asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what consultations he has had with the local authorities and the independent bus operators on the Scotmap proposals; and if he will make a statement.

I welcome the Scotmap objectives of providing more cost-efficient bus services, better tailored to local needs. Detailed proposals arising from Scotmap studies are, however, for discussion between the bus company and the local authority concerned.

Is my hon. Friend aware that if these rationalisation proposals go through they will have a serious impact on the local independent bus companies, on which the rural communities rely? Is he further aware that there will be serious inconvenience to the travelling public?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of the independent operators, especially in rural communities. Detailed decisions affecting his constituency are, of course, for the Western SMT and the regional council, and I have no doubt that they will take full note of my hon. Friend's comments.

What effect is the phasing out of the new bus grant having on bus services? Is my hon. Friend not worried that, with a lot of older buses on the roads, there will be a lack of safety standards among those buses?

I am happy completely to reassure my hon. Friend about safety. On the SBG's finances, we believe that the existing target of 4½ per cent. per annum on net fixed assets is moderate and reasonable.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he proposes on the latest report of the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs.

I am considering the report. I shall respond to the Select Committee as soon as possible.

Is the Secretary of State aware that that excellent man the hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Lambie)—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear"]—deserves the congratulations of the whole House on the report, which has been even better received in my constituency than the determination to extend development area status to Orkney and Shetland? Will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that it will not be allowed to moulder in that revolting building, New St. Andrew's House, and in particular that he will pay attention to the proposals on road equivalent tariff and on reducing the price of petrol? What proposals does the right hon. Gentleman have on those two matters?

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his warm compliment to the work of my neighbour in Ayrshire, which I, too, greatly appreciate. I am also grateful for the right hon. Gentleman's reference to the assisted area status in Shetland. I join him in welcoming the Select Committee's excellent report. I shall study all of its recommendations with great care and respond as soon as possible.

Is the Secretary of State aware that I join in the congratulations on this very useful and helpful report? However, as he has gone some way towards assisting shipping services on the West Coast, will he now set a deadline for the introduction of the road equivalent tariff?

I am not very keen on setting a deadline. As the right hon. Gentleman acknowledged, we have moved a long way towards the road equivalent tariff, as we undertook to do. The grant has been more than doubled in cash terms and stands at £10·6 million, which is a great advance.

Despite the praise that he gives the report, does my right hon. Friend agree that the suggestion to zero rate petrol and transfer the cost to petrol duty would be a retrograde step in country areas?

I note what my hon. Friend said. I would prefer not to make a detailed comment about that until I have had the opportunity to study it. I greatly welcome the fact that the Select Committee has gone into the problem of the price of petrol in rural areas.

I accept the congratulations of the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) and of the Secretary of State for Scotland on the Select Committee's report. I do not know whether the Secretary of State is congratulating me on the good report or on the fact that I am giving him 7,000 Tory voters from Troon following redistribution of the boundaries. May I draw the Secretary of State's attention to the fact that this was the unanimous report of a Select Committee with a Conservative majority? I hope that he will implement its findings as quickly as possible. As a means of making progress towards that aim, will he provide an opportunity for hon. Members to debate the report?

The latter point is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. I am sure that if the hon. Gentleman wants a debate, he can make a request. I think the hon. Gentleman will agree that it is best that such an important document should be carefully considered. I shall do that as quickly as I can.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement about the Health Service workers dispute.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement regarding the dispute in the National Health Service in Scotland.

The effects of the dispute have been damaging to the care of patients in Scotland, with some areas and services being more seriously affected than others. In some cases the trade unions have failed to provide even the basic levels of service required by their code of practice. Whatever the feelings on their pay claim, there can be no justification for the trade unions' action in withdrawing essential services from those least able to look after themselves.

Now that a conciliatory meeting has been arranged between the trade unions and ACAS, will the Government depart from their inflexible attitude and agree to meet the ACAS chairman in order to give further consideration to the justifiable 12 per cent. wage claim? What the Government have offered so far is an insult and amounts to a wage decrease in real terms to nurses and other ancillary workers who are essential to the survival of the National Health Service, founded by a previous Labour Government but threatened with destruction by the present Tory Government?

There has been real growth in the Health Service since this Government took over from the Labour Government. As for inflexibility, we showed in our offer last week of 6 per cent., 6·5 per cent., and 7·5 per cent. a degree of flexibility. The inflexibility has come from the trade union side, which has stuck rigidly to a demand of 12 per cent. and above.

Will the Minister accept that the trade unions, far from being inflexible, are very flexible? It is the trade unions that have asked to see ACAS next Tuesday. The Government have so far made no conciliatory moves in the dispute. Will the Minister accept that, even under the Government's improved offer, according to official figures published in The Guardian today student nurses will actually be worse off financially? When will the Government see sense in this dispute? They are just as responsible as anyone else for damaging patient care.

The Government have said all along that they are not prepared to sanction a recourse to arbitration. It would be wrong to subcontract to some independent body the decision about how much the Government and the taxpayer can afford. The increases that we announced last week, which show flexibility on our side not matched on the other side, are believed by the Government to be fair and in line with settlements of about 6 per cent. in comparable parts of the public sector.

In the light of my hon. Friend's reply that the trade unions in certain areas were not acting in accordance with the trade union code of practice, will he identify the hospitals where the code has not been adhered to?

There are a number of hospitals in Scotland, including, I think, some in my hon. Friend's constituency, where, during some of the time in the last five weeks, the code of practice was not adhered to—

Which ones?

There were two hospitals affected in Edinburgh during the laundry dispute, which, fortunately, has been partially resolved.

There are more than two hospitals in Edinburgh. Name them.

They were the Edinburgh Royal infirmary and the Royal Edinburgh mental hospital.

Will the Minister accept that if there is any inconvenience to patients, the responsibility lies squarely on the Government? Will he accept from me that the final word has not been said on this matter by a long way? How can the hon. Gentleman and the Government say in the same breath that there is no extra money for National Health Service employees but that there will be at least £1,000 million available for financing the Falkland Islands fiasco?

The hon. Gentleman should get his facts right. The figure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence mentioned yesterday was £500 million for this financial year out of the Contingency Fund. That comes out of the Contingency Fund.

Then pay the nurses out of it.

The hon. Gentleman obviously does not understand what the Contingency Fund means. Let me reiterate. Last week we offered a reasonable increase consistent with increases to teachers, to civil servants and, indeed, to the Armed Forces. I hope that workers in the National Health Service will at least take away our offer and consider it, as the nurses are prepared to do.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the nurses are a special case and that this has already been recognised by the Government? Does he further agree that during the winter of discontent the National Health Service unions, along with other unions, brought about the demise of the Labour Government so that they could return to free collective bargaining.

Is that what they have?

Part of free collective bargaining is job security, holidays and pensions. All of this has to be computed when one is working out wages, particularly at a time—[interruption.]

Order.

Our record of expenditure on the National Health Service and increases that we have given to the nurses, in particular, since the last election, are matters of which we can be proud. They contrast with the increases given by the Labour Government which ended up in all the trouble of the winter of 1978–79, which Opposition Members seem to have suddenly and completely forgotten.

How can the Under-Secretary justify giving different levels of pay increases to different people working in the National Health Service, especially as he has recognised the importance of porters and laundry workers in keeping the service going? What justification exists for widening differentials when people are already taking a very real cut in their standard of living.?

In making an offer of 7·5 per cent. to the nurses and professions supplementary to medicine we are recognising their special position within the National Health Service as the people who give direct patient care. We are also recognising the expensive training that equips them for their position in the Health Service. I am certain, whatever the Opposition may say, that the people of this country recognise that it is right to pay special attention in wage negotiations to the particular case of nurses and professions supplementary to medicine.

Give them the 12 per cent. then.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is now in a position to announce the proposed content and timing of legislation to reform the rating system in Scotland.

Not yet. The diverse public responses to the options set out in the Green Paper merit careful consideration.

Does my hon. Friend accept that progress should be made towards achieving a much fairer and more equitable form of taxation system in this respect, however much the ratepayers of Lothian region may be delighted with the reduction in rates following the local elections?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The reactions to the Green Paper have reinforced our impression that ratepayers of all classes are anxious for early relief from the rates burden. Like my hon. Friend, I welcome the new Lothian administration's early decision that its ratepayers should benefit from a reduction in expenditure that will lead to an average saving of £43 for every domestic ratepayer.

Does the Minister remember that we were derided when we opposed the Rating and Valuation (Scotland) Order 1982 and suggested that partial revaluation had handicaps? Does he also remember that only on 17 May he was pouring cold water on our doubts? Is he aware that we welcome his repeal of the order and the postponement of partial revaluation? Does he agree that the clear implication of that retreat is that something has gone seriously wrong with the implementation of plans for electoral reform that were easily given in an electoral promise?

Certainly not. My right hon. Friend responded positively to CoSLA's representations and decided not to go ahead with partial revaluation in 1982–83. We shall go ahead instead with full revaluation in 1985–86. That decision demonstrates the seriousness with which my right hon. Friend and I take representations from CoSLA.

What steps will the Government take to relieve commercial premises of the rate burden?

We have consistently made it clear that proposals for the reform of the rating system will take fully into account the interests of industrial and commercial ratepayers.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the devastating effect that high rates are having on the hotel industry and, therefore, on the tourist industry in Scotland? Does he envisage any relief for that sector of the economy?

I have received representations on that point. We are studying several detailed aspects of the problem.

For the benefit of hon. Members with short memories, will the Minister repeat his party's pledge about rate reform? Does he agree that the increased unpopularity of rates has been due largely to the inflationary policies of the Government and the reduction of rate support grant?

I reiterate that the specific pledge to abolish domestic rates in one Parliament was given in the Conservative manifesto of 1974—not 1979, which was the election that the Conservatives won. We have made clear our commitment to reforming the rating system in the long term.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now make a statement about the sale of the former Hamilton college of education buildings.

Prospective purchasers have been informed that the property is available for disposal either as a whole or in lots and have been invited to submit firm offers by 23 July.

Is the Minister aware that today the doors closed on Lanarkshire's fine college of education at Hamilton, and that responsibility for that contemptible act of educational damage lies fairly and squarely at his door? Will he assure the House that there is no possibility of his agreeing to an elitist private school taking over these buildings? Will he also assure the House that the acute shortage of student accommodation, which has been occasioned by the residences closing, will be greeted with help from the Scottish Education Department?

The hon. Gentleman is aware that the college closed because it virtually ran out of students as a result of the diminishing demand for teachers and the falling school population in Scotland. The Government have always made it clear that we should like the buildings to continue in educational use. So far, no offer has been submitted by any education authority in the West of Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many redundancies have been notified to his Department in Ayr during the past three months.

Since 1 April 1982 two instances of redundancy involving 10 or more people have been notified to the Manpower Services Commission as due to occur in the Ayr employment office area with the loss of 109 jobs.

Does the Secretary of State agree that one of those enforced redundancies was to be at Wallacetown Engineering? Will he, like my colleagues from Ayrshire, welcome the fact that the management has acceded to the trade unions' legitimate claims and that normal work will resume tonight or tomorrow, thus ending an 11-week occupation of the factory, which was justified as it was in pursuit of legitimate aims?

I, too, am relieved that the protracted dispute ended yesterday as a result of an agreement between the management and the trade unions concerned. I deplore the actions of the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues. They encouraged a dispute that has done grave damage to the future of many people's jobs in my constituency. I should have much preferred it if they had not done so.

I appreciate my right hon. Friend's modesty. Will he tell the House some of the good things that have happened in Ayrshire, especially with regard to Scottish Aviation, for which Government contracts are important in the long-term future?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He may like to know that since May 1979 we have made no fewer than 12 offers of selective financial assistance to firms in the Ayr employment office area. That has involved more than 2,300 jobs and associated investment of about £66 million. My hon. Friend will also know that we have given special assistance to British Aerospace, Caledonian Airmotive and the Digital Equipment Company, all of which have been expanding their employment.

Will the Secretary of State join me in congratulating my three hon. Friends from Ayrshire who joined the trade unions to save jobs? Rather than bleating, would it not be better if he took a leaf out of their book and fought a little harder to save more jobs in the Scottish economy?

It would help a great deal if the hon. Gentleman learnt his facts before intervening in these matters. He may not be aware that the company was seriously considering expansion before the strike took place. I am depressed by the fact that the strike cannot have helped that prospect. I hope that the expansion will still take place.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received about industrial action in hospitals in Scotland.

We have received a range of comments from health boards, outside organisations and members of the public on the continuing difficulties for hospital patients that have been caused by the current dispute.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the whole basis of the Health Service is that patient care comes first? Does he agree that the continuing support and sympathy for workers in the Health Service has been eroded by the callous way in which they have disregarded the interests of patients in Scotland? Are the Government prepared to take every step, even if it includes crossing picket lines, to ensure that patient care comes first?

I agree that the spectacle of patients being put at risk and in great discomfort cannot have done the Health Service unions' case any good. The sooner they think about that, the better. We are fortunate that most nurses and many other staff have continued to work throughout the dispute. Many of them have worked far beyond their normal duties. We should be grateful to them for their efforts to keep up services for the care of patients. I strongly deprecate the efforts of outside bodies to politicise the decision at the expense of patients and their care.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to allow the Manpower Services Commission in Scotland greater autonomy in the design and implementation of measures to aid the unemployed.

The Manpower Services Commission in Scotland already has considerable autonomy in the implementation of measures to aid the unemployed and Ministers and the Commission consult closely on the design of such measures.

Will the Minister confirm that he received a letter from the Scottish Council for Social Service which said that more than 30 voluntary organisations will not participate in any scheme for phoney employment for adults? Will he ensure that any such schemes in Scotland satisfy two important criteria: first, that those participating have the full status of employed persons; and, secondly, that they are paid the right wage for the job?

The hon. Gentleman should know that the schemes put into operation by the MSC in Scotland and elsewhere are agreed by employers, trade union representatives and others on the local committees. The local committees are themselves important and the MSC committee for Scotland makes a great contribution towards ensuring that the schemes are as useful and practical as possible for the unemployed and others who are training.

Why is the Minister allowing the MSC establishment in Scotland to be cut by a far higher percentage than that in England, where unemployment is lower?

The studies of manpower in the MSC apply on a United Kingdom basis. The MSC in Scotland is performing its functions very satisfactorily. The right hon. Gentleman will know that the MSC is responsible to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State as well as to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment, and my right hon. Friend takes a very close interest in these matters.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the new training initiative has a much better prospect of being successful in Scotland because we have a Minister with responsibility for education and industry, both of which will be essential elements if the project is to be as successful as we all wish?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Of course, I agree entirely.

Will the Minister look at this again, as in my constituency it is proposed to close down one jobcentre and to reduce the number of staff at the other? In the jobcentre that may be closed as a result of this so-called economy, youth unemployment is remarkable, and 44 per cent. of young people unemployed have been out of work for a year or more.

The right hon. Gentleman will know that if it is planned to close a jobcentre in his constituency other jobcentres are being opened elsewhere in the West of Scotland. This is a matter of MSC planning in considering the use and uptake of places at jobcentres, which is low in some parts of the country despite high unemployment.

How will opening a jobcentre elsewhere help the people of Greenock?

It depends on the uptake of places at the jobcentre. These are matters that the MSC or any other organisation must take into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will set up an inquiry to investigate the problem of reduced salmon stocks in Scottish rivers.

My right hon. Friend has no plans to do so, but he is watching this situation carefully.

I am sure that my hon. Friend, as a keen angler, is aware of the fall in salmon stocks. Is he aware of the serious effects of this on rural economies in areas such as Speyside and Deveronside?

I am well aware of the problem. I am also aware of the reported decline this year, particularly from salmon netting stations. There is, however, no further evidence to show whether this is a temporary decline or a long-term change. A working party is examining matters relevant to the international management of salmon stock and I hope that the creation of the Atlantic salmon convention will be useful in this regard.

As the problem has been going on for some time, presumably the Scottish Office has been examining it for some time. If there is not to be an investigation, what conclusions has the Minister reached about the reasons for the decline in stocks?

At the risk of indulging in a lecture on the cyclical nature of salmon, I should point out that it is early in the year to make a global decision about the decline in stocks. We all realise that stocks are under pressure, but, as has been found in previous years, the grilse run later in the year may be higher than usual. Therefore, we should wait until the end of the year to review the position. Nevertheless, we have been attempting to control and keep down the number of salmon caught off Greenland and the Faroes, both of which areas have increased interception of Atlantic salmon and are undoubtedly causing damage.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many companies went into liquidation in Scotland during 1979, 1980 and 1981, respectively.

The total number of compulsory and creditors' voluntary liquidations—the two types that involve insolvency—recorded in Scotland in 1979, 1980 and 1981 were 238, 379 and 438, respectively.

I am surprised that the question has not been answered, but that is typical of the Government. The record speaks for itself. Instead of the economic miracle—

Order. Perhaps I may help the hon. Gentleman. He can get that point in if he puts it in the form of a question.

The record speaks for itself—[Interruption.] Does it not? Is the Minister aware that an economic miracle has not taken place despite the Government's assurances? Is he also aware that Scotland is suffering as a result of the Government's attitude and is clearly in desperate straits? Does the Minister appreciate that production is lower than it was at the time of the three-day week, which was bad enough? Does he further appreciate that Scotland and its economy has suffered more—

Order. I think that the hon. Gentleman has given the Minister enough to appreciate.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be delighted to hear that, whereas the number of liquidations that I mentioned were of the order of 200 or 300, the numbers of new companies registered in Scotland were 3,514, 3,270 and 3,475 last year. He will also wish to know that in his own constituency the Robb Caledon shipyard has recently won three orders—two for Sealink Ferries and one for an oil supply ship for Norway. In my constituency, which borders his, Brown Brothers and Co. (Engineers) has gained a £23 million order to supply steam catapults and stabilisers to the United States Navy.

Does my hon. Friend agree that a large number of those smaller companies were established as a result of the Government's efforts to encourage enterprise in Scotland?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is encouraging that new businesses are starting up in Scotland at a satisfactory rate.

As the Minister seems to be well briefed with detailed figures, will he tell us how many jobs were lost as a result of the liquidations and how many were created as a result of the new companies starting up?

The hon. Gentleman will be well aware of the unemployment figures in Scotland. He will also be aware that what Scotland needs more than anything else is a growing number of new companies. The figures that I have given reveal that, whereas 200 or 300 companies have been liquidated every year, 2,000 or 3,000 companies have been formed every year, and that is good.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is satisfied that, in the appointment of sheriffs, experience is taken fully into account and that long-serving temporary sheriffs are placed at no disadvantage.

In consultation with my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate, my right hon. Friend's aim is to recommend to Her Majesty the appointment of the best qualified person at any given time. Service as a temporary sheriff is one of a number of factors that are taken into consideration.

Is the Minister aware that the present system gives absolute power of patronage to the Lord Advocate? Is he aware of concern over recent appointments, and does he agree that a clear-cut set of rules should govern appointments to the Bench in Scotland?

I am surprised at the hon. Gentleman's comments. We have not received complaints about the appointments system.

Does the Minister consult the sheriffs principal on this matter as well as taking all other circumstances into account?

I can reassure my hon. Friend that the views of the sheriffs principal are taken into account by my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate before he makes a nomination.

Is the Minister aware that the patronage system of sheriff appointments in Scotland is so corrupt that I am forced to advise my constituents, if they are interested in a fair trial, not to appear before Sheriff Principal Taylor, another failed Tory parliamentary candidate—

Order.

because of the way in which—

Order.

Because of the way in which he tried to gerrymander the parliamentary constituencies in favour of the Tory Party?

Order. The hon. Gentleman is very fortunate that I did not order him to leave the Chamber. He knows that he should sit down when I stand up. He also knows that he is not entitled to criticise a judge, as I gather that he was doing, without putting down a motion on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the current relationship between coal output and the generation of electricity by the Scottish boards.

In the year ended 31 March 1982 coal-fired plant produced 59 per cent. of the output of electricity of the Scottish boards. The Scottish electricity boards purchase 71·6 per cent. of the National Coal Board's output in Scotland.

Does the Minister accept that if that ratio continues into the foreseeable future it will be essential that the future of the Invergordon smelter is decided, because of the high proportion of electricity that it uses? When can the Minister make that decision, because it is important to my constituents, who produce coal for power stations and factories?

We hope to reach a decision on the future of the Invergordon smelter within the next few weeks. We are still conducting negotiations with companies. In the event that efforts to reopen the smelter are successful, it is estimated that the coal burn will be three-quarters of a million tonnes higher annually.

Does my hon. Friend accept that coal remains the most important indigenous source of energy available to this country and that that fact must be reflected in any future energy generating programme? Does my hon. Friend further agree that the political posturings of Mr. Arthur Scargill and Mr. Mick McGahey are endangering what would otherwise be a secure future for the coal miners, because the generating industry requires stability of supply?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. What is worse, Mr. Scargill damages not only the prospects of the coal industry, but those of the Health Service, too.

Does the Minister appreciate that the closure of the Invergordon smelter has resulted in a reduction of no less than three-quarters of a million tonnes of coal consumption by the South of Scotland Electricity Board? Is he also aware that the reopening of the smelter is crucial, not only for the area, but for the coal industry and many other industries in Scotland? Is the Minister further aware that there are disturbing press reports to the effect that most of the potential buyers for the Invergordon smelter have now lost interest and that the power contract on offer is either inadequate or not even specific? Can he say what is happening in the negotiations and give an absolute pledge that the Government will make a full statement on this matter within the next few weeks?

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend and I are fully aware of the importance of the efforts to reopen the Invergordon smelter. The right hon. Gentleman will know that the biggest single obstacle is the state of the world aluminium market. That is why so many companies have withdrawn from the negotiations. However, there are still two or three companies with which we are in urgent consultation. My right hon. Friend will make a statement to the House as soon as he has full information.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is satisfied with the arrangements now made for the operation of the Gourock to Dunoon ferry; and whether he will make a statement.

It is satisfactory that the residents of Cowal continue to have a choice of ferry services, that it has been possible to continue to provide a high standard of service for foot passengers, and that it has been possible to reduce the subsidy being paid to Caledonian MacBrayne in respect of this service in 1982–83 to half the level required in the previous year.

Will the Minister accept that that choice has largely been preserved because the Conservative Government had to retreat in disorder from their original ludicrous proposals for the ferry service? Is the Minister aware that the firm expected to be the principal beneficiary is now so upset that it is considering going to law? Will the Minister note that when that possibility has been exhausted we shall return to the matter?

Will the Minister assure the House that, to assuage the feelings of uncertainty among my constituents, and others, there will be no proposals from the Government to withdraw or modify services? Will the Minister confirm that preparations are being made to sustain services for the financial year 1983–84?

I can confirm that that is the Government's intention.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that competition is a strong lever to bring about cuts in costs and improve efficiency, and that, having saved on the subsidy on those runs, there will be subsidies for other Calmac runs in the West of Scotland?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of competition in this area, as in many others.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many long-term unemployed were registered in the Kilbirnie, Saltcoats and Irvine employment exchange areas at the last available date; and how this compares with the same time in 1979, 1980 and 1981.

On 15 April 1982, 3,318 people in the Kilbirnie, Saltcoats and Irvine employment office areas had been registered as unemployed for more than one year. The comparable figures for 1979, 1980 and 1981 were 1,324, 1,370 and 1,903, respectively.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not ashamed to admit that he is the Minister responsible for employment in Scotland? Is he aware that not only is North Ayrshire a disaster area for unemployment, but that figures show that it is also another disaster area for the long-term unemployed, many of whom have been unemployed for over a year? When will the right hon. Gentleman get off his backside and stop sending his hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for industry and sport to Spain to attend football matches—with no apparent benefit—and start worrying about unemployment in the North Ayrshire area?

I share the hon. Gentleman's great concern about unemployment in North Ayrshire, particularly the long-term unemployed. However, I should not have expected that even he would accuse me of inaction. He must bear in mind what has been done to help the area. As part of the West Scotland special development area, the North Ayrshire area qualifies for maximum assistance. That was brought in by the Conservative Government, not the Labour Government. Since May 1979 we have made 19 offers of selective financial assistance to firms in the area. That involves over 1,470 new jobs. The hon. Gentleman cannot accuse the Government of inactivity, but I share his concern at the unemployment figures.

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

On 10 June 1982, seasonally adjusted unemployment in Scotland stood at 314,800 or 14·1 per cent. We have substantially increased the programme of special measures in the current financial year, but our strategy of controlling inflation within a sound financial framework, and restoring competitiveness, is the best way to improve employment prospects, both in Scotland and elsewhere; and I am encouraged by the progress that we are making.

Is it not the case that the non-seasonally adjusted figure is 341,200 and that that is up by 16,500 since last month, representing 15·3 per cent. of the population? When will the Under-Secretary understand that the policies that he repeats month after month at the Dispatch Box are proving to be an abject failure and a disaster? Will he agree to change course and do something for the unemployed in Scotland instead of repeating, ad nauseam, policies that do not work, and cannot work?

Policies that reduce inflation, reduce wage settlements, reduce interest rates and improve exports and the balance of payments can only be good for Scotland, despite what the hon. Gentleman said.

Is the Minister prepared to hold out any realistic hope, with present policies, of a significant reduction in this appalling figure, at least over the remainder of the lifetime of this Parliament?

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the increase in unemployment has been dramatically reduced, but it is still increasing, and is likely to do so, at least for some months yet. The right hon. Gentleman should not disagree with the Government's policies, as they are close to his policies on expenditure when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Does my hon. Friend accept that, despite the unacceptable rate of unemployment, there is a growing public realisation that there are no easy answers to the problem and that the Government's economic policy provides the only long-term hope for the unemployed? Does he further agree that this was demonstrated by the positive swing from Labour to Conservative in the Coatbridge and Airdrie by-election?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In the by-election at Coatbridge and Airdrie and in the local government elections in Scotland it was obvious that the population of Scotland had far more sense in these matters than Labour Members.

Is the Minister aware that the swing to Labour in the Coatbridge and Airdrie by-election, compared with the swing in the two elections in 1974—which resulted in a Labour Government—would lead to a Labour Government with an even bigger majority in a general election? Is he further aware that the lack of confidence in the Government's policies, particularly on unemployment, displayed by the electorate of Coatbridge and Airdrie is widely reflected among the voters of Scotland, who look for an early opportunity to give a similar verdict on those policies?

I am happy to welcome the hon. Gentleman to the House and to Scottish questions. We look forward to further contributions from him. However, I am sure that he will in future be more accurate, because my awareness, and that of the psephologists, is that the Coatbridge and Airdrie result, reflected throughout the country, would increase the Government's majority.

Does my hon. Friend accept that my constituents in Buckie find it difficult to understand why, despite an unemployment rate of 14·3 per cent. in the area, he has taken away assisted area status, whereas assisted area status is retained for areas such as Inverness, which also have the advantage of Highlands and Islands Development Board grants.

I fully appreciate the disappointment in my hon. Friend's constituency following the Government's decision on assisted area status. These have been difficult decisions to make. Nevertheless, following those decisions, 72 per cent. of the working population of Scotland still remain in assisted areas, and Scotland still has the largest special development area in the United Kingdom. Scotland has done well out of the reappraisal of regional policy that this Government introduced.

rose—

Order. To enable me to call the Opposition Front Bench, I shall allow a minute extra at the end of questions to the Solicitor-General for Scotland.

I welcome my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge and Airdrie (Mr. Clarke). Why did the Secretary of State not answer the question about the appalling level of unemployment in Scotland? Is he not ashamed of the 341,000 unemployed in Scotland, a figure that has doubled during his period of office? If not, he should be. Will the Minister and the Secretary of State stop making all these optimistic noises about an upturn in the economy, when every indicator from the CBI, the Fraser Institute and everyone else predicts further increases in the already tragically high level of unemployment in Scotland?

The right hon. Gentleman must be aware of the impact of the world economy, even on Scotland. Scotland cannot be considered in isolation. The action of my right hon. Friend with regard to these matters is perfectly clear. He is doing everything possible within and without Scotland to make sure that unemployment levels are reduced. Indeed, under my right hon. Friend's leadership, the level of unemployment in Scotland compares very favourably with the rest of the United Kingdom—unlike the record of the right hon. Gentleman, who, while Secretary of State, had the satisfaction of doubling unemployment.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he will have further consultations with the procurators fiscal to discuss the operation of part II of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980, relating to procedure and evidence; and whether he will make a statement.

There is a continuous flow of information from procurators fiscal to the Crown Office on the operation of all parts of the 1980 Act. Both I and my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate have had discussions with procurators fiscal and other interested parties on the operation of the Act, and will continue to do so with a view to identifying any difficulties being experienced in connection with the implementation of this legislation.

Does the Solicitor-General for Scotland accept that great administrative problems arise from the administration of judicial examination? Will he also look at the problems arising from section 2 of the Act, which allows the detention of suspects for questioning by the police? Is he aware that the confidence that he and his colleagues have expressed is not shared by the Criminal Court of Appeal? Has he seen the recent judgment, where Lord Emslie referred to the problem of confusion created by the detention powers, and Lord Cameron said:

"It is not, indeed, immediately apparent what useful purpose this innovative and possibly confusing provision is designed to serve."

A number of points are developing as we gain experience of the working of judicial examination. As to the recent case to which the hon. Gentleman referred, I think that he is referring specifically to the problem of the caution that is given by the police where the powers of detention are exercised. The hon. Gentleman may ruefully reflect that when the measure was in Committee I referred to the efficacy of the warning that is required to be given under that section. I accept and recognise, as the Court of Appeal has said, that there are two stages at which a warning must be given. If the police detain someone without questioning him further, the caution required by section 2(7) is sufficient. However, if the police ask questions, it is clear that they must give a common law caution, and that instruction has already gone from the Crown Office to the police.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 is going down very well in the courts, largely because of the way in which the sheriff principals, such as Sheriff Principal Taylor, are handling it?

In spite of some of the somewhat hysterical over-reactions originally given to this legislation, it is clear that a number of parts of the Act are working extremely well. Despite the fact that it was thought that the police would abuse the powers given to them, a number of people from interested sections involved in the administration of justice in Scotland recognise that they have used them both reasonably and sparingly.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if he will meet the procurator fiscal of Kilmarnock, to discuss the administration of justice in Kilmarnock.

I have no immediate plans to meet the procurator fiscal at Kilmarnock. From time to time I do visit the offices of procurators fiscal and discuss relevant matters with them.

When the Solicitor-General for Scotland meets the procurator fiscal of Kilmarnock, will he ask him when he will take action on the case referred to him claiming that certain consultants employed by Ayrshire and Arran health board were guilty of irregularities? People in Ayrshire are concerned that when the procurator fiscal is dealing with consultants they must wait a long time for a decision, whereas when he is dealing with councillors, decisions are given overnight. When will the procurator fiscal give a decision in this case?

I am aware of the investigations to which the hon. Gentleman has referred. Although I should not like any unnecessary delay before a decision is taken, whether or not it is appropriate to instruct proceedings in this matter, at this stage it would be wholly inappropriate if I were to respond and give any indication about whether a criminal prosecution will be mounted before the investigations are complete.

Is the Solicitor-General for Scotland aware that there is great resentment among the low-paid health workers in Ballochmyle hospital, who cannot get an increase in pay, while these consultants, who are already well paid, are able to boost their large incomes by what appears to be the illegal provision of private beds? Surely the hon. and learned Gentleman must make a statement about this matter, otherwise the rumours and concern will spread far and wide in Ayrshire.

For once, the hon. Gentleman has advisedly chosen his words carefully. As I have already said, it would be wholly inappropriate for me now to give any view about whether it is right to institute criminal proceedings.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what subjects he expects to discuss at his next meeting with the Scottish Law Commission.

While I have no meetings arranged, I meet the Scottish Law Commission from time to time to discuss all aspects of law reform which it is presently considering.

At the risk of being thrown out for being tedious and repetitive, may I ask the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he will remind the Scottish Law Commission that we have been waiting for well over a decade for the publication of its Bill to abolish warrant sales? Is there any chance at all during the lifetime of this Parliament of such a Bill being sponsored by the Government to abolish once and for all this medieval and barbaric practice?

If nothing else, the hon. Gentleman has tenacity on this point. We are awaiting a report from the Scottish Law Commission on the law of diligence. The part that concerns the hon. Gentleman—his concern is shared on both sides of the House—is the aspect that relates to warrant sales. The hon. Gentleman probably recognises that every mature legal system in the world requires an end process to bring to a conclusion the differences between a creditor and a debtor. If the hon. Gentleman is particularly concerned about arrangements that are made for the public sale of the property in a debtor's home, I have some sympathy with that point. Personally, I await with great interest the proposals that will emanate from the Scottish Law Commission, which I expect will not be long in coming.

Order. The answers are getting as long as the questions.

Will my hon. and learned Friend discuss once again with the Law Commission the problems of cost and time arising out of accused persons changing their pleas to guilty on the day of the trial diet? Will he ask it to look again at the ways in which the whole paraphernalia of setting up a trial can be avoided when such a change of plea is likely?

The problem of people changing their pleas at a later date is essentially an administrative one. There are a number of schemes which both I and my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate are considering. I hope that that, in conjunction with a number of provisions of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980, will result in an acceleration in the times for diets.

Are the Government nearing completion of their consideration of the Law Commission's proposals on aliment and divorce, and do they consider that this is a subject on which they could bring forward proposals for reform?

It is recognised that the proposals of the Scottish Law Commission, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, are useful. They are being considered by the Scottish Home and Health Department and I await with interest its views on them.

rose—

I shall allow an extra minute on this question.

What is the current state with regard to custody orders as between England and Scotland, and what progress has been made on an international convention for custody orders for children of divorced parents?

I remember your recent stricture, Mr. Speaker. It is recognised that there continue to be problems over custody orders, particularly in an international context. The Scottish Law Commission, my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate and myself are aware of the concern that this can cause to parents in such a difficult position.