Housing Subsidy, Glasgow
21.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that the usual subsidy of £9 per house was exceeded by the Glasgow Corporation and £11 per house offered to a private firm, and that this offer was increased by the corporation to £12 10s. per house; and whether he will take steps to protect the public funds in this regard?
The amount of subsidy payable by a local authority to private builders in terms of the Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1924, is a matter primarily for the decision of the local authority. They are not limited to a payment of £9, which is the amount of the State contribution, but may increase that sum by a payment from local rates. In the case of Glasgow, the original scheme of assistance framed by the corporation with the approval of the Department of Health for Scotland fixed the rate at £13 10s. per house. Later this rate was reduced to £9, and the approval of the Department was given on 9th October last. Prior to that date the corporation granted subsidy in two instances at the rate of £12 10s. per house. As this rate was not in accordance with that specified in the approved scheme, steps were taken by the Department to ensure that in future the approved rate will not be departed from without their prior approval. I am informed that the corporation have never offered £11 per house to a private firm.
In view of the powers that are disclosed over the Glasgow Corporation in this matter, is it not within the power of the hon. Gentleman to use these powers to prevent them using slates which are not quarried in Scotland?
Has the hon. Gentleman any control over the rental of these houses, in view of the considerable reduction in their cost?
That does not arise out of the question.
Poor Law Relief
22.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the total amount of money paid for indoor and outdoor relief, respectively, in Scotland for the year 1929?
The total expenditure in Scotland for the year ended the 15th May, 1929, on indoor relief was £753,727 and on outdoor relief £2,886,787. These figures exclude the amount expended in respect of the lunatic poor.
Roads Expenditure, Fife
23.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has received a protest from the small burghs in the county of Fife with respect to the increased burden the ratepayers of these burghs will have to bear through the expenditure on classified roads in the county being allocated on the basis of the rateable valuation of the landward areas and small burghs; and what steps he proposes to take to relieve these ratepayers of their burdens?
The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The method of allocating the expenditure to which my hon. Friend refers is prescribed by Section 21 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1929, and can be altered only by legislation. The ratepayers will be wholly relieved of any consequent loss during 1930–31 and the four following years out of the Supplementary Exchequer Grant or other source in accordance with Section 60 of the Act; and this relief will be continued to a gradually lessening extent during subsequent years. In view of Section 72 of the Act, which provides for an investigation before the expiry of seven years into the rules which regulate inter alia the determination of sums to be allocated to small burghs, any proposals for legislation would be at present premature.
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that almost half of the valuation of the county is in the burghs, whereas only a small proportion of the roads are in the burghs; and does he think it is fair that the small burghs should be called upon to bear such a large proportion of the expenditure on the county roads?
Do the burgh inhabitants never use the county roads?
Agriculture
24.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has any proposals to make to relieve the plight of Scottish agriculture?
I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave last Tuesday to a question on this subject by the hon. and gallant Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair).
Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been called to the resolutions which have been passed at a series of mass meetings of agriculturists in the north of Scotland recently; and, in view of the urgency of the problem and the critical condition of the industry, when will he expect to be in a position to make a full statement of the intentions of the Government?
I want to state, quite frankly, that I have had my attention called to the demonstrations that have taken place in various parts of Scotland. During the time I have filled the position which I now occupy, I have been taking a considerable number of steps that will benefit agriculture. My hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen and Kincardine (Mr. Boothby) may be interested to learn that the farmers in his constituency have benefited by an order which we have issued regarding the grading and marking of meat. This has raised the sale from his own part of the country in Smithfield of graded and national marked beef from 539 sides per week to no less than 2,406.
Is it not a fact that these grading proposals were first produced by the late Government, and does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that they in themselves are totally inadequate to meet the requirements of agriculture.
These are matters for debate, and we had better put off this discussion to a more convenient date.
Margarine (Imported Oils)
26.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that imports to Scotland of oleo oil and oleo stearine used in margarine must be accompanied by a certificate that the fat was derived from an animal free from disease; whether he is aware that no such health regulations are observed on imports to England; whether any Scottish authorities have complained of their precaution being defeated by imports via England; and whether he will make any representations on the subject to the Government?
I am aware that the practice in this matter at Scottish ports differs from that observed at English ports, and my right hon. Friend is in consultation with the Minister of Health on the subject, with a view to securing the adoption of a common practice.
Are we to understand that there is no protection for English ports from oils of this description?
I cannot answer questions relating to English ports; I can only answer questions dealing with the protection afforded to Scottish ports.
What is the precise difference between the two positions to which the hon. Gentleman refers?
In the Scottish ports importation is only permitted if it is accompanied by a medical certificate that the oils are produced from animals free from disease. As I understand it, no such medical certificate is insisted upon at the English ports.
May I ask if this oil is the product of General Charteris' Kadaver factory?
Foreign Trawlers (Moray Firth)
26.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the destruction of cod nets caused by foreign trawlers in the Moray Firth in the beginning of last week; whether he is aware that the nets were taken aboard the trawlers and deliberately cut away; whether he is making inquiries into the matter; and what steps he is taking to secure satisfaction to the fishermen and to protect them from further losses in the same way?
My attention has been drawn to this matter. I am informed that the loss sustained, though substantial, is not so extensive as some of the published statements would suggest. The damage occurred in an area away from the main cod net grounds during the week-end. No evidence has been received to support the suggestion that the damage was deliberately done by the foreign trawlers, but I am having full inquiries made into all the circumstances of the occurrence. The question whether any compensation can be recovered is receiving consideration. The patrol vessels have done everything possible to warn foreign trawlers of the presence of the anchored nets and are continuing to do so.
Can the right hon. Gentleman say what progress is being made with the proposal to try and stop the foreign trawlers coming in and interfering with the fishermen who are peacably carrying on their own calling?
As the presence of foreign trawlers in the Moray Firth, and other places where British trawlers are not allowed, is a continued outrage on the feelings of British fishermen, will the right hon. Gentleman not take steps to go to the League of Nations and get this matter put right?
I agree that it is a substantial cause of complaint, but it was a substantial cause of complaint when the hon. Gentleman and his friends were responsible for the Government of the country. It was a substantial cause of complaint then as well as now, but I would say, in reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Banff (Major Wood), that that phase of the question is receiving my earnest consideration.
New School, Falkirk (Wages)
27.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that at a school being built in East Stirlingshire by the aid of a Government grant the fair wages clause is not being observed as regards certain building workers; and if he will take steps to see that standard wages are paid?
I assume that the hon. Member's question relates to the new Advanced Division school at Falkirk. I am informed that the contract includes a fair wages clause which, so far as the Education Authority are aware, is not being infringed. There are apparently two building employers' federations having members in the area and they have different rates. The execution of contracts for school building is a matter for local settlement and I have no power to intervene.
If the proper rate of wages is not being paid, cannot the hon. Member withhold the grant?
As a matter of fact, the grant is supplied in the general block and is not allocated to particular purposes.
As the hon. Gentleman has issued a letter advising the authorities to use home-grown timber and other home-produced materials, can he not issue a letter to the local authorities asking them to pay trade union wages?
In this case, the authority have the fair wages clause in the contract, but the question of the interpretation of it is a different matter.
But is the hon. Member aware that this is a case of definite evasion of the building trade union rates, and can he not take steps with the local authority to see that Government money is not used to pay lower wages?
The statement I have given is that which was supplied by the education authority, who say, specifically, that they are paying the trade union rate and observing the fair wages clause.
When did it become the policy of the hon. Gentleman to take the word of a Tory education authority as against the word of a trade union?
Harbour Improvements, Peterhead
53.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he can now state the intentions of the Government with regard to the scheme for deepening the Port Henry Dock and constructing a slipway at Peterhead?
The Development Commissioners have recommended, and the Treasury have sanctioned, a grant of £39,000 for this purpose, to include a sum of £14,000 previously sanctioned for the slipway alone, on condition that the harbour trustees raise an equivalent amount from other sources.