The National Strategy for Self-directed Support, published on 23 November, makes it clear that local authorities should allow people who need support the right to choose how that support is provided and to take as much control of managing that support as they wish. Self-directed support options include taking an individual budget as a direct payment, choosing how the individual budget is allocated, or a combination of these. People may also choose to leave the local authority to arrange their support. Our draft Self-directed Support Bill includes a duty on local authorities to give people assessed as needing support the opportunity to direct their own support.

Individuals affected by brain injury, who have been assessed as requiring a social support service, are eligible for a direct payment. Under no circumstances should a person be refused a direct payment based purely on their condition or injury.

The circumstances in which direct payments are not appropriate are where a person:

is excluded by current regulations

is incapable of consenting to a direct payment and does not have a guardian or attorney

is barred because of gross misuse of a direct payment.

A full list of circumstances where people are ineligible for a direct payment can be found in the Community Care (Direct Payments) (Scotland) Regulations 2003, section 2:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2003/243/regulation/2/made.

Self directed support guidance was issued to local authorities in July 2007 and is available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/181224/0051499.pdf. This guidance primarily focuses on Direct Payments. On 23 November, the Scottish Government and COSLA published a joint strategy that outlines a 10 year vision for self-directed support. We have also set up an implementation group with COSLA and ADSW (Association of Directors of Social Work) representation. I expect this group will consider the need for further guidance as part of the delivery of its action plan.

Comparisons of rail passenger numbers in Scotland and Great Britain are published in the Scottish Government''s Main Transport Trends 2010 publication (Tables SGB1 to SGB3). A copy is available in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 52059).

Comparisons of rail passenger kilometres in Scotland with EU and OECD countries can be found in the Scottish Government''s Scottish Transport Statistics 2009 publication (Table 13.1). A copy is available in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 50075).

The Scottish Executive''s administration outturn costs since 1999 are shown below:

Year Ended 31 March	Resource	Capital	Total “ Cash Terms	Total “ Constant 2009-10 Prices
	£ million	£ million	£ million	£ million
1999	202	12	214	279
2000	171	20	191	244
2001	194	10	204	257
2002	187	18	205	253
2003	196	10	206	246
2004	214	11	225	262
2005	231	15	246	278
2006	246	15	261	290
2007	239	14	253	272
2008	251	14	265	277
2009	234	16	250	254
2010	261	15	276	276

Note: Structural changes that have taken place over the period affect any year on year comparison. For example the Scottish Government has absorbed activities from a number of bodies transferring into the core Scottish Government as part of the simplification of the public sector landscape (such as parts of Communities Scotland, and the Fisheries Research Service and Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency). There have also been significant new initiatives launched over that period such as the Public Procurement Reform programme.

During the peak construction activity around 900 jobs were created. In addition, First ScotRail has announced 130 permanent posts associated with the new Airdrie-Bathgate railway.

The breakdown of the rail infrastructure and other transport programmes investment budgets by (a) type of investment and (b) project is shown below.

(a) The rail infrastructure represents the network grant which the Office of Rail Regulation judged was necessary to fund Network Rail for renewals, enhancements, maintenance and operating expenditure in Scotland. Network Rail''s income is principally recovered through track access charges paid by passenger and freight operators, station access charges, and network grants paid by the Department for Transport and the Scottish Government to Network Rail in lieu of access charges.

Description	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2009-10
	£ million	£ million	£ million	£ million
Rail Infrastructure	357.90	366.50	382.70	364.30

(b) The budget for major public transport projects is not allocated across individual projects. It funded specific commitments including the Waverley Station redevelopment, the Stirling“Alloa“Kincardine link and our contribution to the Edinburgh trams project.

Description	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2009-10
	£ million	£ million	£ million	£ million
Other Transport Programmes	158.00	264.70	157.70	171.86

 

During the construction of Laurencekirk Station around 50 staff were involved on site with this project.

Two design, build, finance and operate road projects have been undertaken since 1999. The first is the M77/Glasgow Southern Orbital contract which was awarded to Connect M77/GSO Plc, a consortium owned by Balfour Beatty Capital Projects Limited, at a cost of £123 million (net present value) and opened to traffic on 28 April 2005. The second is the M80 Stepps to Haggs contract which was awarded on 16 January 2009 to Highway Management (Scotland) Limited, a consortium of Bilfinger Berger, Grahams and Northstone at a cost of £322 million (net present value).

The net present value of these projects includes the construction, maintenance and operation costs over the 30 year concession period.

The answer to S3W-37092 only gave details of direct capital expenditure, relating to new construction and design, build, finance and operate (DBFO) expenditure. The breakdown is as follows:

Description	2002-03	2003-04	2004-05	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2009-10
(a) Capital Works/Land	86.20	109.97	117.70	5.55	142.00	137.60	130.60	237.30
(d) DBFO	25.88	28.90	29.40	29.90	35.30	34.10	46.00	7.20
Total	112.08	138.87	147.10	105.45	177.30	171.70	176.60	284.50

Structural maintenance and improvements were not included in the figures for investments in roads, as they were not deemed to be classified as such.