import price. I met the relevant fisheries minister on 23 April 2008 to discuss the matter. A joint UK and Ireland paper was also sent to the commission on 22 May 2008. From mid-April, discussions have also focused on the commission’s proposal for a special monitoring mechanism following the repeal of the measures.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it supports the continuation of EU minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government fully supported the continuation of the minimum import price (MIP) and did not agree that it should be repealed. It believes that the MIP has contributed a degree of stability in an otherwise volatile market place.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with the UK Government on securing a continuation of the EU minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon and when such discussions took place.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government has had a continuing dialogue with the UK Government throughout the interim review from the time it was announced on 21 April 2007. This was most intensive from mid-February 2008 onwards when there was frequent e-mail and phone-call correspondence; a number of meetings were also held. These discussions covered a range of subjects that would support the continuance of the measures such as the preparation of papers to be submitted to the commission; the arrangements of meetings with the European Commission; the handling of the Scottish and UK support for the measures in the Anti-Dumping Committee and the lobbying of UK views to other member states.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive how often Scottish ministers have met UK ministers to discuss the continuation of minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon.

Michael Russell: Scottish ministers undertook a number of discussions about the continuation of the minimum import price arrangements with UK ministers by telephone and by e-mail, although no face-to-face meetings occurred.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions Scottish ministers and officials have had with EU member states, and with which states, regarding the continuation of minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon.

Michael Russell: I met the deputy DG Trade in Brussels on 4 February 2008 and the DG Trade in Brussels on the 23 April 2008 specifically to discuss the matter. The Scottish Government, together with the UK and Ireland, circulated a joint paper to all member states on 22 May 2008 which opposed the conclusions to the European Commission’s Interim Review.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with the Norwegian Government regarding the continuation of minimum import price arrangements which have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon; what position it set out to the Norwegian Government; what attitude the Norwegian Government took to such discussions; what measures have been proposed to the Norwegian Government, and what its response has been.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government has proposed that Scotland and Norway explore joint working and closer co-operation on a range of issues of joint concern in aquaculture. I met the Norwegian fisheries minister in Oslo on 13 June 2008 to discuss these matters after several meetings between officials. Further ministerial discussion will take place in the autumn.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions took place between its special advisers and those of UK ministers regarding the continuation of the EU minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon.

Michael Russell: No discussions took place between its special advisers and those of UK ministers regarding the continuation of the minimum import price.

29 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what functions envisaged for the Scottish Futures Trust could reasonably be said to be being already provided by the Private Finance Unit of the Scottish Government.

John Swinney: The aim of the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) is to support the effective planning, funding and delivery of public sector infrastructure investment across Scotland, providing a better deal for taxpayers as a result. This will be assisted through aggregation of projects and the deployment of expertise to maximise value. SFT will be performing a much broader role than that currently provided by the Scottish Government Financial Partnerships Unit.

29 July 2008

Peter Peacock (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what it believes to be the reason for the decline of the golden eagle population on the east side of the Highlands.

Michael Russell: The report highlights two key constraints affecting golden eagle populations. In the eastern and central Highlands many tradionally occupied golden eagle territories now lie empty while others have a high turnover of breeding birds. The evidence shows that this pattern is strongly associated with some grouse moors. In some parts of the western Highlands, the lack of live prey is a significant constraint apparently leading to poor production by golden eagles, with some territories rarely producing any flying young. There is an association between this deficiency and land management practices including intensive burning and heavy grazing.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it plans to take any further action to ensure protection of the golden eagle population from all forms of persecution.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government will continue to pursue measures which will improve the conservation status of golden eagles. Scottish Natural Heritage is currently giving consideration to the identification of further special protection areas for golden eagles and will make recommendations to ministers on this in due course. The Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime is working to strengthen and develop inter-agency work to combat wildlife crime.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive how it intends to expand the population of golden eagles into suitable areas where it does not presently have a foothold.

Michael Russell: The Scottish Government is working with Scottish Natural Heritage to consider ways of expanding the population across Scotland, notably in the south of Scotland where the golden eagle is currently scarce. Reintroductions may be possible, but there are a number of factors that exercise influence on natural patterns of spread and colonisation of golden eagles and the challenges for securing improvement in their conservation status are correspondingly complex.

25 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to ensure that Scotland achieves best economic value from the common shared resource of species of fish of no commercial value to the catching sector.

Mr Richard Lochhead: The Scottish Government aims to ensure that all fish stocks in Scottish waters, whether these have a commercial value or not and no matter where they are located, are managed sustainably for the long term maintenance of our marine environment and the communities and industries it supports.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what specific measures it is taking to protect inshore species of value in recreational sea angling from being totally depleted through commercial fishing policies and practices.

Richard Lochhead: The Scottish Government aims to ensure that all the sea fisheries management measures that it takes within Scottish waters should promote the long term sustainability of all stocks, whether inshore or offshore, and the marine environment as well as the communities and industries that these support.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what value it places on recreational sea angling.

Richard Lochhead: The Scottish Government recognises that recreational sea angling can offer valuable opportunities for people to access and enjoy the marine environment, develop a range of practical skills, derive pleasure from their participation in an exciting and sometimes competitive sport and enjoy the eating of those fish "caught for the pot". Recreational sea angling is a niche tourism market that can contribute to the economies of coastal communities, for example via bed and breakfasts or from hire of charter boats. However, there is currently very little objective or detailed data on the scale and economic impact of recreational sea angling in Scotland. To address this, the Scottish Government has commissioned Glasgow Caledonian University to undertake a study to look at these things.

24 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it envisages that (a) each local authority will issue bonds to finance capital spending, (b) there will be a single local authority bond or (c) both scenarios will arise.

John Swinney: Local authorities are responsible for determining their borrowing requirements and deciding what offers best value to them. The Government will work with local authorities through the Scottish Futures Trust to support this power.

23 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive how many governmental bodies have relocated to the Highlands and Islands since the beginning of 2007.

John Swinney: No governmental bodies have relocated to the Highlands and Islands since the beginning of 2007.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive how many government jobs have been relocated to the Highlands and Islands since the beginning of 2007.

John Swinney: No Scottish Government posts have been relocated to the Highlands and Islands since the beginning of 2007.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether there are any plans for further public sector job relocations to the Highlands and Islands.

John Swinney: The possibility of such relocations will be kept under on-going review.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will welcome any bids from local authorities throughout the Highlands and Islands area requesting that governmental jobs be relocated to their area.

John Swinney: The Scottish Government set out its new relocation policy on 29 January 2008. Relocation of specific bodies will be considered where it can be shown that there are operational benefits from doing so, that the costs of relocation can be afforded and that it will result in efficiencies. Where those conditions are satisfied a transparent process will be undertaken to identify potential location options. Where possible, we will seek to accommodate organisations within the Scottish Government’s estate. If no such opportunity exists we will discuss with our public sector partners, including local authorities, alternative accommodation options.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive how many small units there are within government departments which are eligible for relocation under the Small Units Initiative; what these units are, and how many jobs would be involved in any relocation.

John Swinney: Ministers remain committed to the Small Units Initiative. We will keep under ongoing review opportunities within the core Scottish Government and related bodies for the relocation of specific small units where it can be demonstrated that the benefits are commensurate with the costs involved.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what financial criteria it believes would have to be met in order for local authority bonds for new capital spending to be a competitive home for investment in an open marketplace for investment finance.

John Swinney: The ability of a local authority to support such borrowing would be a major factor, as would the interest rate offered

23 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the NPD PPP programme envisaged and set out in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust differs in any material respect from the NPD PPP project used by Argyll and Bute Council to finance a number of its new school buildings.

John Swinney: The NPD project model proposed for use by the SFT has evolved in certain detailed commercial respects since Argyll and Bute and now offers improved value for money as compared to the Argyll and Bute pilot. Through SFT there is the potential to increase further the benefits of NPD over the "standard UK PFI" model used in the main by the previous administration

22 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions Scottish ministers have had with the European Commission regarding the continuation of minimum import price arrangements that have protected Scottish salmon farming from the cheap importation of Norwegian farmed salmon.

Richard Lochhead: Scottish ministers, notably the First Minister and the Minister for Environment, have remained in close contact with the European Commission to support the need for the minimum import price, to provide evidence that there is a likelihood of a recurrence of dumping and to argue strongly against the Commission’s findings.

The Minister for Environment currently has an on-going dialogue regarding the special monitoring proposal.

21 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-14505 by Linda Fabiani on 2 July 2008, whether, in light of the arrangements referred to, the Scottish Government will cease public commentary on issues which will, or could be, referred to the Joint Ministerial Committee for discussion and resolution.

Linda Fabiani : The Scottish Government will continue to treat all discussions regarding the Joint Ministerial Committee in accordance with the principles outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding.

17 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the broadband reach contract recently awarded to Avanti Communications will include the delivery of an affordable broadband service to households in the Western Isles and, if not, whether there are any plans in place to deliver such a service to those who are currently served by either BT or Connected Communities, who have "out of reach" problems.

Jim Mather : The government’s Broadband Reach contract will not cover any part of the Western Isles. Provision of broadband to out of reach areas in the Western Isles is the responsibility of Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Comhairle nan Eilean Siar, and will be delivered through the Connected Communities network.

17 July 2008

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive to whom, in its private form, the Scottish Futures Trust will be accountable.

John Swinney: Within Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust (Bib number 45605), it is made clear that the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) will not alter the lines of statutory responsibility and accountability which apply across the public sector. SFT will itself be accountable through ministers, including any financial interest it may have in a private sector off-shoot.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will publish the evidence used to conclude that savings within a range of 3% to 5% could accrue from its proposals, as set out on page 14 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust, and whether it considers that such savings are achievable only by the particular methods envisaged in the document.

John Swinney: Page 42 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust (Bib. number 45605) sets out how the savings within a range of 3% to 5% could accrue from the setting up of the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT). It will be for the SFT company itself to consider, working in conjunction with the public sector, whether there are other methods by which such savings may be achieved.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Scottish Futures Trust is an initiative or a fund.

John Swinney: As stated in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust (Bib. number 45605), the Scottish Futures Trust is an initiative covering a range of activities designed to support the efficiency and effectiveness of public infrastructure procurement leading to real and improved value for money solutions.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what is meant on page 11 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust by "This concept in outline suggests provision of assets is facilitated via a sponsor entity which is an organisation with a genuine reason for alternative residual use of the assets created on its behalf and is itself a private sector classified body, e.g. provision of schools accommodation by a university or hospital accommodation by a medical faculty"; whether it is confident that this concept can be brought to fruition and, if so, within what timescale.

John Swinney: The concept mentioned at page 11 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust (Bib. number 45605) was the result of a preliminary investigation in attempting to enhance infrastructure investment. The detail and full impact of the concept will be further explored by the Scottish Futures Trust in conjunction with public and market interests and further details will be set out in due course.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what advantages it considers will be derived from a private sector classified body which has a public sector ethos, as set out on page 13 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust.

John Swinney: The explanation for the proposed form of the Scottish Futures Trust company is set out in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust (Bib. number 45605).

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will confirm that the Scottish Futures Trust as envisaged and set out on page 13 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust will be a private sector classified body.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the term "advisory community" on page 14 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust refers to consultants.

John Swinney: The term "advisory community" is used in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust (Bib. number 45605) to mean all types of advisors that would be able to provide the expertise the SFT company may require periodically. This would include consultants.

16 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether, in the context of a policy on freezing council tax, any increased costs from servicing additional debt of whatever form for the purpose of securing greater capital spending would have to be met by each local authority’s revenues from reductions in other forms of revenue spending.

John Swinney: A local authority is under a statutory duty to determine and keep under review the maximum amount it can afford to allocate to capital expenditure. This requires a local authority to determine the maximum amount it can afford to borrow, irrespective of the type of borrowing, taking into account all the income streams available to it. The Scottish Government has played its part by investing £34.9 billion in local government over the next three years to 2010-11, an increase of 13.1 per cent over the period and includes £70 million of recurring new funding each year to fund a council tax freeze which is the equivalent of a 3.2 per cent increase over the 2007-08 council tax income levels.

16 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether a local authority which took part in any collective arrangement to issue bonds would be able to decide which projects within its own area would be constructed by such finance, or whether such decisions would be taken elsewhere.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what form of organisation would be needed to issue bonds on behalf of a number of local authorities; what the legal status of such an organisation would be, and to whom it would be accountable.

John Swinney: Discussions about the potential use of bonds will form a key part of the dialogue to be held between the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) and the local government sector after SFT is set up later this summer. Issues such as the matter raised in the question above will form part of that dialogue.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether local authorities have powers to incur capital expenditure on matters for which they have no statutory responsibility and where the duty for applying for the finance rests with another statutory body.

John Swinney: Local authorities may only incur expenditure where there is a statutory power to do so.

In the absence of any specific power, the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 (the 2003 Act) provides local authorities with the "power to advance well-being". Under this power, a local authority may do anything which is likely to promote or improve the well-being of its area and/or the persons within that area. There are restrictions placed on this power within the 2003 Act. The power to advance well-being does not enable a local authority to do anything that is expressly prohibited, prevented, restricted or limited by other legislation. The power may not be used in a way that unreasonably duplicates the statutory functions of another body or person. It is for the local authority to consider whether any proposed action is reasonable. It prevents a local authority from raising money by levying any form of tax or charge, by borrowing or otherwise. However, it does not prevent a local authority from continuing to set and determine amounts of council tax or imposing reasonable charges for services provided so long as doing so is not prohibited by existing legislation.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether local authorities should use their powers to pursue their own statutory responsibilities before using any powers to assist the statutory functions of other bodies.

John Swinney: Local authorities are obliged by law to meet their statutory responsibilities as set out in relevant legislation. It is for local authorities to prioritise the use of their powers for delivery of their statutory responsibilities and to achieve delivery of local and national outcomes as they see fit.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what powers a local authority has to apply capital spending within the area of another local authority when the nature of such spending would provide no direct benefit to the residents of its own local authority area.

John Swinney: Local authorities may only incur expenditure where there is a statutory power to do so. In the absence of any specific power, the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 (the 2003 Act) provides local authorities with the power to do anything which is likely to promote or improve the well-being of its area and the persons within that area; or either of those. The power may be used in relation to the whole local authority area or any part of that area. Similarly, the power may be used in relation to all or some of the persons within a local authority area. The local authority may use the power outwith its geographical area if it considers doing so is likely to promote or improve the well-being of its own area and/or persons within its area. There are restrictions placed on this power within the 2003 act. The power to advance well-being does not enable a local authority to do anything that is expressly prohibited, prevented, restricted or limited by other legislation. The power may not be used in a way that unreasonably duplicates the statutory functions of another body or person. It is for the local authority to consider whether any proposed action is reasonable. It prevents a local authority from raising money by levying any form of tax or charge, by borrowing or otherwise. However, it does not prevent a local authority from continuing to set and determine amounts of council tax or imposing reasonable charges for services provided so long as doing so is not prohibited by existing legislation.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether any finance made available by a local authority to another statutory body for the purpose of assisting that body to undertake its statutory functions would be subject to measurement under public capital spending totals at the individual body or Scottish level.

John Swinney: How expenditure is measured and recorded will depend on the type of financial assistance made available and the nature of any data collection. A local authority requires a statutory power to provide financial assistance. Where the financial assistance is in the form of a grant then the expenditure would be included as part of the local authority expenditure for the year. For the local authority statutory accounts it would be recorded as capital expenditure if the expenditure met the definition of capital expenditure in accordance with proper accounting practice. If it did not it would be recorded as revenue expenditure of the authority. For National Accounts purposes if the grant was provided to fund the capital expenditure of the other statutory body it would be recorded on the Scottish Government capital return of the local authority as capital expenditure for this purpose. For the HM Treasury Whole of Government Accounts data collection, the local authority is required to identify the recipient of any grant to another public body to enable the data to be consolidated and eliminate double counting of any expenditure. Where the financial assistance is in the form of a loan the local authority providing the finance would record the expenditure as a debtor of the local authority. It would not be treated as capital expenditure of the local authority.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive when Argyll and Bute Council was first given approval to develop a NPD PPP project.

John Swinney: The council was first given approval to develop their schools NPD project in July 2002.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is planning to create another local authority; for what purpose, and to what advantage.

John Swinney: There are no plans to create another local authority at this time.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what powers local authorities have to issue bonds for the purpose of directly paying for capital expenditure on projects outwith their local authority area, where the sole beneficiaries of any expenditure are not within their local authority area.

John Swinney: Local authorities have a statutory power to borrow money through the issue of bonds by virtue of the provisions contained within the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975. The purposes for which a local authority may borrow are also detailed in the 1975 act.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what powers local authorities have to issue bonds for the purpose of directly paying for capital expenditure on projects outwith their local authority area, where the principal beneficiaries of any expenditure are not within their local authority area.

John Swinney: Local authorities have a statutory power to borrow money through the issue of bonds by virtue of the provisions contained within the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975. The purposes for which a local authority may borrow are also detailed in the 1975 act.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what powers local authorities have to issue bonds for the purpose of directly paying for capital expenditure wholly or in part outwith their local authority area, where their purpose is to be a principal funder for an activity not within their statutory responsibilities.

John Swinney: Local authorities have a statutory power to borrow money through the issue of bonds by virtue of the provisions contained within the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975. The purposes for which a local authority may borrow are also detailed in the 1975 act.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13675 by John Swinney on 9 June 2008, whether there is any limit to how much finance a local authority can raise in order to lend to another local authority.

John Swinney: The Local Government (Scotland) 1975 Act provides a local authority with a power to borrow for the purpose of lending to a "relevant" authority or to any community council established under the area of the local authority, Such borrowing may only be undertaken for purposes for which the relevant authority are authorised by statute to borrow.

Relevant authorities, being local authorities, are under a statutory duty to determine and keep under review the maximum amount each can afford to allocate to capital expenditure. This requires a relevant local authority to determine the maximum amount it can afford to borrow. A local authority may therefore only borrow a sum to on-lend which is equal to the amount the relevant authority has determined it can afford to allocate to capital, and/or for which it has a statutory borrowing power.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13675 by John Swinney on 9 June 2008, whether any finance borrowed in order to lend to another local authority counts within the affairs of the initial local authority for the purpose of the operation of their prudential borrowing arrangements.

John Swinney: The "Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities" issued by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy requires a local authority to take account of all external debt. However, if part of the external debt of a local authority includes borrowing taken to lend to another local authority, the code requires the local authority to make an adjustment to their net borrowing calculation to reflect this.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13675 by John Swinney on 9 June 2008, whether any finance borrowed by one local authority from another counts within the affairs of the receiving local authority for the purpose of the operation of their prudential borrowing arrangements.

John Swinney: The "Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities" issued by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy defines debt as the sum of borrowing and other long term liabilities. Borrowing refers to all external borrowing as taken from the local authority’s balance sheet. An advance from one local authority will be therefore be debt for the receiving authority.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13675 by John Swinney on 9 June 2008, what advantages accrue to a local authority in borrowing from another for the purpose of financing capital expenditure over borrowings from any other lender or by the direct issue of bonds itself.

John Swinney: It is for each local authority, as corporate bodies, to determine what type of borrowing, and what arrangements for borrowing, offer best value to them.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13675 by John Swinney on 9 June 2008, whether a local authority issuing bonds or borrowing for the purpose of lending to another local authority would be required to recover the costs involved in raising the finance from the local authority to which it lent the finance.

John Swinney: The Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975 provides that a local authority may lend to another authority on such terms as may be agreed between them.

16 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive when Argyll and Bute Council awarded the contract to start construction of schools under its NPD PPP project.

John Swinney: Argyll and Bute Council’s schools NPD project reached financial close on 9 September 2005.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will permit only NPD PPP projects to proceed in future.

John Swinney: We have not used the "standard UK PFI" model since May 2007. We have made clear that in circumstances where that model would previously have been used, our preference is now for the NPD approach.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the NPD PPP project in Argyll and Bute could have successfully proceeded at local authority level without "level playing field support".

John Swinney: That is a question for Argyll and Bute Council. Subsequent to the schools PPP programme, some councils have embarked on large bundled schools programmes by utilising such funding options as the prudential regime, and capital receipts.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, there will be a contract for the maintenance of the asset for a specified period and what the typical period might be.

John Swinney: The NPD model currently being used in procurements includes contracts for the maintenance of the asset for a specified period. The actual period will depend on each individual project, however, a typical period would be 25 to 30 years.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, who owns the assets created by the capital spending for the period of any contract for the maintenance of the asset.

John Swinney: The NPD model currently being used in procurements typically provides that the land on which the assets are created is owned by the procuring public body, so that when the contract ends the land and assets revert to the public body automatically. Any new proposal which the Scottish Futures Trust might advance in that regard will be considered on its merits at the time.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, where the risks associated with any asset failures lie.

John Swinney: Under Scottish Government guidance relating to value for money assessment, a full assessment of risks and optimal risk allocation for all major projects is required prior to commencement of procurement. A complex risk matrix results from that process. Standard contracts setting out appropriate risk allocations exist to provide a basis for negotiation during each procurement. The current NPD contract includes a detailed payment mechanism which relates contract payments to asset availability and service performance, and failures incur payment deductions.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, who the partners in the partnership will be.

John Swinney: This will depend on the specific circumstances of each individual project. Typically the market is invited to respond to the procurement opportunity by setting out a bid based on the input of consortium partners.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, which elements of profit deriving from the whole project will not be distributed; how that will be determined, and how any such profit will be applied.

John Swinney: Under NPD contracts the delivery company is not able to make any dividend distributions. Surpluses within the company are used according to pre-determined purposes. These arrangements can be customised to suit particular circumstances.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, which elements of the project are likely to, and can legitimately, make profit and whether any such profits will be taken by the providers of those elements of the projects.

John Swinney: Under current NPD procurements contractors which provide assets and services enter competitive bids which include normal profit margins. The funding element will include rates of return commensurate with current market terms. This process provides a "fixed price" contract for asset creation and life-cycle maintenance and services, without the uncapped equity dividends which are a feature of the "standard UK PFI" model favoured by the previous administration.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive, under its proposals for NPD PPP projects, what options exist for the raising of the necessary capital finance.

John Swinney: The raising of the necessary capital finance in an NPD PPP project is a matter for the private sector companies involved. It is also possible for the public procuring body to inject capital contributions in order to assist affordability of the project. The Scottish Futures Trust will continue to develop improvements to these funding arrangements and work with the public sector to ensure that any project is able to demonstrate that it has achieved value for money.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether, and by what means, capital is raised for the financing of projects where the providers of that finance can expect a profit on their investment.

John Swinney: A return is paid to private investors for all forms of public sector funds raised on the markets (other than funds raised through taxation and other direct receipts). When funds are raised in the market for a project it is consistent with that general approach that the funders are paid a return. What the public sector has to ensure, and be able to demonstrate in any project, is that it has achieved value for money through the efficiency of the procurement method and the price paid for capital and services provided. The Scottish Futures Trust will ensure that the equity gains of the past are no longer a burden on the public purse.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what the cost was of financing the Argyll and Bute NPD PPP project and how that cost compared with any other PPP undertaken over the same time period.

John Swinney: Information regarding the financing of Argyll and Bute Council’s schools NPD project can be found in the final business case which is available from the council. During the procurement, the council received comparative cost information as part of its commercial advice in order to enable it to be satisfied on value for money grounds.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive what information it has on the average difference in the cost of finance between wholly publicly funded and privately funded school construction projects.

John Swinney: Local authorities are responsible for the construction of the public schools estate. Data for schools procured "conventionally" by local authorities is not held centrally by the Scottish Government as affordability and value for money are matters wholly for the local authority concerned. The Scottish Government encourages a value for money assessment for all major projects, that ensures also all comparative data is employed. This is important given that market circumstances, construction inflation, project characteristics and the like. can vary markedly between projects as well as over time. An average cost base for comparison purposes would not be meaningful or as accurate as the methodology currently used. Accordingly, the Scottish Government does not hold or use such comparative data on an average basis.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that the private sector carrying risk for the building and maintenance of public assets brings any cost disciplines and advantages over more traditional forms of procurement.

John Swinney: The Scottish Government recognises the important role that the private sector can play in public sector infrastructure investment through the value of private sector know-how, delivery expertise and due diligence. However, we think that these benefits can be retained by the public sector but that they can be achieved at lower cost to the taxpayer through the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) initiative. We intend to build on the non profit distributing principles pioneered in Scotland for the SFT as this removes the equity element of traditional private finance funding which is the part of the finance that has delivered the largest and most unwarranted profits.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what the nature has been of the relationship between its Private Finance Unit and (a) local authorities and (b) private sector construction and finance companies and what advice the unit has provided to these organisations over recent years.

John Swinney: The Scottish Government Financial Partnerships Unit (FPU) has liaised regularly with those local authorities and private sector organisations involved in PPP projects. The FPU has provided no formal advice to private sector construction and finance companies.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether its Private Finance Unit has ever been involved in assisting due diligence, in advising on standard contracts and in liaising with private finance providers and construction companies in delivery support for PPP projects, including on NPD PPP projects.

John Swinney: The Scottish Government Financial Partnerships Unit (FPU) has assisted parts of the public sector in carrying out due diligence on project business cases. It has developed and advised on standard contracts. It has provided no formal delivery support to the private sector on PPP or NPD projects. This has included information about a variety of delivery issues, including the NPD model.

16 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what it means by "short term" in relation to the Scottish Futures Trust being unlikely to be a direct funder of capital projects, as referred to in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust.

John Swinney: The Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) is an initiative designed to support the efficiency and effectiveness of public infrastructure procurement leading to real and improved value for money solutions. The early work of the SFT will be to provide this support across the public sector framework.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether, if the Scottish Futures Trust reaches a stage of being a direct provider of finance or project management and delivery, it will do so as a public or private body.

John Swinney: The Scottish Futures Trust’s (SFT) Development and Delivery arm will be a public sector classified body and the Finance and Investment arm will sit within the private sector.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether, in any form, the Scottish Futures Trust will take decisions about which projects it will support, and to whom it will be accountable for such decisions.

John Swinney: Projects to be supported by the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) company will be a matter for SFT itself to consider once it is set up, within policies and guidance issued by Scottish Government. The SFT will be accountable through ministers.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive whether the statements on page 7 of Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust are materially correct in every respect.

John Swinney: Yes.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what the VAT status will be of the Scottish Futures Trust in any form and what the implications will be of such status.

John Swinney: The VAT status of the Scottish Futures Trust will be for HM Revenue and Customs to determine. The implications of compliance with UK fiscal policies are generally financial.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what it means by each Scottish Futures Trust being a developer, deliverer and supporter of individual programmes.

John Swinney: The Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) will be one organisation with two arms to it – SFT Delivery and Development, and SFT Finance and Investment. A key role for SFT will be to strengthen public sector capability in infrastructure planning, procurement and delivery through the provision of expertise and financial resources which are focused on best value outcomes, both at the level of individual projects and procurements and also at the level of entire public sector programmes of investment.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it expects the Scottish Futures Trust to manage and deliver any particular construction programmes and, if so, when it is envisaged that the first programme will be completed.

John Swinney: The Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) will set out its activities and priorities in an operational plan as soon as possible following its establishment.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive how much risk capital it envisages the Scottish Futures Trust having at its disposal and where such capital will come from.

John Swinney: This will be a matter for the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) company to consider once it is set up, primarily in the context of the planning for SFT Finance and Investment.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what the proposed legal status will be of any infrastructure investment board, as set out in Taking Forward the Scottish Futures Trust.

John Swinney: The establishment of an infrastructure board for Scotland is a proposal to be discussed with various stakeholders. It is not essential for it to have corporate legal form, but such details will be considered as part of the next stage of the Scottish Futures Trust implementation.

14 July 2008

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive how much bond finance has been raised by each local authority in each of the last 10 financial years.

John Swinney: The information requested is not held centrally.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what proportion of local authority capital spending was financed by bond finance from (a) 1980-81 to 1989-90, (b) 1990-91 to 1999-2000 and (c) 2000-07 to 2007-08.

John Swinney: Information on the type of borrowing undertaken to finance capital spending is not held centrally.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that local authorities have generally favoured bond finance as a means of raising finance for capital spending and what the reasons are for its position on the matter.

John Swinney: The majority of local authority borrowing outstanding at 31 March 2007 was with the Public Works Loan Board.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what financial advantage local authorities gain from raising bond finance over finance raised through the Public Works Loan Board.

John Swinney: Local authorities have a number of borrowing options available to them. It will be for a local authority, or a group of authorities, to determine whether there is any financial advantage from raising money through bonds over finance raised through the Public Works Loan Board.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what financial advantage local authorities gain from raising bond finance over finance raised through other forms of borrowing available beyond the Public Works Loan Board.

John Swinney: Local authorities have a number of borrowing options available to them. It will be for a local authority, or a group of authorities, to determine whether there is any financial advantage from raising money through bonds over finance raised through forms of borrowing available beyond the Public Works Loan Board.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what differences in administration would be involved in local authorities issuing bonds to finance capital works compared with that for borrowing through the Public Works Loan Board or other available forms of borrowing.

John Swinney: Local authorities are responsible for adopting treasury management policies and practices to ensure effective treasury management arrangements that comply with statutory or other requirements that regulate types of borrowing. It is therefore for each local authority to identify and apply suitable administration arrangements for the issue of bonds compared to borrowing through the Public Works Loan Board or other forms of borrowing.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what new statutory powers it envisages giving to local authorities to raise finance for capital spending.

John Swinney: Local authorities have not indicated to the Scottish Government that the existing statutory powers are inadequate for their needs. As such no new statutory powers are envisaged.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what authorisations or permissions local authorities require, and from which regulators, in order to issue bonds to finance capital spending.

John Swinney: Local authorities have a statutory power to borrow money through the issue of bonds by virtue of the provisions contained within the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what form of financial guarantees local authorities will be required to provide as security for any bonds that they may issue to finance capital spending.

John Swinney: The Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975 requires that all monies borrowed under any statutory borrowing power are secured upon the whole funds, rates and revenues of the authority and not otherwise, and all monies borrowed by the authority by whatever method shall be deemed to have the same charge and security and rank equally.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive which local authority personnel will decide the rate of return to be offered on any bonds issued for the purpose of financing capital spending.

John Swinney: This will be a matter for local authorities as corporate bodies.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether it proposes to impose any controls on the freedom of local authorities to issue bonds to finance capital spending.

John Swinney: A local authority is under a statutory duty to determine and keep under review the maximum amount it can afford to allocate to capital expenditure. This requires a local authority to determine the maximum amount it can afford to borrow, irrespective of the type of borrowing. They are also responsible for adopting treasury management policies and practices to ensure effective treasury management arrangements that comply with statutory or other requirements that regulate types of borrowing. The current statutory arrangements, together with existing treasury management codes of practice, do not indicate a need for the Scottish Government to intervene.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether the issuing of bonds to finance capital spending falls within or outwith the terms of the code for prudential borrowing.

John Swinney: The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 places a local authority under a duty to determine the maximum amount which it can afford to allocate to capital expenditure. Regulations issued in 2004 require a local authority to have regard to The Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities issued by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy in determining the maximum amount it can afford to allocate to capital expenditure. The objectives of the prudential code are that the capital investment plans of a local authority are affordable, prudent and sustainable. Borrowing, by way of bonds or otherwise, therefore falls within the terms of the prudential code.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether any finance raised by local authority bonds will be additional to any finance raised under the local authority prudential borrowing code or would displace other funds that could have been raised under the code but by means other than the issuing of bonds.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive whether any finance raised by local authority bonds is in any way additional to the funds that local authorities can currently raise for the financing of capital spending.

Peter Peacock: To ask the Scottish Executive how much bond finance it will allow local authorities to raise beyond sums that they can currently raise to finance capital spending.

John Swinney: A local authority is under a statutory duty to determine and keep under review the maximum amount it can afford to allocate to capital expenditure. This requires a local authority to determine the maximum amount it can afford to borrow, irrespective of the type of borrowing.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions have been held with individual local authorities about their willingness to issue bonds for the financing of capital spending outwith their own local authority area.

Peter Peacock : To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions have been held with individual local authorities about their willingness to issue bonds for t