Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have been advised by the Chief Executive of the Scottish Court Service that the individual fees paid to the consultants who provided the feasibility report on Peebles Sheriff Court are subject to commercial confidentiality. However, I can advise that the total fees paid to date to the consultants are £17,480.

There has been no formal response to the Sheriff Principal's report beyond the statement made by the Deputy Minister for Justice at the conclusion of the Member's Debate on court provision which took place on 12 January 2000. Ministers accepted the recommendations of the Sheriff Principal in their entirety and there were no further matters to report to the Parliament at that time.

The information requested is not collected.

Consignia, post offices and postal services are reserved matters. The Executive can only assist post offices to achieve devolved purposes.The Scottish National Rural Partnership's Report Services in Rural Scotland identified innovative approaches to service provision in rural areas and offered recommendations on how providers, including Consignia, might work with rural communities to identify and achieve their realistic service needs. In response to a recommendation, the Executive is facilitating meetings exploring the possibility of a joint pilot project involving Consignia and other service providers to test the "Community Mall" concept, which, it is envisaged, would improve the economic viability of core services.As part of a broad strategy aimed at providing support for communities in deprived urban areas, ministers are currently considering ways in which post offices located in these areas might be assisted. I will provide further details of this initiative shortly.The pilot of "Your Guide", a project which may have an impact on post offices including those in rural and deprived urban areas, was undertaken in Leicestershire and Rutland. Its purpose is to provide on a one stop shop basis, access to customers for a range of official transactions, information and advice. This is largely delivered through kiosk based applications supplemented by leaflets, telephone helplines and face to face contact. An interim report has been published and this is being evaluated by Scottish Executive officials. A final report is expected in the near future. The Scottish Executive is continuing to work closely with the Department of Trade and Industry and Consignia in relation to the possibility of a national roll out of the project.

It is important to recognise that young people in secure accommodation includes young people at risk as well as those who have committed offences.The following tables outline the available information for 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000. Information for 2000-01 will be available by late summer and early next year for 2001-02. Table 1

	1997-98	1998-99	1999-2000
Average Number of children in secure units	86	83	89

Table 2: Number of Children Admitted to Secure Units for Children

	1997-98	1998-99	1999-2000
Number of admissions	264	265	264

Table 3: Children Resident in Secure Units at 31 March: by Gender

	1998	1999	2000
Male	59	65	71
Female	24	18	16
Total	83	83	87

Table 4: Children Admitted to Secure Units: by Gender

	1997-98	1998-99	1999-2000
Male	179	195	182
Female	85	70	82
Total	264	265	264

Figures on the length of stay of children in secure units are not held centrally. Table 5: Length of Stay of Residents in Children's Secure Units at 31 March

	1998	1999	2000
Less than 1 month	16	23	17
1 month to under 2 months	13	14	13
2 months to under 3 months	5	8	12
3 months to under 6 months	24	19	22
6 months to under 1 year	14	8	12
1 year to under 2 years	10	7	6
2 years or more	1	4	5
Total	83	83	87

Table 6: Length of Stay (on Discharge)

	1997-98	1998-99	1999-2000
Less than 1 month	89	81	67
1 month to under 2 months	27	28	26
2 months to under 3 months	27	31	41
3 months to under 6 months	62	71	84
6 months to under 1 year	52	42	36
1 year to under 2 years	8	9	9
2 years or more	1	3	3
Total	266	265	266

Table 7: Number of Children Resident in Secure Units at 31 March by Reason of PlacementIt is not possible to show the average number.

Reason for placement (see codelist below)	1998	1999	2000
Code 91	1
Code 92			3
Code 93	8	13	8
Code 94	22	21	29
Code 95	9	16	13
Code 96	22	13	13
Code 97	12	3	2
Code 99	9	17	19
Total	83	83	87

Table 8: Children Admitted to Secure Units: by Reason for Placement

Reason for placement (see codelist below)	1998	1999	2000
Code 91	2	8	1
Code 92			1
Code 93	13	18	15
Code 94	59	54	56
Code 95	42	46	61
Code 96	52	29	19
Code 97	57	55	31
Code 99	37	55	78
Not known	2	0	2
Total	264	265	264

Codelist for placement reasons91. Order made under section 44(1) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.92. Order made under section 205 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.93. Order made under section 208 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.94. Order made under section 70(9) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, to which is attached a condition authorising use of Secure Accommodation.95. A Place of Safety Order or Warrant made under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, authorising the use of Secure Accommodation.96. Where committal to a Place of Safety or other temporary detention is made under the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.97. The authority of the Director of Social Work and the person in charge of the establishment, pending the convening of a Children's Hearing to consider the case.99. Other.

I refer the member to the answer given to question S1W-26765.

Boys and girls are held together in all of Scotland's secure units, with the exception of Kerelaw, which has a six bed girls-only unit.

There are no regional disease registers in Scotland, described as such. NHSScotland and the Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health maintain a number of databases which record the incidence and prevalence of a range of diseases and other conditions. This surveillance information can be vital for maintaining and improving safety of patient care as well as allowing rapid investigation of outbreaks of serious infection or clusters of unusual illness. Complete anonymisation of these datasets could therefore compromise safety. Surveillance information also underpins research, policy development, and service planning. As such, it is an important element of the Scottish Executive's plans to continue to improve treatment and care in Scotland.

No, if this means creating unnecessary bureaucracy for Local Health Care Co-operatives to hold funds for commissioning secondary care. Local primary care teams already have a leading role in driving forward the development of care and the redesign of services around the needs of patients. In order to support and empower primary care teams to lead change across the local health system it is important that consideration is given to the future role of Local Health Care Co-operatives. It is for this reason that a major part of the review of The strategic development of management and decision-making in NHSScotland will focus on the developing role of Local Health Care Co-operatives in the planning and delivery of patient care.

There are no disease registers in Scotland, described as such. NHSScotland and the Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health maintain a number of databases which record the incidence and prevalence of a range of diseases and other conditions. This surveillance information can be vital for maintaining and improving safety of patient care as well as allowing rapid investigation of outbreaks of serious infection or clusters of unusual illness. Surveillance information also underpins research, policy development, and service planning. As such, it is an important element of the Scottish Executive's plans to continue to improve treatment and care in Scotland.