asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to increase the number of consultative clinics for the elderly in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

Specialist clinical services, including these for the elderly, are the responsibility of regional hospital boards who decide from their knowledge of needs and priorities how these services should be deployed or extended. The expanding health centre programme will provide opportunities for the development of special clinics where old people can receive medical advice.

As the Government have indicated in the public spending paper their intention to increase the number of geriatric beds in hospitals, would it not be wiser to consider doing an exercise on consultative health clinics for the elderly to save the institutionalising of so many people, particularly in the west of Scotland?

The hon. Gentleman has raised an important point, but he will appreciate that progress depends upon the health centre programme. Here we have some very good news to report. As he may know, 17 health centres are in operation at present, 11 are under construction and 60 are at various stages of planning, including, I am glad to say, one at Rutherglen.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are his plans for the future of Jordanhill College School.

My right hon. Friend is consulting further with the governing body of the college about the school's function and its future.

Is not my hon. Friend aware of the acute worry which the long delay in deciding the future of the school is causing in the area which I represent? Why does not he set this worry at rest by simply allowing the school, which is held in high esteem, to continue its good work, as it did before the right hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) interfered?

I am well aware of the feeling of the parents in this matter, and I am anxious that the issue should be resolved as soon as possible. It is because I recognise the valuable contribution that the school has made to education in Glasgow that I regard it as specially important that the right decision should be taken.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many local authorities have now indicated a willingness to sell council houses; and whether he will keep statistics on a quarterly basis of the total number sold.

Since my circular was sent last July, nine have already applied for consent to sales. Ten others are considering offering houses for sale to sitting tenants. I will keep a record of the number of houses sold.

I am very glad to see the right hon. Gentleman alive and well, and present. Does not he recognise that this agreeably small number shows the complete irrelevance of this policy as a solution to the housing problem in Scotland? Will not he drop the nonsense?

It is at present much too early to judge. I have already given approval in three months to nearly three times the number of houses that were sold in the last three years of the Labour Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give encouragement to local authorities to sell council houses to those who wish to buy them.

I have already told local authorities that they should feel free to sell houses to sitting tenants who wish to buy them, and I hope they will give the most serious consideration to the advantages of selling. For my part I am ready to consent to their doing so unless there are special reasons for refusing.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that if this scheme snowballs successfully it will be a very considerable advantage to local authority housing accounts and will enable local authorities to do a good deal more to help those individuals who need help most?

Yes. As my noble Friend has pointed out, where cash is available to be paid it can help a local authority to provide for those who are waiting on the housing list while the tenant remains in the original house as an owner-occupier.

Before we get bogged down in party warfare on this issue, would the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that since demand by the occupiers is likely to be greatest in high-amenity areas, the social consequences for the larger authorities could perhaps be costly at the end of the day, and, as money is the only argument which can influence hon. Members opposite, will he at least give this due consideration?

Certainly, if that were to happen, I would take this into consideration, with any other considerations, too. As I have made clear, every case in Scotland has to be considered on its merits and must have the Secretary of State's approval.

Would the Secretary of State try to explain to us what this encouragement of selling council houses will do to provide houses? This is the problem. Would he not agree that, rather than waste time selling houses, he should be chasing local authorities, particularly those controlled by his hon. Friends outside this House, to get on with the house-building programme?

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman did not realise from my answer to the first Supplementary that when money is provided by the sale of a house, that money is extra, additional, and available for providing accommodation to someone who is waiting on the housing list. So it is an additional resource. This operation does not conflict with the building of new houses, or the improvement of houses. In fact, it means that a local authority has less to do in management, repairs and the running of the house which has been sold, and can concentrate on the main problems in front of it, such as the one my hon. Friend pointed out.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement about the future of the grant-aided schools in Scotland.

The Government will continue to support these schools. I am examining their financial situation but I am not yet in a position to make a more detailed statement.

None the less, will my right hon. Friend give a clear assurance that the Government will do everything possible to encourage these schools and so protect their fine and continuing contribution to Scottish education?

Yes, I can give that assurance.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the gross inequalities between grant-aided and education authority schools in Scotland? Is he further aware that recently the three promotion classes in Burntisland primary school have been increased to more than 40 pupils per teacher compared with 28 per teacher in the grant-aided George Watt College in Edinburgh? What action will he take to remove this gross injustice from Scottish education?

I do not accept the general remarks of the hon. Gentleman. I am fully aware of the situation resulting from the freezing of grants by the last Government, and the whole question is being considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied that adequate preparations have been made for the raising of the school-leaving age in 1972–73; and if he will make a statement.

Good progress has been made generally with the provision of additional accommodation but some education authorities have made representations which my right hon. Friend is considering about the amount of their school building allocations. On present forecasts the overall pupil/teacher ratio in 1973–74 will be 18·1 to 1, compared with 17 to 1 at present. But there will be serious staffing difficulties in parts of the West of Scotland and my right hon. Friend intends to do all he can to ensure effective deployment of teaching resources.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the previous Administration made inadequate preparations for the raising of the school leaving age? Does he accept that there will be a shortage of 1,800 secondary school teachers even before that critical year and that the previous Government's complacent assurances about school building were ill-founded?

I think that this is a matter. The problem of teacher shortage has been with us for many years. But I fully accept what my hon. Friend said about the serious shortage of teachers. On a straightforward projection we forecast that there will be a shortage of 3,100 teachers in 1973–74 when the full impact of raising the school leaving age will be felt. Therefore, my hon. Friend is absolutely right to emphasise the great seriousness of the situation in which we find ourselves.

If the hon. Gentleman is right about the seriousness of the problem, and in view of the inequalities which exist, would not the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend be better occupied dealing with this kind of problem than bringing forward, as their first Bill, a class and privilege-ridden piece of legislation? Surely it would be better to drop today's proceedings and to discuss the real problems in Scotland.

I suggest that if the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. and hon. Friends would concentrate on the real problems of education, instead of being blinded by ideology, we might make more progress.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will examine as a matter of urgency the effects of the continuing closure of rural schools on community life in the northeast of Scotland.

When a proposed school closure comes to my right hon. Friend for approval, he considers very carefully the contribution made by the school to the life of the community. But our first duty concerns the educational opportunities available to the children and there would have to be decisive evidence of the school's importance to the community before my right hon. Friend could consider requiring an authority to keep it open against their own judgment and against the children's educational interests.

Is the Minister proposing any action on the recommendations of the Gaskin Report in respect of rural depopulation and the influence that these schools have on that subject?

I think that this is a wider question on which it would be inappropriate for me to make a statement at this stage. But my hon. Friend should bear in mind, as I am sure the whole House does, that people are more likely to remain in rural communities if the educational facilities available to their children are comparable with those elsewhere.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider, in conjunction with this question of closing rural schools, whether the criteria operated for the transport of children should be altered to take account of modern circumstances and the need to travel much greater distances?

There is a later Question on the Order Paper about that matter, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be satisfied with the reply which I then give.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received from the Glasgow Chamber of Trade regarding comprehensive development of the Whiteinch area; and what reply he has sent.

On behalf of the Glasgow Chamber the National Chamber of Trade have written to my right hon. Friend about the Whiteinch redevelopment. They have been told that the Government are reviewing the difficult problems of blight and compensation, and that we will be glad to consider any specific points put forward by the Chamber.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the specific point which is upsetting my constituents is the time being taken to pay compensation? If, instead of proceeding under the Highways Acts, the Corporation of Glasgow could be persuaded by my hon. Friend to proceed under the C.D.A. procedure, surely it would be possible to pay the compensation immediately and thus make good to the people who are suffering for the sake of the general welfare of the community?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern about this matter. But there are no fewer than 28 C.D.A.s in the City of Glasgow. I certainly should have no ground for objecting to the present order of selection of priorities made by Glasgow Corporation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what extra provision he is making for geriatric patients in Galloway consequent on the closing of Lauriston Hospital.

The hospital authorities are making available 18 additional geriatric beds at Lochmaben Hospital and are reviewing the availability of general practitioner beds at Castle Douglas and Newton Stewart Hospitals. Their aim is that so far as possible local people should be accommodated in the nearest convenient hospital having regard to their clinical condition.

Is my hon. Friend aware that Lochmaben is a long way from this area and that a number of people, including the Medical Executive Council, are seriously disquieted about the lack of accommodation for old people in their areas? Will he rescind his decision until he has at least heard the views of the Medical Executive Council?

The Medical Executive Council, to which reference has been made, like all the bodies consulted, did not object to the closure in principle. The discussions were not about the closure, but on the wider issue of the availability of beds for general practitioners in the area. While I am conscious of the strong representations made by my hon. Friend, I understand that the Secretary of State would not be prepared to reconsider this matter unless new circumstances arose of which we were not aware at the time of the decision.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what extra costs have been incurred by the horticultural industry in Scotland since 1st January 1970; and if he will make a statement.

No precise figures are available, but as in agriculture generally there have been substantial increases since the beginning of the year.

Does my hon. Friend agree that efficient horticultural producers in Scotland should be given the same protection for crops which are suitable for growing in Scotland as is given to the agricultural industry in the proposed levy system?

While there is, as my hon. Friend knows, some measure of tariff and quota protection, it is the policy of the Government, like that of their predecessors, to reduce the horticultural industry's dependence on the tariff.

Will the Minister give the House an indication of what representations have been made to him by the National Farmers' Union of Scotland relating to the dumping of horticultural produce by Eastern European countries?

The hon. Gentleman raises an important matter. But, as he will appreciate, it is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. If the hon. Gentleman has any evidence, I suggest that he puts the case to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further steps he is taking to attract further industry to the Highlands of Scotland.

Besides the more effective combination of incentives for development areas now to be introduced, the Highlands and Islands Development Board is supplementing its continuous efforts to attract further industry by a comprehensive promotional campaign.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to give an assurance that the powers of the Highlands and Islands Development Board will in no way be interfered with?

Secondly, in view of recent Treasury announcements, will he give a further assurance that there is no suggestion of restricting monies available to the Board for development in the Highlands?

The measures which have been announced in no way affect the status and powers of the Highlands and Islands Development Board. Nor do they affect the system of the provision of money for purposes for which the Board was set up.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why he refused to entertain the proposal of the Highlands and Islands Development Board that it should be allowed freely to invest, without his approval, sums up to £100,000? Furthermore, will he not be so doctrinaire about the cash value of the grants and loans scheme of the Highlands and Islands Development Board in the Highlands as he has been in his support of the Government's policy for the rest of Scotland?

All these matters are now for me, following the appointment of the new Board at the beginning of this month. Since I came into office at the end of June my main concern has been reappointing the Board, because most of its members' contracts were running out.

Does the Secretary of State appreciate that the firms likely to be most quickly and worst hit by the changes from investment grants to depreciation and allowances are those in the new small industries moving into places like the Highlands? Has he not appreciated that all the evidence indicates that he ought to have fought and fought and fought against the application of this policy to Scotland?

I am astonished that the right hon. Gentleman has not understood or even apparently discovered what the changes are. It is not simply a change from investment grants to a system of allowances and free depreciation in the development areas. Part of the change is to more extensive and larger grants under the Local Employment Acts. This is a large proportion of the replacement, particularly to assist the kind of firm, to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, coming into an area because it is related to the provision of new jobs.

With respect, the right hon. Gentleman's shouting shows how uneasy he is about it. Will he consult the late Chairman of the Highlands and Islands Development Board whether he thought that it was more effective to leave the power with the Board to do it or to do it under the Local Employment Acts?

I shall speak more softly to the right hon. Gentleman. I have been consulting a large number of persons concerned. There is no doubt, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, that there were some projects for which an investment grant was a particularly suitable kind of assistance, but grants will still be available. Grants for development under the Local Employment Acts will be there, but in addition the tax allowance system will be there, too, to help many other firms which benefit from that.

As industry and communications are so important in the Highlands, will my right hon. Friend impress upon his colleagues the need to keep open the Dingwall-Kyle of Lochalsh Railway?

I have noted what my hon. Friend said.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider making the special house-building grants, presently available to crofters in the seven crofting counties, available to non-crofting residents in those counties who wish to build their own homes.

No, Sir. Non-crofting residents will benefit from the action my right hon. Friend will be taking to encourage home ownership throughout the country.

Would my hon. Friend be prepared to consider, in that event, the extension of the 100 per cent. mortgage facilities which are available to persons buying old properties to people building new houses in the crofting areas?

The local authoritties have power to do that but, as my hon. Friend knows, Ross and Cromarty has particularly difficult problems of housing. It has done exceptionally well in the provision of housing for industrial development, and I hope to meet the authority soon to discuss its problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what will be the future rôle of the Scottish Economic Planning Council.

The Council has met twice under my chairmanship and, in the light of these meetings, I am now considering its future rôle. I hope to make an announcement shortly.

If my right hon. Friend continues the Council, will he see that by its composition and the work that it does, it is a more useful body than it was under the previous Government?

As the proceedings of the Council were confidential, under arrangements made by the previous Government, I did not know what it did until I came into office. After consultations with the members of the Council, and following my own judgment, I shall in due course be making an announcement.

The right hon. Gentleman says that he did not know what the Council did, but he was always very quick in his criticism of it in respect of the time that it sat and how long it sat. Can he say whether he discussed the recent changes in incentives with the Council?

The whole question of what was likely to be the best combination of incentives has been discussed with the members of the Council during the course of proceedings in which I have taken part.

On the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's question, I never criticised the Council, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman to quote any reference in HANSARD, or anything that I said in public to show that I did while I was in opposition. All that I was seeking was information. The only information that I received was about the number of times the Council sat, and the length of time for which it sat.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will discuss with the appropriate owning public authorities the preparation of a scheme for the piping and infilling of the Monk-land Canal, Airdrie; and if he will make a statement.

A meeting took place with representatives of Airdrie and Coat-bridge Town Councils on 21st September and Airdrie Town Council has since indicated that it would be prepared to co-operate with Coatbridge in a scheme for infilling the canal. At the town council's request, discussions are now proceeding with Lanark County Council to examine the possibility of incorporating the county section of the canal into the scheme.

Is the Minister aware that this is an unguarded stretch of a disused waterway, which is a serious life hazard to young children? Will he do his very best to prevail upon Lanark County Council to agree to a joint scheme for the piping and filling-in of this canal and the removing of this hazard from the lives of young people?

I am sure that the local authorities involved fully appreciate all the arguments, but the cost involved is heavy and it is right that they should take time carefully to weigh this against the benefits which may be expected to accrue. We for our part will continue to use our good offices to try to resolve any difficulties as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now give a definite date for the start of the new general hospital in Airdrie, due to start in early 1971; and if he will make a statement.

The Western Regional Hospital Board hopes to start the construction of the new Airdrie District General Hospital as early as practicable in 1971. My right hon. Friend's Department is now examining the board's proposals for the final cost limit. This is a necessary preliminary to the invitation of tenders, and for this reason I am unable at the moment to give a more definite date for the start.

As most hospitals have been described by competent medical authorities as being half a century out of date, will the Minister realise that this is a very urgent project? Will he do his utmost to prevail upon those responsible to live up to the programme already decided upon and to have the hospital commenced in April of next year?

It was only on 26th October that the board submitted to my De- partment its proposals of the overall costs. I assure the hon. Gentleman that there will be no unnecessary delay at our end.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has for speeding up the house building programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he will now take to accelerate the house building programme in Scotland.

The new policies and measures which were announced to the House last week are intended to provide a framework for achieving the best possible rate of building wherever there is a need to be met, and for promoting the improvement of existing houses.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that those policies, in so far as they have been expanded—they have not been expanded by him at all—by the Secretary of State for the Environment, are bound to lead to a reduction in the number of new houses built? Can the right hon. Gentleman now come clean to the House and say exactly what floor and what ceiling there is to the figure of proposed housing subsidy cuts?

On the first point, the procedure followed last week was similar to that followed by the previous Government when, on 18th March of this year, the then Minister of Housing and Local Government made a statement on housing which covered Scotland as well as England, and in which he specifically referred to Scottish housing aspects.

On the second part, it is not a question of withdrawing subsidies. It is a question of directing them to where they are really needed.

Will my right hon. Friend make urgent representations in the Cabinet and elsewhere to relieve the building industry of two iniquitous burdens and penalties, namely, S.E.T., which is costing it £19 million, and B.S.T., which is costing it £8 million, so that it can get on with the job of building houses and making fuller use of a large number in the building industry who are at present out of work?

I am aware of all that my hon. Friend has said. S.E.T. is a matter for the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but the Government's attitude has been made clear. The second matter raised by my hon. Friend is a subject on which a White Paper has been issued, and on which I understand the House should have an opportunity of taking a decision in due course.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is a great air of uncertainty in the minds of local authorities about the future housebuilding programme? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that any details that we possess have been obtained not from this House, but through the medium of the Press? Can he tell the House what will be the scale of completion of houses in Scotland in 1972, 1973 and 1974?

To answer the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question I should need to have the gift of second sight, which many of my constituents and others in the North of Scotland think I have, but to which I do not lay claim.—[Interruption.] I have made certain predictions in the past which, very strangely, came true at the appropriate times. I shall not, however, chance my arm on this.

On the question of uncertainty, if local authorities have any, they will soon find it ended in the consultations that we shall be having with them.

When the right hon. Gentleman refers to a statement, or a non-statement, by me about this, surely he appreciates that this was an occasion when we published a White Paper? Now we have no information at all about the Government's intentions in respect of the housebuilding programme and the effect which any proposals will have on local authorities. Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that between now and the publication of the details there is bound to be hesitancy on the part of local authorities, with the result that our record of achievements over the last three years, and again this year, of house-building completions will sink sadly, and we shall get the usual completions under the Tories going down year by year, with the housing programme for Scotland once again sinking into misery?

If the right hon. Gentleman will look up HANSARD of 18th March he will see that it was not a question of a White Paper, but a statement by the then Minister of Housing, during which he covered the situation in Scotland as well. On the same day a statement was issued by the then Minister of Agriculture, the right hon. Member for Anglesey (Mr. Cledwyn Hughes), and that covered the Scottish situation and answered Scottish questions, too—the very same day. So I cannot see what the right hon. Gentleman or his hon. Friend are complaining about, concerning the statement last week. On the second point, the question of completions and starts, as is shown by the records, a large drop in the starts of house building occurred many months before this Government came into office.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to decrease the mileage from three to two miles for qualifying for free bus travelling for pupils attending secondary schools.

No, Sir. Education authorities already have discretion under the statute to provide transport within the prescribed limit where they think that the circumstances warrant it and my right hon. Friend has had no representations from them for any change in the law.

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that many parents with three or four children attending secondary schools are finding it very difficult indeed to meet the increased bus fares which now prevail, and is he further aware that children who are aged over 15 have to pay the full fares? Would he not think that the Government should now attempt to do something about it and send out circulars to local authorities suggesting to them that it is Government policy to do as is suggested in my Question?

I think it would be wrong to make a general change in the Statute, but I would again emphasise that local authorities have a general discretion if they wish to provide free transport, irrespective of distance. Some authorities, admittedly, work rather strictly to the limits, but others operate with larger limits.

Would it not help very much if the Government abolished B.S.T., which adds to the difficulties of children in the mornings?

I think that that is a rather different question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is now taking to relieve unemployment in Scotland this winter.

In addition to the increased measures of assistance under the Local Employment Acts which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced on 27th October I have decided, as I indicated in reply to the hon. Member for Clackmannan and East Stirlingshire (Mr. Douglas) on 28th October, to accelerate over £1½ million of essential works for which I am responsible.—[Vol. 805, c. 150.]

Would the Secretary of State for Scotland accept that most people in Scotland believe that that amount of aid is inadequate to meet the unemployment problem this winter? Would he also accept that employment levels ultimately reflect upon migration levels? Would he now take the opportunity of apologising to my right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) for that puerile statement seeking to give to the Conservatives credit for the Labour Government's policies which reduced migration from Scotland over the last few years?

I know of no such puerile statement and I know of nothing to withdraw, but this accelerated works programme for this winter is for Scotland only and we intend that it shall be effective in providing employment immediately during this winter.

Would the right hon. Gentleman give a very quick answer to this? The advanced programme for local authorities—is it to be 100 per cent. grant?

These matters are being discussed—

Oh.

—with the local authorities and I cannot at this stage, without notice, give the right hon. Gentleman the answer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us a list of those projects which are to be put into operation and will he let me know whether any of them are in the County of Stirling?

I will undertake to do that for the hon. Gentleman; but at least £1 million will be for the trunk road programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what allocation of funds will now be made to the county of Midlothian to enable them to carry out their primary school building programme.

My right hon. Friend is at present considering representations for additional capital investment for primary and secondary school building from Midlothian and a number of other education authorities. He will also be consulting education authorities generally about the additional investment which is now being made available for the improvement of primary schools which will amount to £4 million.

Has the hon. Gentleman read the debate on the mini-budget presented by his right hon. Friend? Does he not know that in that debate the question of the allocation of extra funds towards education was very seriously challenged and was not answered? Will the hon. Gentleman not realise that not only Midlothian but local education authorities all over Scotland are very concerned about this and that they want extra money not only for the primary but also for the post-primary education programmes?

I am fully aware of what was said in the debate, but I think that, in fairness, the hon. Gentleman must at least admit that what education authorities are complaining of is the allocation given by the previous Government. Under the mini-budget we have £4 million extra for primary school building in Scotland, and I think that the least that hon. Gentlemen opposite can do in these circumstances is to welcome the extra money for Scotland.

But if the situation is so serious, is not this a miserable sum, bearing in mind that the Government are taking £32 million from Scottish children in respect of meals and milk charges—£32 million over the four years? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we increased the allocation by £40 million at the end of four years? Surely he can do better than that!

The right hon. Gentleman should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. He must be aware that local authorities are hammering on the doors of the Scottish Office complaining about the inadequate sums allocated by the previous Government. This is new cash, extra cash, which will benefit Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to delay proposed revaluation of properties in Scotland.

No, Sir.

The right hon. Gentleman must be aware that there is in Scotland at the present time confusion and anxiety about the future prospects with revaluation. Since he and his Government have declared that they will be altering certain financial structures, does he not think it appropriate to listen to some of their very strong authoritative voices, and delay the issue of revaluation?

No, Sir, this is a decision which has to be taken by the Government. Revaluation brings up to date a fair distribution of the rates between ratepayers in Scotland. The more up to date it is, the more likely it is to be fair between different ratepayers.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, in the light of plans for increased allocations for hospital building 1971 to 1975, he will now consider the representations of the South-East Regional Hospital Board and make an allocation to enable them to commence the new district hospital for the Borders during this period.

An allocation has already been made to enable development to start on the site of the new district general hospital for the Borders. Any review arising from the increased allocations for hospital building is unlikely to provide for additional phases of this hospital to start in the programme announced on 20th April this year.

That reply will be received as rather disappointing. Is the hon. Gentleman saying that of the increased allocation announced by the Chancellor, none will go to the South-East Regional Hospital Board? He must know that the Board itself stated that if any extra money were available over what was already announced, this would be its first priority.

I am sorry if I gave that impression: that is not the position. The position that I mentioned was that it would not be possible for additional phases of the hospital to start in the programme announced on 20th April this year. I do not want to give a general commitment. Clearly, the allocation of the extra money for hospital building is something that we still have to consider in detail.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, following the Goverment's plans for changes in industrial investment incentives, he will make a statement about their likely effect in Scotland.

All the measures which were announced on 27th October by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer are designed to produce an economic climate in which industry can grow again at a satisfactory rate, both in the United Kingdom as a whole and in Scotland.

As paragraph 15 of the White Paper on Investment Incentives made clear, it is estimated that the differential benefit provided to the development areas by free depreciation in conjunction with the additional Local Employment Acts grants and loans will be broadly equivalent to the present cost of the regional differential in the investment grants scheme.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that that depends on how one interprets the words "broadly equivalent" and that the experience in the Borders so far is that those firms which have come in and started from scratch, without having profits with which to offset depreciation allowances, have found the investment grants on the machinery most valuable, and that these are now being removed?

The technical investment grant system will be removed, but grants for development will be increased under the Local Employment Acts. This is a misunderstanding which must be made clear. It is not a question of doing away with all grants: it is increasing more general grants. The investment grant system, for instance, did not apply to service industries. The fact that we have nearly 100,000 unemployed in Scotland at the moment means that some change was necessary. There could be no doubt about that. The new combination will be much more effective in producing results.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reason for these continual questions, not only here but by every economist and many industrialists throughout Scotland, is that they do not accept that the total resources will be what they were under the investment grant system? Secondly, is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that in an area like Scotland, the problems of the central valley and of his hon. Friends in the Highlands cannot be solved under a profit-based investment and that the entire shipbuilding industry and shipping industry are anxious about this ending of the basic investment grant situation?

Order. Long questions and long answers cut out hon. Members who are anxious to put questions.

I will give a short answer. Clearly, the hon. Member has not been listening to many of the comments from informed industrial and economic opinion in Scotland. Secondly, I must make it clear that the special free depreciation advantage in the development areas, if not used at the beginning on profits in the first year or two, is not lost but can be continued through the following years. This is rather different from the previous form.

In the light of that answer, will the Secretary of State study in depth the speech made last night by the chairman of the Chamber of Shipping, Sir John Nicholson, and tell him of the alarm that this is causing on Clydeside, and give full attention to the matter of industrial incentives in terms of shipping and the effect that it will have on the Clyde?

I have seen the newspaper reports about that speech, which was confined to the question of shipping and did not deal with shipbuilding.

The Question asks about the likely effect of the changes. Will the right hon. Gentleman describe the efforts made to study this question—where the information was obtained, who was consulted and what has happened to the report of the inquiry, first mentioned by the Board of Trade in April, 1969, and subsequently taken over by the Minister of Technology, into this very question? Was that report used when the Department made up its mind on this question? Has it been shelved, or when will it be published?

I do not know where the hon. Gentleman has been for the last three years. Over the period when we were in opposition, we carried out a vast amount of consultation. Many informed observers said that no Opposition had ever done so much work in preparation in this field. In our statements and in our election manifesto, we said that we would be replacing the investment grant system, which was widely criticised on both sides of the House and outside the House, by a system of tax allowances and increased and extensive use of the Local Employment Acts. So we have translated into action exactly what we said we would do.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if we get better value for money in Scotland in terms of jobs and new industries, the people of Scotland will be very pleased?

I agree and I would like to add that the Highlands and Islands Development Board will find the new and more flexible system of much more advantage to it than the previous one.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will bring to the attention of German industrialists applying for consent to investment in Scotland the recent changes in Government policy on incentives to industry.

My right hon. Friend intends to ensure that the new combination of incentives available to industrialists investing in Scotland is widely known in Germany and elsewhere.

Is it true that the Under-Secretary of State himself flew over the Firth of Clyde with a group of German industrialists and pointed out the magnificent deep-water facilities of Hunterston? Would he now tell us whether this implies that a decision has been taken in relation to the development at Hunterston? Finally, if he brought back any of the waters of the Clyde, would he dab a little on the brow of his hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor) and cool that temper of his?

I did not fly over the Clyde myself, but I arranged for our visitors from Germany to do so. They were most impressed with what they saw. The other part of the hon. Gentleman's question is a matter which is under consideration, as he knows, by my right hon. Friend. I certainly cannot give any information on that at this time.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of the additional £110 million to be spent by Her Majesty's Government between 1971 and 1975 on health and welfare services will be spent on Scotland; and how specifically he proposes to allocate this money.

£11 million over the years 1971–72 to 1974–75. The additional expenditure will be directed to those parts of the services to whose improvement I attach priority, including, for example, services for the elderly and the mentally handicapped. My aim is to bring about improvements in these directions both in the hospital services and through the local authority health and social work services and the voluntary organisations concerned in this field. I will shortly be having consultations to this end both with regional hospital board chairmen and, in the context of the rate support grant negotiations, with the local authority associations, as affecting their services.

It will take me some time to work out the figures in my head, but it strikes me that we are not getting a particularly good deal out of this. We are getting this £11 million over the next five years. If the right hon. Gentleman allows for the fact that prices are rising very fast and that the £11 million clearly, at the end of that time, will not be worth all that much, what will we get in terms of actual hospital beds by 1975? How many additional health centres will we get by 1975? Will the right hon. Gentleman be quite specific about what we will see in real terms at the end of this period?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman would not expect me to decide this—the announcement having been made only last week—before consulting those concerned, as I have said I will. One thing which is certain is that £11 million will be available in addition in Scotland to be used where it is most needed, particularly among the elderly and in facilities for the mentally handicapped.

If this is an additonal £11 million, can the right hon. Gentleman give me a simple figure? What will we be spending in 1975 on these services?

I will give that figure, with notice.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of the sum announced in the Government's White Paper on public expenditure as increased expenditure on education is to be allocated to Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

About a tenth.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this allocation will be very welcome in Scotland? Will he make particular efforts to speed up its use, as there are still thousands of primary school children in part-time education in Scotland?

Yes, Sir. I shall shortly be inviting authorities to submit their proposals for primary school improvement projects, and the £4 million will be allocated when they have been considered.

The hon. Gentleman's Answer is curious, because his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science declared that the education bill was to be cut by about 1 per cent. How can one-tenth of minus 1 per cent. add up to the kind of figures the hon. Gentleman gave his hon. Friend?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that those are the figures, that £4 million extra will be available for the primary building programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his estimate of the number of Scottish school children receiving school meals and of the increase in revenue from the proposed increase in charges.

About 375,000 children were taking school meals in January, 1970. Savings in public expenditure of about £7 million are expected in the four years 1971–75. These are net savings after allowance has been made for the increased number of children who will be entitled to free meals under the more generous conditions which we are introducing.

Would not the Minister admit, in view of his previous Answer, that he is financing an increase in primary education expenditure out of the pockets of people whose children need school meals? Will he undertake to ensure that the very valuable school meal service, particularly in the rural communities, is taken up, by conducting sample, and if necessary comprehensive, surveys to ensure that young people who require good nutrition at school are not denied it because of the increased charges?

The hon. Gentleman's point was very much in the Government's mind. We want to concentrate help on those who need it, and the plain fact is—there is no denying it—that under our new more generous arrangements a higher proportion will be entitled to free school meals. We shall make every endeavour to make the facilities known.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to ensure that children entitled to free school meals are not publicly identified.

This is a matter for the education authorities. They have, however, been advised on means of avoiding such identification, and I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the relevant Departmental circular.

While I thank the Minister for that reply, is he aware that the new Government's economic policy will bring further hardship to many people in Scotland and will mean that many children will require free meals? Will he make sure, within the power at his disposal, that children are in no way identified, and ensure that local authorities carry that out to the letter?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that our new measures will increase the facilities for free meals. Although it may be that the case that occasionally children receiving free meals are identified, I want to make it crystal-clear to the hon. Gentleman and the House that I deplore this and will take every action to make sure that my views and those of the Government are brought clearly to the attention of local authorities.

On a point of order. May I raise a point of order about a reply by the Secretary of State to a supplementary question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross), who was advised, when he asked about investment grants for Scotland, to put down a Question? I put down a Question to the Secretary of State some days ago about this very matter, and it was transferred to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. Have we a right to question the Secretary of State on the matter, and can we get a reply if we put down a Question again?

Order. I deprecate the raising of points of Order during Questions. I think that the hon. Gentleman could have raised it afterwards

Reverting to the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Robert Hughes), I should explain that I cut in on the hon. Gentleman's remarks because Question Time was going rapidly, and it is good practice to raise points of order after Question Time. The position is that Ministers themselves decide to which Ministry a Question shall be allocated. If the hon. Gentleman is dissatisfied with what has happened about a Question of his, the Ministers concerned will have heard his protest.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of the sum announced in the Government White Paper on Public Expenditure to be spent on infrastructure schemes under the Local Employment Acts is to be allocated to Scotland; and if he will give priority to the need for improved communications in the North-East.

The amount spent in Scotland will depend very largely upon the volume of work on the provision of basic services and the clearance of derelict land which local authorities undertake in support of industrial development in their areas. The hon Member can be sure that the needs of North-East Scotland will be very much in mind.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer and assure him that, whatever hon. Members opposite may say, the package of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor and my right hon. Friend's clarification today are widely welcomed in the North-East of Scotland, where we are all certain that it will contribute to the area's long-term prosperity.

I note that my hon. Friend is very discerning on the advantages of the new proposals for his area of Scotland.

The hon. Gentleman must be gifted with second sight, because none of us has any figures yet. How much was spent on infrastructure in Scotland last year under the Local Employment Act? How much will be spent next year or will be made available for spending next year?

If the right hon. Gentleman will put down Questions on that, I shall be able to give him the answers. But I can tell him that the total additional expenditure in the development areas under the new proposals is expected to be about £25 million.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland under what statutory authority a certificated teacher who was in legal employment at April, 1968, but who refused to apply for permission to teach from the General Teaching Council has been dismissed; and if he will make a statement.

Under the Education (Scotland) Act 1962 the appointment of a teacher is at the pleasure of the education authority. In employing teachers an authority must, however, comply with the provisions of the Schools (Scotland) Code 1956. These have, since 1st April, 1968, required that, for appointments other than temporary appointments in secondary and special schools, a teacher must be registered with the General Teaching Council.

I recognise that, but is the Minister aware that a number—a small number, I agree—of teachers have written to me about the matter? They are men and women who have been certificated and have been in teaching for 10, 20 and sometimes 30 years, but they resented this process. Is it not wrong to force the process on those teachers when teachers are in such short supply?

I should not be honest if I did not admit that any situation in which a qualified teacher finds himself not in employment is one which obviously causes us a great deal of concern. But I cannot hold out any hope of a major review or reorganisation of the law. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that the position of such people is very much in our minds.

Does my hon. Friend perhaps consider that if the Bill is finally passed to deduct levies at source that would remove one of the reasons why teachers certificated before 1st April, 1968 should not be deemed to be registered, thus getting round the problem so rightly raised by the hon. Gentleman?

I cannot go into the complexities of the matter now. But I would again emphasise, as was so rightly emphasised by my predecessors, that here there is no question of joining an organisation. It is simply a matter of registering with a professional council, and perhaps some of those who have taken objection may on reflection reconsider their position.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland for how long the motorway between Glasgow and Edinburgh has been under construction; and when it will be completed.

Construction of the motorway section of the Glasgow to Edinburgh trunk road began in September, 1963, and my right hon. Friend will be opening the final length of it at the end of this month.

At least that is one cheery little note from the Front Bench opposite. But will the M6, which is proceeding so smoothly and efficiently on the English side of the border, soon show signs of existence on the Scottish side?

The question of the M6 is entirely different from that of the M8, but I can tell the hon. Gentleman that work is proceeding on joining up the M6 and the M74, and we see no reason why it should slowing down.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many outbreaks of fowl pest there have been in Scotland; what actions are being taken to curtail the disease; and if he will make a statement.

There have been five recent cases of fowl pest in Scotland, three primary outbreaks and two secondary.

Movement restrictions were placed on the premises concerned and the birds slaughtered.

The last case was confirmed on 29th October: there have been no more outbreaks.

In view of the seriousness of the disease, will my hon. Friend consider giving the widest possible publicity to the means by which it is spread, to cut down its incidence?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern. Steps have been taken to alert poultry keepers to the risks of infection, particularly from improperly-treated swill. I cannot emphasise too strongly how necessary it is that poultry-keepers observe these elementary precautions.