Skip to main content

Commons Chamber

Volume 887: debated on Monday 3 March 1975

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

House Of Commons

Monday 3rd March 1975

The House met at half-past Two o'clock


[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair]

Oral Answers To Questions


Sixth-Form Colleges


asked the Secretary of State for Wales what proportion of fifth-form scholars entered the sixth form colleges during this academic year in those areas in Wales which such colleges exist; how this compares with the proportion of sixth-formers to fifth-formers in neighbouring conventional secondary schools; and whether he will make a statement.

The only sixth-form college in Wales was established in 1972. It has received about 17 per cent. of fifth-year pupils from its catchment area compared with 30 per cent. entering sixth forms in neighbouring secondary schools. By 1977, however, the proportion should approach that of neighbouring schools.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that that is a disappointing answer? Does he agree that the sixth-form college is a major educational innovation which may bring forth unexpected and unlooked for results? Therefore, before agreeing to any additional schemes, will he make and publish an assessment for the whole community, using comprehensiveness as a criterion?

It is a major innovation. I understand my hon. Friend's concern. I am opposed to selection at any stage of secondary education.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that community colleges with open access for 16-to-18 year-olds are far preferable, both socially and educationally, to sixth-form colleges, and will he ensure that plans for the establishment of such institutions in Wales are expanded?

We in the Welsh Office are in no way bigoted or committed to one line in education. We always take on board experienced remarks such as those uttered by the hon. Member for Merioneth (Mr. Thomas).

Does my hon. Friend agree that the criteria both of comprehensiveness and of open access to the community are satisfied in junior colleges which are situated in what hitherto were colleges of further education?

Welsh Development Agency


asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether the proposed Welsh Development Agency will be responsible to him or to the projected Welsh Assembly.

When established the agency will be responsible to me. The precise nature of the relationship in the future between agency and Assembly remains for consideration.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the Welsh Development Agency is a most welcome innovation if it means new jobs and the safeguarding of existing jobs? Is he also aware that it will be most unwelcome if it is to be used to enable a State grab of perfectly successful firms, and that it will be totally ineffective if it is to be at the mercy of political pressures and sectional local interests, which will happen if it is made responsible to an elected Welsh Assembly?

I was glad to hear the hon. Gentleman's welcome for the Welsh Development Agency. This body will be a highly effective one, with a whole range of powers, and it will be able to act in such a way that the interests of the whole Principality are fully safeguarded.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that there is a welcome in Wales for the establishment of the Welsh Development Agency? Now that the Industry Bill is upstairs in Committee and we shall have the National Enterprise Board put into operation very soon, will he press ahead with the legislation for the Welsh Development Agency so that it can have the powers of the NEB and do the enormous amount of work which is needed to develop industry in Wales?

I am encouraged by those remarks. We shall push ahead speedily with our legislative plans, which will be the chief point of what I am seeking to do in order to ensure that jobs are protected and provided in Wales. I regard it as an essential part of the powers of the Welsh Development Agency that it should be able to act in such a way in parallel with the National Enterprise Board.

Does the Secretary of State agree that if this agency grows to be a really effective force in the Welsh economy, as we hope it will, it will need the same powers of democratic control as are possessed by those bodies already existing in Wales which are answerable to the Secretary of State but not to the Assembly?

I cannot anticipate the publication of the Government's proposals for the powers of the Assembly, but I am responsible democratically to the people of Wales, and I shall ensure that the body operates, in the first instance, as an agency of mine.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there will be widespread support for a properly constituted development agency, but that its success will depend upon the confidence and co-operation of industry, and that will be lacking if the agency is given the job of implementing NEB proposals and "Bennery" in Wales? Has the Secretary of State received representations from Welsh industry urging him not to prejudice the success of the agency, by freeing it from these operations, which would be anathema to many Welsh industries?

I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman. There has been a substantial welcome for the setting up of the development agency. I concede that there are views about the powers of the NEB being exercised by the agency, and I have taken note of them. I regard this as of fundamental importance. We are about to set up the most important body that Wales has seen for a long time—if not ever—and it is vitally important that it should be able to exercise a whole range of powers comprehensively in order to tackle the real problems of Wales.


asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the progress of consideration of the establishment of a Welsh Development Agency.

Discussions on the consultation paper are almost complete. I plan to bring a Bill before the House as early as possible.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give an assurance that in considering this Bill he will give specific consideration to the abilities of the Welsh Development Agency to set up industry in its own right, without having to work through the National Enterprise Board?

I think that the hon. Gentleman has misconceived the consultation paper which I issued about the powers of the Welsh Development Agency. Perhaps he will now await our legislative proposals, which will be published in due course.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend assure us that the Welsh Development Agency, when established, will have a suitable office and appropriate senior officials in North Wales, as we regard it as extremely important that there should be a reasonable spread of industry throughout the whole of Wales?

For all the operations of the agency, for the powers that it will operate in parallel with similar powers of the National Enterprise Board, and for all the powers that I regard as fundamentally important, it is of the utmost importance that the agency should have a presence in both mid-Wales and North Wales to ensure that it can operate effectively to meet the needs of the whole of Wales. That is what I plan and that is why I propose to set up a comprehensive body to deal with all our problems in this respect.

Water Charges (Daniel Report)


asked the Secretary of State for Wales when he expects to receive the report of the Daniel Committee on Water Charges.

Within the next few days.

When they receive this report will my hon. Friend and his right hon. and learned Friend take into account that water charges, based as they are upon the general rate, tend to operate unfairly, especially towards small businesses in Wales? Is my hon. Friend aware that one business man in my constituency has calculated that he is paying £1 per gallon of water? This is expensive, even for Welsh water. Will my hon. Friend therefore press forward with the scheme for the equalisation of water charges throughout the United Kingdom as a way of treating Welsh water consumers more fairly than they have been treated over the past two or three years?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend's remarks will be noted. I cannot anticipate what the Daniel Committee will report.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that few matters have caused such deep concern in Wales in recent months as water and sewerage? When he is considering the report and the remarks of his right hon. Friend, will the hon. Gentleman consider whether the grant from the Government can extend to these big additions made to the rates by the precepts of these bodies now in charge of water and sewerage? This is an important matter, and I hope the hon. Gentleman will consider it seriously.

I agree that this is an important matter, and it is regrettable that it was not dealt with under the Water Act 1973.

Will the hon. Gentleman keep in mind that it is the failure to ensure a material return for the Welsh water which flows from Welsh reservoirs to English conurbations which explains in great part the steep rise in the water rate in particular and rates in general?

That is one of the matters upon which the Daniel Committee was asked to report. I am sure the hon. Gentleman would not wish me to anticipate the report.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the recent dissatisfaction in many rural areas about the setting up of the water authority has spread to every area in Wales, because of the charges, which are so patently unfair? Will my hon. Friend consider urgently any solutions which the committee puts forward, and certainly any solutions for changing the method of calculating charges?

I am sure that that is one matter which the Daniel Committee will consider and report upon. I am sorry to repeat it, but if one sets up an independent committee it is best to wait for it to report.

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm a recent statement by the water authority that the amount of money it expects from water charges in 1975–76 is one-third up on 1974–75, and that the amount of money it expects from the sewerage rate is nearly 100 per cent. up on what it received in 1974–75? This extra money is needed largely because of inflation, but also because of increased loan charges. Can the hon. Gentleman explain to the House why the water authority is paying an interest rate of no less than 17¼ per cent.

Many of these detailed questions are the responsibility of the water authority. The House of Commons gave it that responsibility by the Water Act 1973, which the hon. Gentleman supported wholeheartedly during its passage through the House.

On the question of sewerage charges, the authority inherited a huge backlog of schemes and the hon. Gentleman and others are quick to come to the Dispatch Box and demand that the schemes be included in this and next year's financial programmes.

Coal And Steel Workers (Housing)


asked the Secretary of State for Wales what advice he has given to local authorities regarding benefits available from EEC sources for the housing of coal and steel workers.

This is a matter which the Government will be considering in conjunction with the coal and steel industries and with the local authority associations.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that Welsh local authorities are getting their full share of these benefits? Is he further aware that many local authorities are completely unaware of the eighth programme, announced by the European Coal and Steel last year, which provides housing loans for coal and steel workers at as low a rate of interest as 1 per cent?

I appreciate the point being made by my hon. Friend. It is one of the matters which I discussed in Brussels and Luxembourg last week. We made it clear to the Commission that in our view local authorities have an important rôle to play in the housing scene in Wales and the Commission accepted this. On the question of the awareness of local authorities of the scheme, I shall be taking this further, now that I have returned from my initial discussions with the Commission.

Why is the Welsh Office only now considering making this advice available? Why has it not done so already?

The scheme that has been set up in Europe involves national and regional authorities—but not local authorities—the unions and the coal and steel industries in Europe. There is a different philosophy between the European way of doing things and the British way of doing things in this respect. The rôle of local authorities does not figure prominently in the European scheme. It was with the idea of making an adjustment for the British situation that I had discussions with the Commission last week.

Is not this a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul? Is not the whole operation merely a recycling of our own money? Does not my hon. Friend feel that his time would be better spent if it were devoted to more fundamental questions, such as the Welsh steel industry, which is suffering badly from Common Market strategy, and the coal industry, which could be halved as a result of action taken by bureaucrats in Brussels and Luxembourg during the next 10 years?

I think that I spend my time very usefully in trying to achieve practical results for Wales. We are a member of the Community, and if money is available it is my duty, together with my right hon. and learned Friend, to try to get it for Wales.

On the question of halving the coal industry, I think that no greater lie was given to this scare than the announcement last week of a £1 million exploration programme into the reserves of the South Wales coalfield. That is a good answer to my hon. Friend's question.

Rates (Small Businesses)


asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will take steps to provide assistance to small business people in meeting increased rate demands in 1975.

The House has already approved proposals under which ratepayers, both domestic and non-domestic, in all areas, will benefit from the unprecedentedly generous rate of grant to be given for 1975–76.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that many employees will be made redundant and many small businesses will close during the year, due to this year's high rate demand? Will he reconsider his decision and try to help small business people? I was told today that rates in Aberystwyth have risen by 80 per cent. in 12 months, and unless something is done in the foreseeable future many small businesses will be in dire trouble.

I should have thought the hon. Gentleman would be the first to pay tribute to the exceedingly generous rate of Government grant for this year. That grant was introduced unopposed from either side of the House. Although obviously one would have wanted to do more, the proposal that we put forward was not opposed in the Division Lobby. We have provided local authorities with a rate relief on a more generous scale than ever before.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman acknowledge that whereas the grant may be larger than ever before, the need is greater than ever? Experienced people in local authorities are saying that they are placed in a fearful position because of continuing and expanding inflation. Will he address himself to the question again?

The hon. Gentleman will remember that the rate support grant, on average, is working at 66 per cent.—the highest ever. The Government have given this aid because of the real need of local authorities. At the same time, the Government have also appealed to local authorities—and I have done so myself—for restraint in their expenditure. We are deeply aware of the problems of local government, and the hon. Gentleman will be aware of the problems of central Government. I would be very surprised if the hon. Gentleman were advocating a wholesale increase of expenditure on this front. I doubt that he would do so, as it would probably be inconsistent with other parts of his philosophy. We have done a great deal, on a far greater scale than ever before.

Heads Of The Valley Road


asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he proposes any improvement in the Heads of the Valley Road, in view of concern expressed about the safety of the road.

There is a continuing programme of improvements. Current proposals include additional signs; double white lines at various bends and gradients; improved road markings, junction improvements and the provision of street lighting.

I thank my hon. Friend for that encouraging reply. Is he aware that for some time there has been deep anxiety about the safety of this road? Will he look with favour upon any future applications that may come from the local authorities in the Heads of the Valley area? At the same time, I appreciate the action that has already been taken.

We are always ready to receive representations from local authorities in South Wales about this major road. This is part of the industrial regeneration of North Glamorgan and Gwent. This is my Department's positive response to the real fears that many of my hon. Friends have had about this road over the past few years.



asked the Secretary of State for Wales if, in view of the special problems faced by the Powys Area Health Authority, he will introduce special measures to help Powys.

My right hon. and learned Friend is conscious of the area's special needs and will take them into account in allocating revenue and capital resources to the authority for the coming financial year. We are also carrying out an operational research study into the area's ambulance service needs and are considering what other help may be given.

My hon. Friend will be aware of the difficulties experienced by this area. Further, he will know that it is as sparse an area as any in Wales and as large an authority as any other. Will he consider urgently the upgrading of some of the smaller hospitals into community hospitals, in view of the fact that the area has no general district hospital? Will he press upon his colleagues in other Departments the need to consider the question of travelling to visit hospitals, in view of increased costs?

I am aware that Powys is 80 miles long. The Department knows well its special problems. I should like my hon. Friend to know the increased revenue resources for the area health authority. It will be significantly above the average for Wales as a whole. As a major new hospital for the area is not possible, capital for other projects will be weighted materially in its favour. That was one of the matters that my right hon. and learned Friend hinted at when he recently addressed Powys County Council. On the vexed question of travel expenses, all I can say is that we are conscious that the cost of travelling to hospital can be heavy, but in these times of economic stringency I cannot hold out any promise at this stage.

In the allocation of area health authority financial resources for next April, will the Minister reconsider the position of the area health authority of Gwynedd? As he told the authority earlier last week, it has been seriously under-funded. Will he consider Gwynedd's position? It has 8 per cent. of the population and a high percentage of elderly people, yet it received only just over 6 per cent. of the total financial allocation for the last financial year?

The Government know of Gwynedd's problem. Already we can say that we have given an additional £1·5 million for the current financial year. We shall ensure in the years ahead that Gwynedd has a larger slice of the cake.

Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that the proposed new general hospital at Bangor, which is so urgently needed, will be started this year? Does he realise that this is a matter that affects the confidence of the area health authority and all the community health councils in the area?

My right hon. Friend has waged a 10-year campaign to ensure that Bangor has a district general hospital. I am glad to say that our plans are to begin the hospital later this year.

South Glamorgan


asked the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he is taking to increase employment prospects in the county of South Glamorgan.

The Government have granted development area status to the county. This will provide great additional financial attractions for manufacturing industry through the increased incentives under the Industry Act 1972 and the regional employment premium, which we have doubled.

I have on a number of occasions warmly welcomed the inclusion of South Glamorgan in the development area. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman now consider reconstituting the task force to deal with the provision of employment for redundant workers well in advance of any closure of East Moors?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his first remark. I assure him that all necessary steps will be taken and that information will be substantially available in good time to meet whatever demands are made for new employment in his county.

I would not want to press the claims of one county rather than another, but will my right hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that there are also to be considered the needs of the Mid-Glamorgan area? There is a need for diversity in the valleys. Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that when thinking of moving Government Departments from London to Wales there is a tendency to think only in terms of those Departments going to Cardiff? Perhaps we should be a bit more far-reaching in our outlook and think in terms of Government Departments going to other areas. If we developed the Heads of the Valley area, it could develop the whole community.

I think that my hon. Friend has pinpointed the difficulty in which one is always placed. If he examines the programme of advance factories that we have announced in his county and—for those who travel to work there—in the immediate vicinity of his county, he will realise that the area received a substantial share in the past year.

Comprehensive Education


asked the Secretary of State for Wales if, on the basis of submissions made to him, he is satisfied with provision made for the implementation of comprehensive secondary education in that part of the constituency of the hon. Member for Bedwellty not already operating such a system; and if he will make a statement.

We have allocated sufficient resources for the introduction of comprehensive education in the Sirhowy and Western Valley. It is for the local authority to decide when to implement the reorganisation.

Does my hon. Friend acknowledge that the local authority is very anxious to implement comprehensive education for sixth-form levels as soon as possible? Has an allocation been made in respect of the Cross Keys College of Further Education, which has become a junior college? Further, approximately how much is involved?

I have met members and representatives of the Gwent LEA. I know of their utmost commitment to the principle and ideal of comprehensive education. The LEA has been told that extensions to the Cross Keys College of Further Education are included in the further education building programme for 1975–76. That may well be worth about £270,000. It will certainly help to facilitate a comprehensive school system in the area.

Will the hon. Gentleman say to what extent the parents of the children involved will be consulted before reorganisation takes place?

Now that my hon. Friend has had the opportunity of visiting the constituency of Pontypool and seeing the appalling physical conditions that exist in that area—conditions that present the implementation of comprehensive education, despite the declared desire of all the parents and of the local authority to implement it—will he give the House some idea what priorities may be given to ensure that resources are available to implement comprehensive education throughout my constituency?

We shall announce shortly the Gwent LEA's allocation for school building in 1975–76. The visit that I made with my hon. Friend to Gwent and to his constituency to see the conditions of the schools about which he has shown a deep concern for a long time is still a very clear memory. He will recall, however, that I said that these were times of financial stringency. Nor did I at that time make any promises except to say that the Government would make available the money to enable the Pontypool area to go fully comprehensive and to have schools really fit for all the children in my hon. Friend's constituency.

Noise Contour Map (Cardiff)


asked the Secretary of State for Wales when the noise contour map of Eastern Avenue, Cardiff, will be ready so that claims for compensation may be lodged under the Land Compensation Act 1973.

Provisional noise maps for this scheme are expected to be published this month. This should enable the determination of claims for compensation for injurious affection to proceed.

I welcome that answer. How soon can these claims be met? Will the Minister ensure that individuals who have moved house from the affected areas but still have valid claims are kept informed of their rights?

We are well aware of the interest of householders and those affected by this matter. Outstanding claims are a matter for the district valuer and the owners of the properties concerned. There have been difficulties in obtaining noise insulation agents, because of the refusal of local authorities to accept this work as agents of the Welsh Office, but we have overcome those difficulties by the appointment of the National Building Agency.

Eec Commission (Minister's Visit)


asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the visit of the Under-Secretary of State to the EEC Commission.

I had valuable discussions in both Brussels and Luxembourg dealing in particular with ECSC housing assistance and the rôle of the Welsh Development Agency in relation to institutions of the European Community.

Does the Minister accept, from his studies and from ours last week, in Brussels, that the social and regional policy of the Community lags far behind its industrial and competition policy, and that therefore the effects of industrial centralisation on Wales could be disastrous? Is it not therefore right that the Welsh people should be allowed to express their view separately in the coming referendum on membership?

One of the most fundamental features of the renegotiation undertaken by this Government is the question of regional aid and the right of the British people to decide for themselves whether they wish to stay in the EEC. The referendum will decide this latter point. Our renegotiations will make considerable progress towards satisfying our needs in regional terms.

In view of the disquiet in Wales some months ago, which arose from a suspicion that some Government Departments, for perverse reasons, were not fully utilising the opportunities and moneys which existed in the EEC, will the Minister ensure that his right hon. Friends know that the people of Wales expect the Government to seize such opportunities on behalf of Wales with vigour?

One readily acknowledges that during the renegotiation period all Government Departments are getting what they can for Wales from the Common Market pot, but does the Minister consider that it will be possible to renegotiate the geographical location of Wales so that we can take advantage of a centralised market, if, unfortunately, we have to stay in the EEC?

I doubt whether even our powerful renegotiation team can achieve that. The aim of renegotiation is to ensure that the successful regional policies followed by Labour Governments will be able to continue within the EEC if the British people decide that we should stay in.

Does the Minister agree that the Departments of Trade and Industry have not applied for the various grants which could be available for Wales from the EEC? Does he accept that the regional policy agreed at the summit meeting and at recent meetings of the Council of Ministers will be administered to the advantage of Wales in the coming months and years?

I am sure that the Secretary of State for Industry would deny some of those remarks. Considerable progress has been made on the regional fund. It is true that, unlike the previous Conservative Government, we have treated renegotiation as a serious defence of the interests of both Britain and Wales.

Dangerous Manufacturing Processes


asked the Secretary for State for Wales what steps he has taken, following the Flixborough disaster, designed to avoid housing development in the vicinity of factories and other establishments engaged with processes which could prove dangerous; and if he will make a statement.

Welsh Office Circular 162/74, which was issued shortly after the Flixborough disaster, gave advice to local planning authorities on these problems.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the great concern about this in parts of my constituency, in Barry and at Sully, where I live? Without questioning him in detail about a recent case affecting Sully, may I ask for a general assurance that, in all decisions by the Secretary of State, this kind of consideration is borne in mind before any decision is made?

The hon. Gentleman refers to a case in his constituency. That decision was made after a public inquiry, at which the objectors made no reference to the presence of factories which might give rise to risks. However, we naturally take into account information received on this point.

Surely the Minister is aware that the presence of a number of possibly dangerous factories is a matter of general knowledge in the area. Is he now saying that no note was taken of this consideration when the decision was made?

When dealing with these planning inquiries, the Secretary of State can deal only with the matters before him and which were brought before the inquiry. At the inquiry, no objection was raised on the grounds to which the hon. Gentleman has referred.



asked the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he is taking to reduce unemployment in Wales.

The Government's policies are designed to protect and create jobs in Wales.

With unemployment in Wales currently at 4·2 per cent.—higher than at any time last year or the year before—the Secretary of State will, I am sure, appreciate our concern, but is he aware that the biggest discouragement to employment in Wales are the provisions of the Industry Bill, the capital transfer tax and the so-called Employment Protection Bill?

I suspect that the hon. Member is living in an entirely different world. What is wanted in Wales—and what has been lacking, year after year—is new investment. I believe that by our proposals under the Industry Bill and for the National Enterprise Board and the Welsh Development Agency, we shall be able to provide the jobs that are so badly needed in Wales.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend foresee the agency having a significant effect on unemployment in Wales? If so, what advice will he give Opposition Members when that legislation comes before the House?

I shall be extremely surprised if Members of the Conservative Party go into the Lobby against the Welsh Development Agency. Whatever they may think about particular components of the Bill, because of their own dogmatic approach, they will know in their hearts that this is the only way of solving comprehensively the problems of Wales, and that the great problem today is the unemployment situation that we have inherited—high double figures over a number of years and so little done by the Conservative Party. An illustration is the programme of advance factories that we have brought into Wales, when there were so few in the time of the Conservative Party.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there are vacant nursery factories in Cardinganshire and that it is very difficult to entice industrialists to Ceredigion? We have no railways links with England, and our road communications are bad. Will he assure us that he will spend more in the next five years on road communications into Mid-Wales?

Road communications are important, and I have a personal interest so far as Mid-Wales goes, since I live there. However, although some advance and nursery factories will not be occupied from time to time, it is the whole object of the exercise to ensure that factories are constructed to meet the needs of industrialists, so that we can instantly provide opportunities for industry to expand. The hon. Gentleman will know that our programme of 330,000 square feet of advance factory space last year, compared with a total of 400,000 in three and a half years of the previous Government, is a proud record, and I will continue in that vein.

Local Government


asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he considers that it is a probable or desirable consequence of the creation of the Welsh Assembly that there should be a restructuring of Welsh local government on the basis of a unitary system.

The Government's proposals for devolution do not involve the reorganisation of local government.

Is not the startling increase in rates foreseen for this year due in part at least to the duplication arising from the present structure? If we are to avoid over-government in Wales, does not my hon. Friend agree that there is a need for a re-examination now—before loyalties get too fixed—of the structure of Welsh local government?

The creation of a Welsh elected assembly is not in any sense meant to be an additional local government tier. Its aim is to bring central Government nearer to the people. At present local government has enough difficulties, without any more thoughts of reorganisation.

Civil Service

Non-Industrial Staff


asked the Minister for the Civil Service what study has been made with a view to introducing incentive schemes into the non-industrial Civil Service.

The development of suitable incentives is a continuing element in the management of the non-industrial Civil Service. Information about the incentives offered in the private sector is currently being collected by the Pay Research Unit and I shall consider the matter further when this information is available.

Does the Minister agree that there is need now for a really imaginative widespread scheme which could increase incomes, job satisfaction and efficiency and, perhaps, reduce numbers as well?

The Department is constantly aware of the need to examine incentives. We do not agree entirely that financial incentives are the only means of increasing productivity. As the hon. Gentleman rightly indicated, job satisfaction and other factors are equally important.

Will the Minister give an assurance that there will be no productivity scheme which will provide incentives for VAT inspectors to harass and intimidate small traders?


asked the Minister for the Civil Service what were the numbers of non-industrial civil servants in the United Kingdom on 1st January 1975, 1st January 1974, 1st January 1973 and 1st January 1972, respectively.


asked the Minister for the Civil Service what have been the annual increases or decreases in each of the last four years in the number of non-industrial civil servants.

The numbers in each case were: 1972, 504,000—an increase of 5,000; 1973, 504,000—no change; 1974, 511,000—an increase of 7,000; 1975, 517,000—an increase of 6,000.

Bearing in mind the increase in the number of non-industrial civil servants which that reply reveals, and also the fact that there have been 30,000 transfers out and only 10,000 transfers in during the period, will the Minister say what is the Government's policy in regard to the future numbers of civil servants who will be administering our country?

The Government's policy in regard to the number of civil servants will be decided on the policies and administrative burdens which this Parliament gives the Civil Service to undertake.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the assemblies to which he has been referring as being set up in Wales and Scotland will require an enormous increase in the Civil Service employment force, under whatever guise it appears, and that that will mean considerable cost for either the people of Scotland and Wales or the people of the United Kingdom in general?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is one of the factors which the House will take into consideration in its approach to the policy on devolution.



asked the Minister for the Civil Service what steps are being taken by the Civil Service Department to facilitate the implementation of the Government's proposals for devolution to Scotland and Wales.

My Department is playing a full part in helping to work out and implement the administrative arrangements to support the measures of devolution to Scotland and Wales which are finally agreed.

Does the Minister accept that if devolution to Scotland is to be successful it will be necessary, at the very least, for the existing Civil Service Departments at St. Andrew's House to be put under the authority of the new Scottish Assembly?

I am mindful of the hon. Gentleman's long-term interest in this subject. I hope that he will accept that it would be premature to reach a firm view of the supporting administrative arrangements which are required for devolution until a clear picture has emerged of the constitutional framework within which the Scottish and Welsh Assemblies will discharge their respective functions.

What do the civil servants' unions in the first division of the Civil Service say about being subjected to a Scottish Assembly?

I can assure my hon. Friend that preliminary discussions are currently proceeding with the National Staff Side and the Departmental Whitley Staff Sides on administrative arrangements which may be involved by the devolution policies of the Government in respect of Scotland and Wales.

Has the Minister given consideration to the implementation of the administrative changes which will be necessary when Scotland gets full self-government and not just devolution?

I have indicated that until such time as the constitutional framework is determined by Parliament it would be premature to determine the administrative framework.

Does my hon. Friend agree that after the establishment of assemblies in Cardiff and Edinburgh, it is very important that there should continue to be interchangeability as between civil servants in Whitehall, Edinburgh and Cardiff?

That is a very important point. The interests of civil servants will no doubt receive detailed consideration by the House in its consideration of this issue.

Northern Region


asked the Minister for the Civil Service what further plans he has for the dispersal of Civil Service employment to the Northern Region.

The programme announced by the Lord President on 30th July last involves the dispersal of nearly 4,000 posts from London to the Northern Region and the setting up, subject to parliamentary approval, of a child allowance scheme centre in Washington New Town, comprising about 2,000 posts. There are no plans for further dispersal of Civil Service work to the Northern Region at present.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but when is the child allowance scheme office likely to be opened at Washington New Town, in my constituency? Does he not accept that far more tax work could be dispersed to the development areas?

I certainly accept the urgency of dispersing civil servants to the Northern Region, but the individual questions which my hon. Friend has now put are really questions for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Social Services.

Will the Minister bear in mind that the forced dispersal of civil servants without adequate consultation would go against the spirit of worker participation?

Yes. I certainly give my hon. Friend the assurance that there will be full and adequate consultation, both with the National Staff Side and with the Departmental Staff Sides of the individual Departments concerned.

"Civil Servants And Change" (Report)


asked the Minister for the Civil Service what steps he proposes to take to implement the proposals for action by his Department set out in the report "Civil Servants and Change".

My officials are already working out the way forward on the measures indicated in the report, including the strengthening of line management, a review of the administration of staff rules, and improved interdepartmental promotion opportunities. The Civil Service Department will also be assisting Departments, as appropriate, in their evaluation of their own domestic follow-up programmes. Work is continuing in areas where results have already been achieved, including flexible working hours, job satisfaction studies, and the office improvement programme.

Will my hon. Friend pay particular attention to the proposal that artificial barriers to the promotion of technically qualified and specialist staff—which I note his Department now admits to exist—should be removed, and will he report progress to the House?

My hon. Friend has a great knowledge of this matter. I assure him that the Civil Service Department is working to remove the artificial barriers to which he has referred in order to reach the general objective of improved unified grading.

Will my hon. Friend agree to change the conditions of employment of civil servants so that they can be given paid absence from work to the same extent as Sir Christopher Soames, so that they may take part in the EEC referendum campaign?

I have no responsibility for the conditions under which Sir Christopher Soames is at present employed.

Accountancy Service


asked the Minister for the Civil Service if he has yet appointed a head of profession of the Accountancy Service in the Civil Service; and if he will make a statement.

No appointment has yet been made of a head of the Government Accountancy Service. The recent advertisements did not produce a suitable candidate but it remains the intention to fill the post.

Is the Minister aware that this matter has been hanging fire ever since the Melville-Burney Report in 1973, and that there is a pressing need for revision of the Treasury's rules for accounting, which has been hanging fire since 1873?

I certainly accept the urgency of the points made by the hon. Gentleman. I assure him that discussions are currently proceeding with representatives of the profession concerned to see whether we can identify a possible area in which we can get men of the requisite talents and abilities to fill these posts.

Scottish Assembly


asked the Minister for the Civil Service what consultations he has had with the Civil Service unions and the First Minister of the Civil Service on the proposal to subject civil servants in Scotland to a Scottish Assembly.

No decisions have yet been reached on the supporting administrative arrangements for devolution to a Scottish Assembly. There have been preliminary discussions between the officials and staff sides at both national and departmental level on the implications of devolution for the Civil Service and the staff associations have been assured that there will be full consultations with them on this.

Is there a clear undertaking that at all stages there will be discussions?

I am happy to give my hon. Friend the undertaking that as far as practicable I shall seek to ensure that adequate and full discussion is afforded the staff at each stage of the discussion of the administrative arrangements which will flow from devolution.

House Of Commons

Members' Interests


asked the Lord President of the Council when he intends to publish Her Majesty's Government's proposals on the compulsory declaration of Members' outside financial interests.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons
(Mr. Edward Short)

The Government's views on the proposals made last month in the report by the Select Committee on Members' Interests (Declaration) will be made known as soon as possible. If at all possible I shall arrange for a debate on this report before Easter.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that when the Government put forward their proposals they will include proposals to make compulsory the declaration of specific amounts of cash that are paid to Members of Parliament in pursuance of outside interests? Will he further extend the provisions to include Lobby correspondents and also the Chamber of Parliament? Unless that is done the proposal will be meaningless.

On the first point, I do not propose to recommend the House to go any further than the Select Committee has proposed. On the second point, the Select Committee is quite free now to consider Lobby journalists or anybody else if it wishes to do so.

Does not the Lord President agree that it would be desirable to discuss the whole question of Members' interests alongside, if not at the same time as, the consideration of the report of the Boyle Committee into Members' remuneration? The two are linked and it would be desirable to consider them as one subject and not completely separately.

That is a point of view that had not occurred to me. I shall consider it. Probably the majority of Members will wish the report on Members' interests to be taken before the report of the Boyle Committee is likely to be available. It may be some months before the Boyle Committee reports, because the committee is carrying out a major review.

Statutory Instruments (Debates)


asked the Lord President of the Council how many statutory instruments came into force in 1974; and of these how many were debated by the House or by Standing Committees.

I understand that the number of statutory instruments that came into force during the calendar year 1974 was 2,399. Of these, 51 were debated by Standing Committees and 63 by the House.

Do not those figures show that we debated a relatively small proportion of the total number of statutory instruments? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the comparison that his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary made between the situation regarding our own domestic statutory instruments and EEC documents, when the right hon. Gentleman pointed out that in connection with the latter we are in the process in our existing arrangements of encompassing the Government around with a greater degree of parliamentary control than would otherwise be the case?

That is a point on the EEC documents. As for the others, we now have two Committees—the Scrutiny Committee and the Merits Committee. I think that the House has found this of great advantage, because the Scrutiny Committee recommends the ones to be discussed and the Merits Committee has enabled many more to be discussed than would otherwise have been found time for in the parliamentary programme.



asked the Lord President of the Council what representations he has had from official bodies in Scotland concerning the Government's proposals for devolution.

The White Paper published in September last year indicated that written representations were received from over 60 organisations in Scotland and that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and his colleagues subsequently held a series of discussions with some of these bodies.

Is the Lord President aware, particularly in the light of his recent visit, of a growing body of opinion in Scotland which argues that the Government should either proceed with the maximum degree of devolution or else not touch the subject, and that the one thing we do not want is the façade of devolution at great public expense?

The hon. Gentleman will have read the Government's White Paper of last September. I would hardly say that that was the façade of devolution. We are proposing that there should be executive and legislative devolution to Scotland—legislative devolution in the fields in which Scotland now has its own legislation.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that one of the most important written statements was a Labour Party policy statement just before the election which said that as well as legislative devolution there would be substantial executive devolution of powers over trade and industry?

That was a very important document. This weekend we have had an equally important document—one of the best documents we have had on this subject—from the Scottish Trades Union Congress.

Eec Membership (Referendum)


asked the Lord President of the Council whether he is satisfied with the progress he has made in carrying out his special responsibilities in connection with the forthcoming EEC referendum; and whether he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. The White Paper on the referendum was published on 26th February.

Is the Lord President aware that in the White Paper to which he has referred it is made clear that it is the Government's present intention that those who are away on holiday when the referendum takes place will be disfranchised? Is he aware also that Mr. Humphrey Taylor, who runs one of our leading polling organisations, has estimated that if the referendum were held in the latter half of June, which is the Government's present intention, over 2 million people would be so disfranchised and that if it were to be held later in the summer, which may well be the case, anything up to 5 million people would be disfranchised?

Would not that be a scandal? If this unique test of public opinion is to be what it sets out to be, is it not essential that postal or proxy votes should be given to those people who will be away on holiday when the referendum takes place?

The Government's aim has been to make the arrangements as fair as possible. We have tried to adhere as far as we can to the normal rules for parliamentary elections, where people who are on holiday do not get a postal vote. However, I have gone into the question of local holidays very carefully. I think that in the third week of June there are only two towns in the country where local holiday weeks will be held. Nevertheless, I agree that there will be some people on holiday.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the many problems confronting citizens of the United Kingdom if they are away on holiday in parts of the Middle East, from which region I had the experience of posting a message home, which arrived 16 days later? In such a case would not the postal vote for those on holiday be ridiculous?

No, I do not think that it would be ridiculous. I think that this is a matter which, in the broader context of our parliamentary practice, should be considered by Mr. Speaker's Conference, with a view to a recommendation being made. As for the referendum, all that we are proposing to do is to transplant the machinery and the mechanics of the normal electoral law into the referendum.

Apart from the count, I agree, as to which we are willing to listen to the views of the House. As for the rest, we are proposing to use the normal rules.


asked the Lord President of the Council what consultations he held with groups outside Parliament in preparing the Government's White Paper on the conduct of the referendum on British membership of the EEC.

I had discussions with representatives of the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Parties, the European Movement and the National Referendum Campaign Committee.

Will the Lord President now consult Members of the House about the parliamentary timetable during the proposed referendum campaign? The Government are trying to arrange a national debate throughout the country on a vital issue. Would it not be the final devaluation of Parliament if we were not able to take part in that campaign in our constituencies simply because the Government were denying a referendum recess?

The Question is about people outside Parliament who were consulted. I also consulted all parties, including all the minor parties, inside the House, so I consulted many people.

Does the Lord President agree that in trying to make the referendum as much like a General Election as possible there is considerable merit in declaring the result not nationally but constituency by constituency?

I think that there is merit both ways. The Government felt that from the point of view of national unity the balance came down on the side of counting the votes nationally. However, there are two points of view about it.

The right hon. Gentleman certainly consulted the other parties in the House. I gladly bear witness to that fact. However, is he aware that it is quite another matter to claim that he accepted our advice? He did nothing of the kind. I hope that he will afford Members of Parliament every opportunity to take part in the debate in the country. That will have implications for the Government's programme.

If the right hon. Gentleman will read the Official Report tomorrow he will see that I said no such thing. All I said was that I consulted. I shall try as far as possible to meet the wishes of all the groups I consulted, but I have not met everybody or heard all the points which they would like to put to me. I have discussed this matter with the right hon. Gentleman and with many other hon. Members. Certainly when one does this it is not possible to meet everybody's wishes.

London Underground (Accident)

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the train crash at Moorgate on Friday in which a number of people were killed.

Yes, Sir. At 08.48 on Friday 28th February a southbound train on the Highbury branch of the Northern Line of London Transport Railways overran the platform at Moorgate at speed and came into heavy collision with the buffer stops at the end of a short extension tunnel into which the first two-and-a-half cars of the six-car train became telescoped and impacted.

I much regret to have to inform the House that it is feared that altogether about 40 passengers and the driver of the train lost their lives. The bodies of 26 passengers have been identified and a further 16 persons are at present listed as missing. A further 76 passengers were admitted to hospital, and of these 42 have been discharged.

I am sure that the House will wish to join my colleagues in the Government and myself in expressing our sympathy with the relatives of those who lost their lives and best wishes for a speedy recovery to those who were injured.

I would like, too, to pay a tribute, in which I am sure all hon. Members will wish to join, to the work of the emergency services—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—the police, the fire brigade, and the ambulance and medical services—and to London Transport's own staff who are carrying out the rescue and recovery operations with skill and devotion under extremely difficult conditions. The recovery of the bodies of the dead is not expected to be completed before Wednesday.

I have ordered a public inquiry into the circumstances of the accident. It will be conducted by the Chief Inspecting Officer of Railways and will be opened as soon as possible.

On behalf of all those who live and work in the City of London and Westminster, may I associate myself and my constituents with the condolences which the Minister has expressed to the relatives of those who were killed, and extend our best wishes to those who were injured? May I say, too, how glad we all are to hear the right hon. Gentleman's praise for the emergency services. In this terrible disaster, their achievement is really beyond praise and should be a source of pride to everyone in London.

May I also thank the right hon. Gentleman for his speedy announcement of the establishment of an inquiry. This, I am sure, is the best thing to do. Will he assure the House that this inquiry, as well as looking into the specific circumstances of this tragedy, will also inquire into the servicing procedures in London Transport? Has he any information to give the House about the servicing of the rolling stock involved on this occasion?

Can the right hon. Gentleman also assure us that the inquiry will look into the question of crowding on Underground trains? On London Transport buses there are regulations about the number of people who may stand in a bus at any given time. Does the right hon. Gentleman think that this would be desirable on the Underground? Can he also say how long the inquiry's work is likely to take?

Finally, would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that, despite this great tragedy, London Transport has a safety record which is second to none, and that it would be most unfortunate if this terrible incident should cast doubt in the minds of people about the safety or the London Transport system?

I am very much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for his kind words about the emergency services. I certainly agree with him that they are beyond praise. What one may not fully realise—it is still going on—is the desperate job of clearing up the wreckage of this appalling accident. I am sure that the thoughts of the House go to my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, Central (Mr. Grant), particularly because many of his constituents were involved, and to others whose constituents have been injured and killed in this appalling affair.

We shall set up an inquiry as soon as possible, when all relevant matters will be considered. It will, of course, be open to members of the public to appear and raise these questions. It is unwise and irresponsible to speculate on the causes of the accident, not least because the engine has not yet been recovered from the wreckage. Certainly we shall press ahead as fast as possible. I am sure that the House will want to know the conclusions following any recommendations which may be made.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that the most important requirement now for the families concerned is skilled help and assistance, and skilled legal advice, on questions of compensation? Will my right hon. Friend undertake to confer with his ministerial colleagues to ensure that the families of all concerned receive assistance? Does he agree that this tragedy underlines the need for a disaster unit to be set up by the Government, not to duplicate the work of the rescue teams but to get this kind of instant skilled assistance to the families?

I think my hon. Friend's point about a disaster unit is rather wider than the scope of this Question, but certainly I will draw my right hon. Friend's attention to my hon. Friend's concern in this context.

I understand that already the Greater London Council and London Transport are giving thought to ensuring proper compensation, but it is too early yet to have a definitive statement. I will certainly see that this matter is pursued.

May I associate myself and my right hon. and hon. Friends with the observations of the Minister and of my hon. Friend the Member for the City of London and Westminster, South (Mr. Tugendhat)?

May I press the Minister on two matters? Will he accept that one of the most important aspects is to reassure the travelling public on the safety record of London Transport? It is 21 years since the last serious accident, and I believe that in 100 years there has been no failure of the braking system similar to that which may have caused this sort of accident.

There is one other matter which necessitates a speedy report from this inquiry. I refer to the sort of Press speculation that we are already reading about as to the cause of the accident. Would the right hon. Gentleman confirm that Government financial assistance will be made available if it is required in connection with safety regulations? I appreciate that nobody would advocate that overnight we could fully automate every line in London like the Victoria Line, but there must be a case for looking carefully at the trip wire automatic braking system being installed at every station.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the absolutely unparalleled safety record of London Transport. I believe there have been only three accidents involving death to passengers since 1945, and nothing in the history of London Transport on the appalling scale of the present disaster. London Transport can rest on a very fine record.

The hon. Gentleman himself was a little guilty of speculation when he referred to an accident due to a braking fault. We still do not know, and we shall not know for some considerable time, what was the cause of the accident, not least because the wreckage of the front of the train, as I said, may not be recovered until Wednesday.

We shall certainly examine any recommendations or lessons which appear to be right following the inquiry, but it would be too early to talk about particular automatic or other safety devices. Arising from what the hon. Member said, there was an accident at Tooting about four or five years ago when a train driver was killed in an empty train because he went into a reversing tunnel, but that was a totally different situation from the situation which we are now discussing.

May I associate myself with the sympathy expressed by the Minister to the relatives of those killed and injured in this terrible tragedy?

May I press my right hon. Friend a little further on the question of compensation? There is already some concern in the Wood Green constituency, from which many of the killed and injured came, about the problems of those who lost relatives who were the main financial support of their families. London Transport has said that it will consider all legitimate claims, but there is likely to be considerable financial hardship beyond that. Has my right hon. Friend any means of launching a disaster fund to provide financial help to supplement whatever London Transport can do?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend. We shall consider what she has said. I think that some discussion has already taken place about the possibility of a disaster fund. London Transport has undertaken to pay compensation on all legitimate claims, and I am not sure how much further one can go beyond that. As I say, it is too early yet to get down to precise details, but I shall certainly bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said.

I, too, associate myself with the Minister's expressions of sympathy to the victims of this terrible accident and to the relatives of those who lost their lives, and I add my thanks to the emergency services, especially since between a quarter and a fifth of the named victims come from my constituency.

I urge the Minister to bear in mind that we want the matter of compensation to be dealt with speedily and not to be bogged down in legalistic argument on questions of negligence. Further, while the inquiry is in progress, will the Minister ensure that particular regard is had to a fact which I have been pressing on London Transport for some time; namely, that the equipment on the Northern Line is now some 40 years old, and the fiscal policies of the Greater London Council have not been conducive towards replacement of that stock?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that that was possibly a cause of the accident.

I think that the House would be wise to await the inquiry, not least because some important evidence which will have to be examined has not yet been extracted from the tunnel. On the question of compensation, I appreciate the concern on both sides of the House that this matter should be dealt with generously and as humanely and speedily as possible. While the prime responsibility lies with the Greater London Council and London Transport, we shall certainly do all we can to try to achieve those objectives.

As one who spent many years on British Rail before becoming a Member of the House, and whose job it was on occasion to find out all the facts regarding faults, derailments and so on, I should like my right hon. Friend's assurance that the inquiry will be far-reaching and will ascertain all the facts that it is possible to find or that any hon. Member could wish to have found. Further, will my right hon. Friend agree that some of the unskilled speculation about the causes of the crash does nothing but harm? Moreover, was it not rather distressing to see the young guard on the train being interviewed on television at a time when, quite frankly, that ought not to have been allowed, and it was dangerous and undesirable in its possible effect on any future inquiry?

I am sure that there is great support for what my hon. Friend says, but neither my right hon. Friends nor I have any control over the media in these matters. All I could do was what I did, which was to refuse to participate in the exercise.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that the House wishes him to get the inquiry completed as soon as possible, because a lot of reassurance is needed, and, further, that a statement such as that attributed to London Transport—that the rolling stock, while being unreliable, was not unsafe—is the sort of statement which, if genuinely made by London Transport, is not at all helpful and London Transport ought to be told not to make it?

I think that we all agree that in these desperately difficult circumstances it would have been wiser if many people had said less than they did. I shall certainly draw the hon. Gentleman's observation to the attention of those concerned. As to the timing of the inquiry, I think that the public hearing should be relatively short, but I am sure that the House will want it to be thorough, and it may well involve considerable testing of equipment, brakes and the rest. I am sure that the House will want a thorough job done as well as one done as speedily as possible.

Glasgow Refuse Disposal (Drivers' Dispute)

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I shall make a statement on the strike by the drivers of Glasgow Corporation refuse vehicles.

The drivers have been on strike since 13th January, seeking a further pay increase. The strike is unofficial. It has resulted in the accumulation of large amounts of uncollected refuse in the City.

The wages of local authority drivers throughout Great Britain are negotiated in the National Joint Council for local authorities' services. Agreement on a new annual wage settlement was reached in the National Joint Council on 7th November, only four months ago, giving the drivers an increase of £7·78—including consolidation of threshold payments. That agreement envisaged that there would be further discussions on the unions' claim for a review of the grading structure. Last Thursday, an offer was made to increase the pay of the local authority grades, which include the Glasgow drivers. This was rejected. I understand that the local authority employers are considering asking the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service for its assistance in this national dispute and also the local disputes related to it.

The action is being taken against a nationally negotiated agreement. To treat separately with these drivers would threaten the agreed national negotiating procedures for all local authority workers, leading inevitably to leap-frogging claims and fragmented bargaining.

In these circumstances, I hope that the House will join with me, and with the Glasgow Corporation, in urging the drivers to return to normal working.

We are grateful for the small mercy that, after a seven-weeks strike which has resulted in appalling living conditions in some parts of Glasgow and the accumulation of 50,000 tons of refuse and a major health hazard, the Minister has at least made a statement. But will the right hon. Gentleman now answer four detailed questions?

First, as the concern now is primarily about the health hazard, will the Secretary of State invite his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to make a statement about what plans can be put in hand to help remove from Glasgow the 50,000 tons of rubbish? Second, as this strike is entirely unofficial, may we know whether the Transport and General Workers' Union, which has always supported the social contract, has condemned the strike and has urged the men to return to work?

Third, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Glasgow Corporation has said that, if it conceded this claim, it could add £10 million to its rates and, more important, open the floodgates to a further claim by 20,000 other employees of the local authority?

Fourth, will the right hon. Gentleman strongly urge the Secretary of State for Scotland to make an immediate statement on steps which can be taken, in consultation with Glasgow Corporation, to remove the rubbish, which is becoming a serious health hazard? Is it not utterly outrageous that, after seven weeks of strike, a request for an official visit from even a junior Minister to assess the situation for himself has been rejected, and this at a time when we had half the Cabinet at the strike-bound Glasgow Airport at the weekend?

I shall take, first, the hon. Gentleman's questions about the health hazard. The Secretary of State for Scotland has kept the closest watch on all the reports about health hazards. We could not agree with the terms in which the hon. Gentleman stated the matter, but, if action has to be taken about that, the Secretary of State for Scotland will take it, and I assume that the hon. Gentleman will therefore address to my right hon. Friend any further questions he may have on that subject.

I come to the hon. Gentleman's second question. The strike is unofficial, and I am sure that the Transport and General Workers' Union, which has from the beginning stated that the strike is unofficial, is doing everything in its power to try to bring the dispute to an end. The union wishes to see the end of it, just as the Government and Glasgow Corporation wish to see the end of it, and I am sure that the whole House should give support to Glasgow Corporation in seeking an end to the dispute as speedily as possible.

The figure which the hon. Gentleman gave has been mentioned by the Lord Provost. It is undoubtedly true that, if the claim were to be met in full, the figure would be very large, not only for Glasgow but for the whole country. The main fact here is that the whole matter must be settled in a national agreement, and if there were any attempt to settle it locally or by a specialised agreement applied to a particular area it could lead to all the difficulties which I described in my statement.

However uncomfortable it may be for the city of Glasgow, will my right hon. Friend lose no opportunity to point out that if he were to step into this kind of dispute, the dispute in Glasgow and that of the signalmen in London and every other dispute would end up with beer and sandwiches at Downing Street?

I am not sure about the beer and sandwiches—I have not been offered them recently—but I think that what my hon. Friend suggests is correct. It would be quite wrong to seek a settlement of this dispute by separate negotiations or in a separate way, and, as I tried to indicate as strongly as possible, we support the attitude which Glasgow Corporation has taken in the matter.

Is the Secretary of State aware that many people in Scotland feel that if the same amount of rubbish were piling up in Trafalgar Square as is piling up in Glasgow streets the whole mess would have been cleared up a lot sooner? Will he reconsider his earlier point about separate representations? Industrial problems in Scotland should be settled in Scotland, not remotely, in London.

Of course we are expecting this matter to be settled in Scotland, but the hon. Gentleman is quite wrong in his supposition that similar events have not occurred elsewhere. This is not only a Scottish strike. A similar strike for a similar claim is now taking place in Liverpool—and that partly disproves the hon. Member's claim. Some years ago there was comparable difficulty in London. The hon. Gentleman, like the rest of the House, must apply his mind to how we may get a solution. It would be no good having a solution for Glasgow if that disrupted the situation throughout the rest of the country. That would be no good for Glasgow or for anybody else.

While the situation in Glasgow is grim, the situation in Liverpool is deplorable. Will the Secretary of State take urgent action to enable local authorities to repay to ratepayers the money paid through the rates for the clearance of refuse when refuse is not cleared up after, say, four weeks?

I do not think that is a solution to the problem. The solution, as I have suggested, is that all of us in this House should seek to secure respect for the national agreement which was approved by all the trade unions concerned in the negotiations. The more that hon. Members representing seats in Glasgow, Liverpool or anywhere else join with me in that appeal, the sooner we shall deal with these troubles.

Will my right hon. Friend reassure the House that, while there is grave inconvenience caused to the citizens of Glasgow, at least the question of the health hazard is being kept under close scrutiny and that the medical authorities have stated at this moment that there is no health hazard?

We are all rather amazed that every week the Secretary of State has come to the House and made a statement such as the one he has just made. We understood that the social contract and the abolition of the Industrial Relations Act would make all sweet and reasonable in industry again. Would he not be serving the interests of the country better if, instead of making this sort of statement, he supported the statements made by his right hon. Friends the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Education, and perhaps began to tell the country some of the truths they have been telling instead of the pettiness with which he treats the House.

The right hon. Gentleman is wrong on every count, and I suppose that the House will not be surprised about that. I went to Glasgow at the weekend and I made a statement about the social contract in the discussions which we had with the Scottish Trades Union Congress. We held lengthy discussions on these matters. We discussed the social contract among other matters. In my speech on Saturday afternoon I referred in detail to the social contract and urged that everyone should abide by its guidelines as laid down by the TUC. I did it then just as I have done it in the House again today. What I said on Saturday, therefore, is perfectly consistent with what I said this afternoon.

Will my right hon. Friend assure both the official and the unofficial Opposition that we on the Labour side are just as concerned as they are, if not more so, about the accumulation of rubbish in the streets of Glasgow? Is he aware that we also deplore the rubbish that is emanating from the mouths of some members of the Opposition, particularly from the hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. Crawford), who would be better employed supporting my right hon. Friend's statement and trying to bring this serious situation to an end?

I am grateful for my hon. Friends promise of support. As for his reference to opposition from the other side of the House, we have scarcely noticed that opposition.

The Secretary of State is intolerably complacent about this whole matter. Just how many more weeks is he prepared to let this strike go on before he takes action? Will he delay over this strike in the same way that he has delayed over the weekly railway strike? Will he send one of his Ministers to Glasgow to report back about what action should be taken?

Of course the Government have the most complete and detailed reports about the situation in Glasgow, Liverpool and in the other parts of the country which might be affected. It is quite irresponsible for the hon. Gentleman to suggest that the Government do not have that kind of information. When he suggests, as he apparently did, that I should have intervened in the signalmen's strike, I am compelled to ask Conservative Members to consider the matter carefully. Is it the policy of the Opposition that the Government should intervene in a strike of that nature, because if it is, they are recommending a general recipe for industrial chaos in Britain.

Does the hon. Member wish to proceed with his application under Standing Order No. 9?

I wish first, Mr. Speaker, to ask a brief question of the Secretary of State. It involves two specific points. First, in view of the crisis in Glasgow, will the Secretary of State send a Minister either from his Department or from the Scottish Office to study the situation? Secondly, will he tell the people of Glasgow whether there are any contingency plans to deal with the accumulation of rubbish should a serious health hazard arise?

I replied to the hon. Member on these two aspects at the beginning of supplementary questions on the statement. It is highly irresponsible for the hon. Member to suggest that the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Scottish Office are not in the closest touch with the situation. They have been in the closest touch all the time, and for the hon. Gentleman to suggest anything different is merely to attempt to mislead the people of Glasgow. I do not imagine for a moment that he will succeed.

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration: namely,

"the need to remove 50,000 tons of rubbish which has accumulated in Glasgow in consequence of a dispute in Glasgow's cleansing department."
The matter is specific because there has been a seven-week strike in the city's cleansing department and an appalling accumulation of rubbish. Anyone with normal vision or a normal sense of smell will be aware that this matter is specific.

It is also an important matter because over the weekend the professor of community medicine of Glasgow University expressed the view that there was a serious health hazard, and there was a statement this morning from the sanitation department saying that it was expecting a large number of rats to appear in those areas where the refuse is concentrated.

This matter demands urgent attention because, in spite of the statement by the Secretary of State for Employment and Written Answers from the Secretary of State for Scotland, we have not the slightest idea whether there are any contingency plans to deal with this serious and deteriorating situation. In those circumstances I believe that I should be failing the people of Glasgow if I did not submit this application to you.

I have listened carefully to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) in his application for a debate under Standing Order No. 9 to discuss a specific and important matter that he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely,

"the need to remove 50,000 tons of rubbish which has accumulated in Glasgow in consequence of a dispute in Glasgow's cleansing department".
I have listened carefully to the hon. Member and to the exchanges which have taken place in the House today. I have to decide whether the situation would be alleviated by a debate in the House today or tomorrow. In my view the answer is "No".

Question Of Privilege

May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to consider words that have just appeared in a newspaper called the Travel Trade Gazette, which I feel you may be inclined to rule, when you have heard the facts, constitute a prima facie breach of privilege.

On the front page there is a headline saying:
"Commons attack angers ABTA".
There is then a banner headline reading
"MP, Walsh speculation".
Underneath there is a paragraph saying:
"There was speculation amongst the trade over Mrs. Dunwoody's motives for attacking ABTA. Several ABTA leaders cited her friendship with Mr. Dennis Walsh the former ABTA chairman who was forced to stand down from office."
In an opinion entitled
"Dunwoody Day"
there is a long passage of which I complain strongly, saying:
"Now comes the news that ABTA leaders are suspicious of the motives of a former Labour junior minister in a surprise attack in the House of Commons on the association.
It is being openly suggested that Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody was 'primed' well in advance of her speech by outside influences.
Cynics point to her close friendship with former ABTA chairman Dennis Walsh, now leading the other trade associations, the Institute of Travel Agents.
Mutterings of vested interests and power-politics are being bandied about. Nothing, of course, can be conclusively proved. But in situations such as this there is usually no smoke without fire.
The question being asked is: What is the real significance of the Dunwoody broadside?
Is she speaking for the holidaymaker at large when she claims they could eventually need protection from tour operator collapse by the intervention of a national government?
Or is she being used as a powerful pawn in a protracted battle of travel trade chess aimed at dethroning the present ABTA leadership?"
Apart from the fact that no one who knows me thinks of me as anyone's pawn, or cannot have been listening, I complain bitterly about the words in the article.

As the hon. Lady is relying on a statement in a newspaper, will she bring the paper to the Table?

Copy of newspaper handed in.

Orders Of The Day

Finance Bill

Not amended ( in the Committee) and as amended ( in the Standing Committee), considered.

4.5 p.m.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will remember that on Thursday a number of points of order were raised about the absence of facilities for hon. Members on both sides of the House to consider amendments that had then been tabled or were being tabled. You will also remember that the Leader of the House repeated a number of times his undertaking that all the material necessary for Members to consider the legislation would be made available in time. He repeated that time and time again in the hearing of many hon. Members.

On Friday we had occasion to raise the matter yet again. I did so, as reported at column 989 of Fridays Official Report, because by then it was clear that there was no print available to hon. Members of the amendments that had been tabled throughout Thursday, up until the close of play on Thursday. Moreover, no print has since been made available of amendments tabled on Friday, by the Government or Opposition side, to Part III. All that hon. Members have today is an Order Paper containing amendments to Parts I, II and IV. There does not exist a marshalled list, or any comprehensive list, of those tabled to Part III.

This is a serious state of affairs. It makes it impossible for proper consultation on that part of the Bill to take place.

The Government Deputy Chief Whip was also drawn into the matter, to his misfortune, on Friday. To try to rescue something from the wreck, he told the House that he would ensure that every hon. Member who had served on the Standing Committee would be supplied with at least a copy of the Xeroxed amendments, out of order and unmarshalled, that were available to about 30 hon. Members on Friday. I understand that that undertaking has not been fulfilled either. Although efforts were no doubt made by the Government, some of my hon. Friends did not receive even that inadequate summary of the amendments on Friday, Saturday or Monday, either at their home address or at their constituency address.

This is an intolerable state of affairs. I wish to find out from the Leader of the House, by raising this point of order, what excuses there are for this state of affairs and what remedy he proposes. We know that the printing was not taking place on Thursday. That is not sufficient excuse. Either the time table for the production of the amendments and for the consideration of the Bill was impossibly tight, or there may be some other reason for the failure to have these documents printed. The situation suggests that the social contract, of which we are told the capital transfer tax is an important part, is failing even to achieve its objective of securing continued activity by the Government's printers.

The House is entitled not only to a remedy but to an apology from the Leader of the House.

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons
(Mr. Edward Short)

At your suggestion, Mr. Speaker, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer put down a business motion for today. If the House is prepared to pass that motion, the undertaking I gave on Thursday will have been carried out.

Further to that point of order. Following the exchanges on Friday, the situation is even worse. My right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) and I went to the Government Chief Whip's office on Friday to find out where we could go on Saturday to obtain the amendments. It would not be fair to say that we were barred entry, because every door was wide open, but there was no one present. They had all departed, and there was not even a sign to say that they had gone for a tea break. Constant attempts on Friday and Saturday to find out were without avail. Now the final selection is not received until 1.45 p.m., which is without precedent.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Could you clarify the rule on the starring of amendments? I am aware that you generously said that today you would suspend the normal practice of not calling starred amendments, but the rule needs clarification. I tabled three amendments which appear starred on today's Notice Paper—Nos. 326, 327 and 328. They appeared on the photostat copy of the list of amendments which the Vote Office released on Friday. Therefore, I was surprised to find that on today's list they appear starred.

As I understand the rule, if amendments have already been released by the Vote Office, they should not appear starred on a subsequent list on a subsequent day. I also understand that this rule does not depend on whether the Notice Paper is printed, Roneoed, typed or copied by photostat, or whatever method is used for its presentation.

Clarification is needed, because on another occasion the Chair might not waive the rule whereby starred amendments are not normally selected, and as a result of amendments being starred the second time they appear on a Notice Paper released by the Vote Office their selection by the Chair might be prejudiced. I should be grateful, Mr. Speaker, if you would say whether I am correct in believing that the form of reproduction of the Notice Paper should not be material to whether an amendment is starred on a subsequent Notice Paper.

I shall go into the point the hon. Gentleman has made. I have completely disregarded whether or not amendments are starred today. I have selected amendments on merit, irrespective of whether or not they are starred.

As anxiety has understandably been expressed about printing, and in so far as printing by Her Majesty's Stationery Office falls within the ambit of my ministerial responsibilities, it might be in order for me to make a statement on the printting situation as it has affected the Stationery Office over the weekend.

It may be for the benefit of the House if I explain that 720 amendments have been tabled. The Notice Paper this morning contains 32 pages of marshalled amendments covering Clauses 1–18 and Schedules 1–3. Because of the complexity of the amendments and the time taken to select the relevant amendments for the marshalled list, the Stationery Office was not able to marshal more than 32 pages.

Five hundred sets of the first 60 pages of the unmarshalled amendments were delivered to the House this morning. Copies of the remaining amendments, covering a further 60 pages, are now available in the Vote Office.

Because of the complexity of the operation and the efforts devoted to producing a marshalled list of amendments for today's business, together with the volume of the amendments and the time-phasing of the tabling of amendments, this situation has produced a position where Her Majesty's Stationery Office was left with a task over the weekend beyond its capacity. I regret that copies of the final 60 pages were not available for the consideration of hon. Members this morning.

I think that the whole House will be grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his gallant attempt to take the blame in this difficult situation. No blame attaches to him. The trouble is that we are dealing with an intolerably complex operation and the Government simply have not been able to make arrangements in time for the House to consider this matter in an orderly fashion.

I take it—the Leader of the House can confirm or deny—that the situation that we have now reached means that it will be quite impossible for any of Part III to be taken until Thursday.

In that case the right hon. Gentleman is saying that the amendments to this vital part of the Bill will not be available to the House in time, which is certainly in conformity with the very bad habit that the right hon. Gentleman is now forcing on the House.

I put it to the Government once again that, in fairness to themselves and to Parliament, they should agree to withdraw the capital transfer tax and put it to a Select Committee so that it may be given reasonably mature consideration and not thrust down the throats of hon. Members in this unconsidered, inconsiderate, discourteous fashion. That would enable the right hon. Gentleman at least to salvage for himself and his Department some shreds of a reputation for doing things in a proper and civilised fashion.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether the views that the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Peyton) has just expressed to the House would have been different had he heard the statement by his right hon. and learned Friend the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer on the radio this morning, when he said that the aim of the Opposition in this operation was to stop this tax from reaching the statute book—in other words, there was no question of giving it mature consideration at any stage. Would his attitude have been somewhat different if he had known that, after making a fuss about the non-availability of amendments on Thursday, the Opposition tabled 100 pages of new amendments, nearly half of which were tabled between 10 o'clock at night and 1.45 in the morning?