asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how much money will be made available to the Herring Industry Board for the year 1980.

The board's levy on the sale of herring will provide it with a very modest revenue, probably less than £10,000. As regards the scheme of grants and loans for building and improving herring vessels which the board administers for the Government, it is our policy to provide a reasonable level of funds. In the financial year 1979–80 the expenditure is expected to be around £1·25 million. The provision for 1980–81 will clearly require to be considered carefully in the light of the structure of the industry.

As there is a total ban on herring fishing, is my right hon. Friend aware that fishermen who previously made application to the Herring Industry Board for grant and loan now find themselves forced to do so to the White Fish Authority? As that authority was granted only £1 million by my right hon. Friend's Department, is he aware that it is essential that the £1 million should be greatly increased, bearing in mind that last year over 1,652 applications for improvement were made by the fishing industry?

I share my hon. Friend's concern about the position in the industry. It is necessary for the preservation of stocks for the ban to continue until stocks have recovered. In considering provision for the coming year I shall take into account all that my hon. Friend has said.

Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to give the House any information about the allegations that the French are illegally catching herring in considerable quantities in EEC water?

I have seen the reports. Inquiries have been put in train through our usual departments to ascertain what truth there is in them.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any further information about allegations that the Grimsby boat, "The Grimsby Lady", a purse seiner, has been landing herring in two Danish ports? If we are to obtain reasonable finance for the herring industry, we must ensure that the herring ban is not broken by anybody, including ourselves.

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman. We have followed up every report that we have seen of unauthorised landings of herring whether in this country or abroad. I shall endeavour to obtain further information about the case referred to by the hon. Gentleman, and I shall write to him.

Will my right hon. Friend keep himself constantly informed about herring stocks in the North Sea so that as soon as possible he may obtain an allocation of herring for our fishermen?

I shall. However, as long as there is scientific advice to the effect that it is necessary to restrict fishing in this way we must heed that advice.

If the right hon. Gentleman is to make inquiries into allegations that have appeared in The Daily Telegraph, will he undertake that once he has completed the inquiries he will make a statement to the House? The charges against the French Government are quite serious—namely, that their trawlers are apparently breaking the clear EEC instruction that there shall be no herring fishing. Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that a statement will be made when the allegations have been denied or substantiated?

I appreciate what the hon. Gentleman says. First, we must ascertain the facts as far as we can. I shall find the best way I can of informing the House of the results of my inquiries.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he can now make a statement on the manner by which he proposes to finance the sale of council houses.

It is up to the prospective purchaser to arrange the funding of his purchase. If funds are not available from private sources, for example building societies, a local authority mortgage will be available to him.

Whatever the Minister's deeply held views on the matter may be, will he concede that the majority of local authorities are appalled at the prospect of having to sell newly constructed council houses at half price? Is he aware that when the Orkney housing committee considered his circular it had before it an estimate for eight council houses at £30,000 each? Does he seriously propose that when constructed these houses should be made available for sale at a loss of £15,000 each?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that when a local authority decides what rent to charge for any individual house the building cost is not taken into account. I have yet to hear any intelligent argument why the principles which are relevant for rent purposes should not also be relevant for sale purposes.

As the incentive to purchase a council house depends largely upon the person wishing to buy in an area where he has respectably behaved neighbours, will my hon. Friend assure us that, in spite of anything else he does, especially in the tenants' charter, he will do nothing which will make it more difficult for local governments to deal with antisocial tenants?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that important question. Last week we made it clear that local authority tenants in Scotland would for the first time receive security of tenure. We also indicated that there would be provision to enable the local authorities to deal reasonably with any special problem causing great concern to neighbours resulting from the conduct of one tenant living nearby.

The Minister must be aware that over the lifetime of a council house the rent paid by council tenants vastly exceeds the price paid by the purchaser of a private house. Surely he is being absurd in suggesting that by giving away council houses the councils are acting economically.

The hon. Gentleman misleads himself. He is looking at the capital burden on a house. He must not simply look at the original cost of constructing it. He must also take into account the cost of rehabilitation which, for example, in the case of Glasgow, is estimated to be £7,000 per house. The Opposition never take that important consideration into account.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that, in spite of the miserable approach by the Labour Party, there has been an extremely enthusiastic response from council house tenants in Scotland to his proposals and that it has come from the so-called bad areas just as much as the so-called good areas?

My hon. Friend is correct. Not only have many thousands of ordinary Scottish tenants sought to exercise this right, but at least 29 Scottish local authorities are providing for the right to buy. Only nine have refused to do so. That indicates that it is the local authorities as well as the tenants who support the principle of what the Government are doing and reject the rather Neanderthal view of the Opposition.

What does the Minister mean by saying that a local authority mortgage will be available? Is he saying that, apart from forcing local authorities to sell houses against their will, thereby making it impossible for them to carry out a sensible housing or housing management policy, he will also force them to finance sales?

If the right hon. Gentleman will consider the details of the question he asked he will realise that, if a local authority provides a mortgage for a house that is already owned by that local authority, there are no public expenditure implications. That is why no local authority sought to object to the proposal that local authorities would be required to provide a local authority mortgage if no other means of finance were available to the prospective tenant.

If I may clarify that, is the Minister saying that local authorities will be forced to supply local authority mortgages even if they do not wish to do so?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the operations of the Scottish Development Agency.

The relevant provisions of the Industry Bill, published yesterday, and the new industrial investment guidelines which we shall be issuing provide the basis for the Agency to operate more effectively.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the small business counselling services are a particularly important part of the work of the Agency? How many firms have taken advantage of this provision so far? Are there any plans to expand it?

Yes, Sir. The small businesses part of the Agency's functions is very important. We have plans to expand it. I cannot say off the cuff how many companies have sought help from this body, which has been in existence since before the formation of the Agency. I am sure that many hundreds of firms have taken advice from it.

Why did not the Minister publish the revised guidelines for the Agency when the Bill was published? As the Agency has been a paper tiger in relation to its investment in in- dustry, will not the Minister encourage it to spend more money on the provision of employment in Scotland rather than make money available for environmental improvements, as it is the jobs aspect that is becoming desperate in many areas?

The guidelines could not be published until the Bill had been published. The Bill gives the Agency powers to invest, but the guidelines lay down the principles under which the Government of the day wish those powers to be conducted. The Agency has our full support in investing in those cases where the jobs will be productive and viable and where no false hopes will be raised. People taking employment in companies that have these investments will know that they have a secure future.

Will the Minister ensure that nothing will be done to impede the successful efforts of the Agency to contribute to employment prospects, especially in areas of high unemployment? I refer to the policy of building new factories, investing in others and clearing away areas of dereliction, thus making our neighbourhoods more attractive to incoming industrialists.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. The purposes of the exercise, the Industry Bill and the guidelines, are to make the Agency operate more effectively in these spheres.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that one of the criticisms made of the present powers is that they may be used to assist one possibly inefficient firm and, as a result, undermine the competitive position of other efficient firms? Will he confirm that the new guidelines will take that point fully into account?

Yes, Sir. The existing guidelines require the Agency to ensure that its subsidiaries compete fairly in the market. I have no evidence to suggest that this is being abused. However, if my hon. Friend has any cause to think that that is happening I shall be obliged if he will write to me.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the redevelopment of the peripheral housing schemes in Glasgow; and if he will make available to Glasgow district council extra financial support to combat deprivation in these areas.

Glasgow district council is working with Strathclyde regional council to develop the comprehensive framework of action identified as needed for the peripheral housing estates in the report "Glasgow—Implications of Population Changes to 1983". The district council's capital expenditure allocations already take account of the specific problems of the city as a whole, and it is for the council to determine its spending priorities within them.

Does the Minister accept that there will be widespread cynicism and dismay at the suggestion that the present allocation of capital spending takes account of the problems of Glasgow? Is he aware that even now, as a result of the dramatic and drastic cuts in capital spending programmes enforced by the Government, the Glasgow district council is being forced to scrap much-needed rehabilitation and modernisation programmes in the peripheral schemes? That would totally destroy the morale of people who were expecting early action and have worked for a long time to have that action organised. Will the Minister give us some hope about the peripheral schemes? Will he please ensure that the money is forthcoming?

The hon. Gentleman should be aware, in representing a Glasgow constituency, that the needs of the city are, and have been for some time, recognised by successive Governments as deserving particular support. Glasgow receives, and will continue to receive, over a quarter of the total housing allocation to local authorities. Any hon. Member who is being reasonable about the matter will accept that that is a proper recognition of Glasgow's requirements.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the only cause for real dismay is the fact that the Labour Party once again has obtained control over Glasgow's affairs for the future?

I agree with my hon. Friend. It was significant, and an honourable and acceptable matter, that when the Conservative administration of Glasgow finally had to resign it was on the basis of trying to do the best deal for the public. The Labour Party will not be able to offer that.

Is the Minister aware that his statements today will not only dismay residents and tenants in the peripheral housing schemes but also anger them? There is considerable anger among the tenants of these schemes that environmental improvement schemes that have been on the ground for some time are now under threat of being axed by the Glasgow district council owing to the expenditure cuts being carried out and forced on them by the Government?

I disagree. The problem was caused by the previous Government making commitments when they had not provided the resources to meet them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has had with the Scottish Development Agency following his speech in the Scottish Grand Committee on 17 July; and if he will now make a statement on the Agency's policy towards direct investment in industry.

I have had full and helpful discussions with the Agency, and we have reached a very large measure of agreement on the form of the Agency's activities in the future. I hope to make an announcement shortly, when remaining points of detail are settled.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, bad as are the changes foreshadowed in the Industry Bill, much more damaging would be any attempt by the Government to curtail industrial investment in Scotland by the Agency? Surely he accepts that it would be doctrinaire madness to curtail investment at a time when there will be a massive slump in employment and investment in some of our major industries in Scotland.

When the hon. Gentleman discovers what we announce about the new guidelines, he will find that there is no discouragement whatever to the agency from investing in viable projects which will be helpful and produce good, solid jobs for the future.

Surely the Secretary of State would agree that the biggest problem now facing investment in Scotland is the stupid and reactionary decision of the Chancellor of the Exchequer yesterday to permit a complete and unprohibited outflow of capital. This was precisely the malaise in the 1950s and 1960s. Given that kind of haemorrhage, how does he exonerate his own behaviour in crippling the investment prospects of the SDA?

I have in no sense crippled the investment prospects of the SDA. As a matter of fact, it will have in the current year approximately 16 per cent. more to spend in real terms than it spent last year under the previous Government.

Following the question by my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrewshire, West (Mr. Buchan), would the Secretary of State care to indicate the value of the Agency's office in New York, in view of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's decision yesterday? How does the Secretary of State hope to induce direct investment into this country from the United States after such a decision? The transfer of funds will now be in the opposite direction. This is an insult to the Scottish people. What action did the Secretary of State take in the Cabinet on this matter?

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to ask a question about the announcement made yesterday by my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he will no doubt table a question to the Chancellor in the usual way. My hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North (Mr. Fletcher) has recently visited New York and tells me that the SDA's operations there are going extremely successfully.

Does not the Secretary of State's answer illustrate the sheer hypocrisy of the Secretary of State and his junior Minister in running around all over Scotland, seeking to spread hope where none now exists as a result of the actions of the Secretary of State on the Scottish Development Agency? How on earth can the Secretary of State justify reducing the investment capabilities of the SDA from £2 million to £1 million, and cutting its budget by £17 million?

If I had to choose between going round Scotland spreading hope and going round Scotland with the hon. Gentleman, spreading gloom, I am glad to say that I should choose the former of the two courses.

May I say in passing that it is unparliamentary to accuse anyone in this House of being a hypocrite. It is well known that there are no hypocrites here. We must find other words with which to express our emotions.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects next to meet the chairman of the South of Scotland Electricity Board.

I have no immediate plans for a further meeting with the chairman of the board, whom I saw last month.

Does the Secretary of State remember his Minister telling me, in a written answer on 20 July, that he would ask the electricity board chairman to write to me about the burning of imported coal in Scottish power stations? I am still awaiting a reply. Instead of turning a blind eye to the import of 100,000 tons of coal from places such as China, will the Secretary of State give us an assurance that he will fight in the Cabinet to ensure that his Government will go ahead with public investment in the Scottish coal industry, in places such as Musselburgh and the Stirlingshire and Clackmannan coalfield, where there are more than 300 million tons of indigenous coal?

The Government have a responsibility to ensure that the people in Scotland can be kept warm this winter. We have already told the National Coal Board that we will take in the power stations every lump of coal that it can mine this winter. If there is a shortfall from that, as there is, we are responsible for trying to import coal from elsewhere. It would be very remiss of us if we did not.

Since the Secretary of State is aware that the electricity board has stated that it will burn all the Scottish coal it can get this year, and bearing in mind that some of the new finds in Scotland are among the best and most exciting in the whole of the United Kingdom, will he, if he decides to meet the chairman of the board, discuss with him the question of the refurbishing of existing coal-fired power stations, and even discuss the question of building new coal-fired power stations? Is the Secretary of State aware that the power plant industry in Scotland would be very pleased if that kind of policy were pursued?

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for confirming what I said a moment ago, that we are prepared to burn every bit of coal that can be mined in Scotland this winter. All the matters to which he has referred will be discussed between me and the electricity board chairman in planning our future provision of electricity.

What is the stock position? There are rumours that in some cases it is down to two days. Will the Secretary of State take the opportunity of dispelling these rumours, if they are not true?

Although the stock position could be better, there is no truth in rumours such as that, and we expect to be able to get through the winter, in normal conditions, reasonably satisfactory.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that there must be something seriously wrong with output and productivity in Scottish coal mines if it is possible to import coal from the other side of the world and still save money in doing so?

I appreciate what my hon. Friend says. This is indeed something that the National Coal Board and the unions concerned are looking at very seriously.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to reach a decision as to whether he will recommend the use of the Royal Prerogative in relation to the case of ex-Police Sergeant Jamieson of Bo'ness.

I wrote to the hon. Gentleman on 28 September informing him that I had examined the case but found that there were no sufficient grounds to justify recommending the exercise of the Royal Prerogative in this case.

Will the Scottish Office consider holding an inquiry as to how well-experienced and respected police officers at Falkirk police station allowed three boys, allegedly victims of a brutal assault, to leave at 6 o'clock on a Sabbath morning to walk from Falkirk to Bo'ness?

I know the hon. Gentleman's very close concern with this question, which he has pursued very effectively, but I think that every possible inquiry about the background of the case has been thoroughly carried out. I do not think that there is much to be gained by any further inquiries at this stage.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his estimate of the reduction in expenditure which will be effected as a result of his cuts in public support for industrial and commercial development in Scotland.

In discussing public expenditure savings it is necessary to distinguish between planned expenditure and actual expenditure. In terms of planned expenditure, Scotland's share of the savings resulting from the announcement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry on 17 July could amount to £45 million over the next three years. In terms of actual expenditure on programmes under the control of my Department, substantially more public support is available for industrial and commercial development in Scotland in real terms this year than was actually spent last year under the previous Administration.

Does the Minister remember that in the past three months we have had an increase of 1,000 unemployed in Scotland? The figure now stands at 278,468. Will he bear in mind that the cuts in public expenditure will have an adverse effect in the public sector, particularly the steel industry, quite apart from the increase in VAT? Will he also bear in mind that the gloom in Scotland is being spread not by Labour Members but by small industrialists, who now find that those who claimed to be the champions of the small industrialists have departed from them? Will the Minister take his finger out and do something about it?

I have already told the hon. Gentleman that in real terms we shall be spending more this year on commercial and industrial development in Scotland than was spent last year. That should go some way towards satisfying his points.

Would my hon. Friend like to tell the House what is the expenditure of the Highlands and Islands Development Board in this year, and whether it represents an increase or a decrease?

I am happy to say that this year the Highlands and Islands Development Board will be able to spend £2½ million more than last year, because its budget has been increased to that extent.

In relation to industrial development in Scotland, why has the Scottish Economic Planning Department decided to give up the agency work on behalf of the European Investment Bank? Why is it that the small companies, with which the Minister professes to be so concerned, are now finding, when they make application to the Scottish Economic Planning Department, that their applications will not be considered because the Department is not taking any more applications? They are also being told that the Scottish Economic Planning Department does not know who will be doing the agency work on behalf of the European Investment Bank. What is going on in the Scottish Office at the moment?

The hon. Gentleman is raising a specific matter about which he should give the House notice, or certainly write to me, if he wants me to consider it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate the effect on unemployment of the reduction in status of the Girvan employment office area from special development area to development area status.

No, Sir. It is not practicable to isolate in this way the effect of regional policy changes for small local areas where employment prospects can be heavily influenced by individual industrial developments.

Is the Minister aware that, at a meeting which representatives of the local district council and I had with the Department of Industry, it emerged that two mistakes had been made with regard to factors affecting this area? The Department had used a seasonal unemployment level which was unusually low, and it also had wrong information about the possibility of a mine being sunk in the area. In view of these factors, the Department agreed to review the position. Will the Minister indicate when the review is likely to be completed and when I may expect an announcement whether this area is to have a change in its status?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that in July, when the initial announcement was made about the changes in regional policy, it was said that all areas which had been downgraded would be reviewed at the end of three years before the final decisions were taken. In that context, I take it that he is referring to the representations that he has made to the Department of Industry, all of which will be taken into account before a final decision is taken at the end of three years.

The Under-Secretary said that changes in status are to be reviewed. When will the special inquiry into the Aberdeen area begin work and how soon does he expect it to report?

As I said, there is a constant review of the changes in regional policy. The position in Aberdeen will be included in that review. The authorities in Aberdeen, as in other parts of Scotland, have been assured that the matter will be considered finally at the end of the period.

Is the Minister aware that his Department might have difficulty in isolating the effects of the changes in Girvan, but what is certain is that the downgrading of Edinburgh will have a massive and disastrous effect on the level of primary and industrial investment in that city in the years ahead. Surely, after all the statements that he and his colleagues made in Edinburgh about the Labour Government discriminating against Edinburgh in favour of Glasgow, it is time that they did something to reverse this decision.

The hon. Gentleman will know that the purpose of the exercise was to give maximum help to those areas of Scotland in greatest need. Scotland now has 37 per cent. of the population of special development areas in the United Kingdom compared with 30 per cent. previously, Comparing the position in Edinburgh with all its problems with Glasgow and the West of Scotland, we, and I as an Edinburgh Member, must accept that Glasgow needs the greater amount of aid, and that is what the policy is aimed at.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects next to be present at a meeting of the EEC Council of Ministers.

My noble Friend the Minister of State attended the last Council of Agriculture Ministers on 15 and 16 October and I intend to be present at the next Council of Fisheries Ministers which will take place on 29 October.

When the right hon. Gentleman meets the Council, will he draw its attention to the reports of landings of herring in Denmark and France, about which we heard in answer to an earlier question? Bearing in mind the permission for a 5 per cent. by-catch—even mackerel fishers can land 5 per cent. of herring—will he reconsider his decision to refuse permission for the one drift net fishing vessel still on the West coast of Scotland to proceed to catch a small quota by drift net fishing?

I have no doubt that some of the matters to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred are bound to be covered in formal or informal discussions which we shall have at the Council meeting.

How soon will the Secretary of State be able to pursue the question of seeking a change in the rules of the EEC regional fund to enable assistance to be given to those areas of Scotland which have been down-graded from development area status and which are as a consequence losing the aid which at present they are able to receive?

I appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's point. We are proceeding to discuss this matter with all concerned, but we have considerable time in which to do so. The changes in regional policy do not become fully effective for three years, and there will be a further review of the areas before that time. Therefore, there is time to get this matter straightened out.

Before my right hon. Friend attends the meeting to which he referred, will he and his colleagues undertake to lodge the strongest possible protest about the behaviour of the French Government in defying the order of the European Court regarding the import of foreign lamb? Will he also comment on the behaviour of British Socialist Members of the European Parliament who yesterday prevented a motion by a Conservative Member criticising the French Government from proceeding?

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and I have lost no opportunity of making clear our views on how the French have been dealing with sheepmeat, and we shall no doubt take another opportunity to do so next week.

Will the Secretary of State seek to persuade the Commission to widen the ambit of its proposed £10 million special integrated development plan so that it is not purely for the benefit of the Western Isles but is of benefit to other parts of the mainland of Scotland which suffer from similar problems of distance from markets and sparsity of population?

This is one of a number of measures put forward by the Commission to improve agricultural structures. We are still considering the implications of the package as a whole for the United Kingdom, and that is one of the matters that we are bearing in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the provision for residential care of mentally handicapped children in Scotland.

One can never be satisfied with the scale and nature of provision in this sector, but this is primarily a matter for decision by local authorities and health boards in the light of their assessment of need and of the resources available.

Does the Minister agree with the main conclusion of the Peters report on services for the mentally handicapped in Scotland that insufficient has been done to take care of those who are mentally handicapped in community care? Bearing in mind his passing of the buck to local authorities and health boards, will he assure the House today that, notwithstanding Government cuts, he will do his utmost to increase expenditure for the care of these vulnerable sections of the community who need help?

I accept the conclusions of the Peters report, but, as I said, if the resources are not available to implement such reports, we cannot do it at this stage.

Will be Minister confirm that, despite much talk about cuts in public expenditure, in terms of the Health Service in Scotland there are no cuts in this current year?

That is correct. We have said that the Health Service will be defended against expenditure economies. We have made it quite clear that that is our policy.

Does the Minister accept that when we refer to these sections of the community we all have a great responsibility because, in the main, they have no voice of their own? Therefore, will he assure the House that he will monitor the effects of the cuts in public expenditure to ensure that the resources are devoted to where he thinks they should be directed? Will he also indicate that the care of the mentally disadvantaged will be enhanced, not retarded?

Of course. It is also to be hoped that, when local authorities consider their commitments and priorities, those in the groups mentioned by the hon. Gentleman will be defended against adverse effects on them.

Does the Minister consider that we are at some disadvantage in being able to assess the problem because we do not have a register of the mentally handicapped similar to the register of the blind?

I accept that and I will look into it.

How can the Under-Secretary say that in some way he will defend the mentally handicapped in the community, when his colleague, the Minister for Social Security, has publicly told the disabled that they will have to bear their part of public expenditure cuts that are being used by this Government to redistribute social resources into the pockets of the rich and wealthy through the tax cuts?

Might I remind the hon. Member of what his colleague the then Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Government, said in 1976 when he made his expenditure economies:

"I am afraid that there is no way of reducing this gap without tightening our belts. It's no good any party promising enormous in creases"

"in Government expenditure. Our first job is to get the economy into some sort of balance again."

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the latest situation in the fishing industry.

Landings in Scotland so far this year are running at 20 per cent. below the corresponding level for last year. The total value of the fish taken is marginally below the value of last year while costs have risen, and I am very concerned about the difficulties currently faced by the fishing industry. The situation should improve as a result of the conservation and management measures we have taken, but the current uncertainties can be removed only by a satisfactory settlement of the common fisheries policy which we are urgently seeking.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Will he take this opportunity to give the House a categoric assurance that at the Dublin summit there will be no trade-off of British fishing interests against any other British interests? Will he also assure us that at the fisheries meeting there will be no piecemeal settlement? What we want is a package deal as a whole, not a settlement on conservation and the rest left in limbo.

The Government's position on the Dublin summit is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. My right hon. Friend and I will be approaching the fisheries negotiations purely in the context of the good of our own fishing industry. With regard to the general conduct of negotiations, we shall certainly bear in mind that what is required is an agreement as a whole which will be acceptable to our own fishing industry. We shall stick firmly to those lines.

Is the Secretary of State aware of an article which appeared in the Glasgow Herald last Friday to the effect that, because of the operation of the quota system, there is a scandalous waste, a dumping, of valuable herring? Will the Minister investigate these allegations and report to the House?

I saw that report and I, too, was very disturbed by it. I am having it investigated. I would deplore any irresponsible dumping of fish which are not caught legally. I am sure that most of those in the fishing industry would do the same.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he plans next to meet the Trades Union Congress and the Scottish Confederation of British Industry.

As I have already indicated to the bodies concerned, I intend to have regular meetings with the Scottish Trades Union Congress and the CBI (Scotland).

When my right hon. Friend meets them, will he discuss with them the lessons to be learned for the whole of Scotland from the recent tragic closure of the Singer factory at Clydebank? In particular, will he discuss with them the advantages to the workforce of accepting inevitable closures of this kind quickly, so that joint action between the Government and trade unions can be started to produce replacement jobs as soon as possible? Would he also like to comment on the ill-conceived and unhelpful intervention of the right hon. Member for Glasgow, Craigton (Mr. Millan) in trying to persuade the workforce to resist the closure?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I am very concerned about the situation at Clydebank and I have assured all concerned that I and my hon. Friend will do all that we can to help in that area. I am meeting representatives of the STUC and the Clydebank shop stewards tomorrow, and I look forward to an exchange of views with them.

When the Minister sees the representatives of the STUC will he be able to give them an assurance that the abandonment of exchange control regulations will not have a detrimental effect on the 116,000 workers who are employed by foreign companies in Scotland and who are likely to leave if any change in the industrial climate continues in this country?

I do not think that the removal of exchange control regulations will have any effect on those employed in Scotland. Indeed, it will have a beneficial effect on the economy as a whole.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the current unemployment situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the latest Scottish unemployment figures.

On 11 October 1979 unemployment in Scotland was 178,489–7·9 per cent. The grave deterioration in the unemployment situation since we were last in office continues to cause the Government serious concern and our prime objective is to create an economic climate in Scotland and in the rest of the United Kingdom in which investment is encouraged and lasting jobs can be created. This is the only way in which a longterm reduction in unemployment can be achieved.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the appalling fact that 9,000 youngsters who left school four months ago are still searching for a job? Has there been any new initiative by the Government designed to decrease unemployment rather than increase it? Does he further agree that the unemployment rate has accelerated since the accession of his Government?

The hon. Member is wrong in that. I am sure he will agree that the only way to solve the unemployment problem is to remove a lot of the restrictions which have made it not worth while for people to start new businesses and create new jobs, unfortunately under the Government of which he was a most loyal supporter?

Is the Secretary of State aware that this House has given him power to intervene and to give new life to threatened industries, whether it be in Clydebank, Lemac in my constituency, or, indeed, the imperilled hill farming industry? Is the Minister aware that those who are threatened with unemployment in Scotland wish that he would use those powers instead of behaving like the Prime Minister's lap dog in Cabinet?

As I have already said, I have a very wide range of powers in this matter and I intend to use every one of them in the most helpful way possible to create new jobs, and to encourage firms to expand and create new employment in every way they can. As has already been said, there is more money available this year than the previous Government gave last year for that purpose, and we shall use it as vigorously as we can.

Will my right hon. Friend lose no opportunity to point out to the people of Scotland the sickening hypocrisy of Labour Members? It was the Labour Government that presided over the doubling of unemployment in Scotland and left us with the situation with which we now have to cope.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have seen the results of five years of Socialist policy. The country voted for a change and it will get it.

Everyone is sympathetic about the closure of the Singer factory, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the closure of British Shipbuilders' yard at Burntisland? Will he give the same degree of urgency to finding jobs for people who have been unemployed in that part of Scotland as he is giving to those at Singers?

The question of degree of urgency is difficult to measure, but I can assure the hon. Member that, within the limits of the powers available to me, I shall give every possible assistance in his area as well as other areas. I hope that we shall manage to persuade new firms to come in and take up the jobs that have been lost.

Order. When the word "hypocrisy" is applied to a Party, it is different from when it is applied to an individual. That has long been our understanding.

As unemployment in Scotland is now rising, and as it is agreed by everyone, including some Ministers, that the present Government's monetary policies, along with expenditure cuts, are bound to increase unemployment, particularly in areas such as Scotland, is it the Government's policy that their monetary policies will continue regardless of the effect on unemployment?

It is certainly the Government's intention that the expenditure which was embarked upon by the right hon. Member for Glasgow, Craigton (Mr. Millan) and his colleagues—expenditure which had no backing for it in funds—has to be brought under control. We are getting expenditure under control and, once we have done so, there may be a chance of some new jobs to help the unemployed.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the review of ferry charges to the islands.

As my hon. Friend is aware we are currently examining in detail the whole question of Government assistance to ferry services. I hope to issue a consultation paper before the recess and take decisions on the future pattern of assistance early in the new year.

Does my hon. Friend realise that his timetable will be welcomed by many of my island constituents? Does he also realise that freight charges impose an increasing burden on my constituents and, further, that they all wish that, in his review, some element of competition will be injected into ferry services so that the islanders do not become the victims of a State monopoly?

I can certainly assure my hon. Friend that we are very well aware of the feelings of the islanders. That is why, at a time of very severe restraint, the Government have indicated that it will be a priority to ensure the viability of Scotland's island communities.

Is the Minister aware that his review of ferry charges has also been welcomed in my constituency? When the time comes to make a decision, will he bear in mind the fact that in Norway island communities in the far north are afforded an equal chance of a reasonable economic freight service by the Government in Oslo?

I am aware of the right hon. Gentleman's point. We are approaching this matter without any rigid views. We are anxious to hear the views of the local authorities and the island communities before coming to firm decisions on the manner in which we shall move towards a road equivalent tariff.