asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when construction work will commence on the Collin bypass and the Annan bypass, respectively, on the A75 trunk road.

Construction of the Collin bypass will start this financial year if outstanding objections can be resolved, and that of the Annan bypass in 1985, subject to satisfactory conclusion of the required economic appraisal and statutory procedures.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great disappointment at the lack of progress on the A75, especially with the Annan bypass? Will he consider setting up a task force now to meet the farmers and other interested parties to decide whether a public inquiry is necessary? Is he further aware of the strong feeling that there is a lack of urgency in his Department to get the bypass constructed?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's strong feelings about that bypass. We have an impressive continuing programme of improvement on the A75. My hon. Friend will know that we have received about 50 objections to the published proposals on the Annan bypass. I assure him that my officials and staff are doing everything that they can to resolve those objections as quickly as possible. We shall then decide whether a public inquiry is necessary.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many former public sector tenants have now bought their own homes since May 1979; how many tenants have indicated a wish to buy but have not yet had their transactions completed; and if he will make a statement.

The reported number of sitting tenants who have bought their houses between 1 April 1979 and 30 September 1982 is nearly 28,000. An estimated 38,000 or so other tenants have applied to buy since May 1979. Of these, just over 8,000 have concluded missives.

I thank my hon. Friend for that moderately encouraging reply. Is he aware that in Fife, the Glenrothes development corporation, the Dunfermline district council and the Kirkcaldy district council have sold more than 1,000 houses to sitting tenants? Is he further aware that even the smaller North-East Fife district council has sold more than 700 houses? Does he agree that if the same proportion of houses as have been sold in Fife had been sold throughout Scotland he would have been able to announce double the figures that he has just announced? Will he ask other authorities to emulate the Fife example, which has been helpful both to ratepayers and to tenants?

I agree with my hon. Friend. District councils tenants in Fife have shown wisdom and acumen in these matters. I assure my hon. Friend that there has been a sustained increase in the number of applications to buy throughout Scotland since February. I hope that it will not be too long before the rest of Scotland reaches the levels that have already been achieved in Fife.

Will the Minister make clear for the purpose of statistics at what stage he regards a sale as having been made? Is it at the time when the local authority agrees, or when the missives are delivered?

When the missives are delivered. The right hon. Gentleman has tabled a detailed written question on precisely that point, which I am answering.

Is the Minister aware that Kirkcaldy district council bitterly resents being compelled by the Government to sell houses that it does not want to sell because such sales prevent people on the waiting list getting houses for rent? Does he agree that, despite that, it has always been the policy of successive Governments, especially with regard to new towns, to sell houses built by private enterprise for sale and if the development corporation is a willing seller?

Sales do not affect the total housing stock. Kirkcaldy district council has asked to see me because its present estimate of sales far exceeds its earlier one. That demonstrates the substantial interest of tenants in purchasing houses in Kirkcaldy.

Has any problem arisen in rural areas with small stocks of houses, some of which have to be kept for essential jobs? Have any councils been in touch with my hon. Friend on this matter?

I assure my hon. Friend that I have received no such representations recently.

Does the Minister accept that bitter experience shows that the best and most popular part of the housing stock is being sold off? Is he aware that the public sector housing stock is therefore being grievously impoverished by Government policies? On the alleged success of the campaign, will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the outturn of capital receipts in Scotland in 1982–83, which largely consist of council house sales, is £16 million lower than the Government expected and that the estimate for 1983–84 suggests a major tailing off in their expectations about the sale of council houses?

The hon. Gentleman is talking nonsense. People in all income groups throughout Scotland are applying to buy their houses. There has been an interesting spate of applications from the Gorbals area of Glasgow. I assure the hon. Gentleman that resources from the sale of houses are available for local authorities to improve their general housing stock.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he proposes to take to minimise the risks to elderly and disabled people from hypothermia and cold-related illnesses in the coming winter.

My Department intends to keep closely in touch with local authorities and health boards throughout the winter. I am confident that these authorities will do all they can to combat the risks to the elderly of hypothermia.

That is a pathetic answer. Is the Minister aware that nearly 10,000 Scots will die of hypothermia and cold-related diseases this winter? Why has he cut the money to the Scottish health education group so that it can no longer produce valuable heating packs? Why has he abandoned the "good neighbour" scheme introduced by the late Frank McElhone? Is it the Government's policy to let these old people die of starvation?

The hon. Gentleman does nothing for his case by gross overstatement of the figures. They are absurdly overstated. The Scottish health education group has run campaigns and will do so again this winter. On 9 December a television programme called "Bodyline" drew attention to the need to keep warm this winter. Reference was made to the availability of written material from a distribution centre giving advice to organisations and people who seek it.

Apart from direct action, will my hon. Friend consider issuing a statement reminding citizens that it is their moral duty to keep an eye on their neighbours and to ensure, so far as possible, that they do not suffer or die alone or unnoticed? Does he agree that the phrase "the caring society" refers not only to Government institutions, but to the population at large?

My hon. Friend is right. It is important that all people should be aware of their obligations towards their elderly neighbours. One of the main dangers is that elderly people who become ill or suffer injury are left alone for longer than they should be. It is therefore important that neighbours should keep an eye on their elderly friends and relatives.

Does the Minister agree that there is considerable information to the effect that the figures quoted by my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Foulkes) are correct and that the Government are cutting the amount of money available to help the elderly to avoid the worst excesses of a bad winter? Is it not a national scandal that old people are being treated in this manner by a heartless Government?

I am sorry to hear the hon. Gentleman repeating the nonsense uttered by his hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Foulkes). I must inform both hon. Gentlemen that in 1981, 193 death certificates gave hypothermia as the primary or secondary cause of death among those aged 65 or over. [Interruption.]

Order. The hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Foulkes) does not realise how strong his voice is. He must try to control himself and allow others to have a chance.

These figures do not differentiate between hypothermia due to inadequate heating and hypothermia from exposure following illness or alcoholic intoxication. The figures given by both hon. Gentlemen are at variance with the facts.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that assistance is being given to those suffering from senile dementia, a considerable number of whom may be at risk from hypothermia? Will he also confirm that everything possible is done to ensure that a ticket to hospital is not a one-way ticket for those concerned?

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the circumstances of elderly people who may suffer some degree of confusion. This underlines the point that I have already made in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram). It is important that people should have regard for their elderly neighbours during the cold weather and at other times of the year.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what new initiatives he has taken in the past 12 months to alleviate the problem of youth unemployment in Scotland.

We have announced the new youth training scheme, which will provide 12 months' education and training for all unemployed 16-year-olds from September 1983. The quality of places available under the youth opportunities programme has been improved. Information technology centres have been established to give unemployed young people training in the new technologies and we have introduced the young workers scheme to encourage employers to take on more young people as full-time employees.

Despite cosmetic exercises, including the cooking of the figures by the Secretary of State for Employment, does the hon. Gentleman agree that youth unemployment and unemployment generally are going remorselessly upwards? Does he accept that nothing that the Government have done or intend to do will stop that trend? Does he recognise that the only long-term way to provide real jobs for these young people and others is to undertake massive public investment in housing, construction, communications and the rest?

Everyone is concerned about unemployment, especially among young people. That is why the Government have taken the steps that I have mentioned. It is not public sector investment that is the main requirement but private sector investment in a healthy economy. The Government's steps to reduce inflation and interest rates are taking us in the right direction. There is nothing cosmetic about the youth training scheme. Employers who take on three additional trainees for every two recruited in the normal way will be eligible for a training grant of £1,850 for all the trainees. That provides real job opportunities for young people.

Is the Minister aware that boys and girls who are willing to undertake further training after leaving school are at a disadvantage compared with those who go into dead-end jobs? Will he investigate this problem in rural areas and ensure that the disadvantage is removed?

That is not a new problem. Those staying on at school have always given up the immediate prospect of earning money in a job. If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to the £25 allowance, the Government agree that it could create problems. However, under the youth opportunities programme, there is no evidence to suggest that young people who would not normally do so have been leaving school just to take advantage of one of the schemes.

Will my hon. Friend pay particular attention to the employment of young females in rural areas? Is he aware that if the young females stay, so will the young males?

I am always happy to accept my hon. Friend's advice, particularly on the rural economy and the habits of nature.

I am tempted to ask the Minister to comment on the old females in rural areas when the old males stay there.

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman is experiencing some difficulties of old age. The £1,850 is not insignificant when it is allocated to each training place. It helps employers to take on more people. That is why it has been introduced. Through the Manpower Services Commission we are in constant touch with local authorities about the training scheme. The budget for the YTS will meet the cost of the training that will be carried out in further education colleges. It is not intended that local authorities should bear that cost.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make extra funds available to Edinburgh district council for its programme of modernisation of council houses in Edinburgh.

The district council has not suggested that the funds available to it are insufficient to enable it to carry through its programme.

Is the Minister aware that the number of empty houses and the general deterioration in a number of Edinburgh council housing schemes is almost a national scandal? Will he approach his political colleagues who control the council and make it clear that they have a responsibility to carry out repairs on those estates, especially those, such as Bingham in my constituency, which desperately need radical improvement programmes?

I believe that Edinburgh has a very responsible housing authority. The hon. Gentleman will be interested to know that Edinburgh district council increased expenditure for modernisation from £2·5 million in 1980–81 to £4·4 million in 1981–82, which was 36 per cent. of its total allocation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in several Edinburgh constituencies the problem of vacant council houses is very serious? Will he confirm that the council would be right to try to deal effectively with that problem as it did with Martello Court?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The problem of vacant houses can be dealt with through the kind of innovation that was applied at Martello Court, through homesteading and methods of tenant participation.

rose—

Order. Supplementaries on this question must be limited to Edinburgh.

Will the Minister bring to the attention of Edinburgh district council the progressive policies of, for example, Monklands district council, which has very forward-looking schemes for modernisation on which to spend money if the Minister would make it available?

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman. I am sure that Edinburgh district council is aware of innovations in Monklands, as in all other local authorities in Scotland.

Will my hon. Friend discuss with Edinburgh district council the need to revise its definition of dampness to include condensation caused solely or primarily by faults in the construction of council houses which are not the fault of the tenants but which lead to excessive heating bills? Does he agree that until that situation is changed there will be a positive disincentive to councils to undertake the necessary remedial insulation that would solve the problem?

The difference between dampness and condensation is essentially that condensation is internal.—[HON. MEMBERS: "It is still wet."]—We are undertaking a great deal of research into this matter. I assure my hon. Friend that Edinburgh district council, like all authorities, has been requested to pay specific attention to the need to combat dampness when drawing up its future programmes.

Mr. John Maxton to ask question No. 6.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I had hoped to have the chance to ask a question, as other hon. Members from Edinburgh have done so.

I want to be fair. I thought that the hon. Gentleman came from further north than Edinburgh. I will certainly call him.

Is the Minister aware that when he quotes statistics he is really saying that there are lies, damned lies and Tory propaganda, given how greatly the council tenants of Edinburgh—and that includes Leith—are suffering because of cuts in maintenance? Will he come to my constituency to see the suffering of working people there and then admit that what he has said today is not true?

Order. That is enough to get on with.

I am sorry but not surprised that the hon. Gentleman cannot accept the statistics, but they are accurate. I am always delighted to go and see housing in different parts of Scotland. In Edinburgh, I visited Pilton with my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, West (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton).

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when next he plans to meet the chairman of the Greater Glasgow health board to discuss the board's future expenditure plans.

I met the chairman and members of the Greater Glasgow health board on 2 September this year to discuss the financial situation of the board and the provision of health services generally in Glasgow. Since then I have met the chairman on several occasions, the most recent being on Monday. I have no plans at present to have further discussions on the board's future financial plans.

Will the Minister nevertheless make arrangements to go with Sir Simpson Stevenson to see the appalling state of health care at Castlemilk? Having done so, and having discussed the problems with community representatives in the area, will he ensure that the health board receives extra money to build a proper health centre for that community?

I have just received an invitation from the hon. Gentleman to visit Castlemilk, and I am always ready to discuss matters with hon. Members. The actual expenditure of the Greater Glasgow health board is a matter for the board to decide, but only a fortnight ago I opened the splendid health centre that it has built at Bridgeton. I am confident that the board is well aware of the problems in various parts of the city, including the hon. Gentleman's constituency.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the resources available to the National Health Service in Scotland have increased in real terms and that this applies also to Glasgow?

My hon. Friend is right. The total money available to the National Health Service in Scotland has increased greatly during the term of this Government. To be fair to the Greater Glasgow health board, however, as it was one of the better funded boards, the increase there has been less than the average to allow the less well funded health boards in Scotland to catch up.

Is not the Minister well aware that in the current year there has been a decrease, not an increase, in real terms due to the operation of the share formula in Glasgow? Is he further aware that this is causing great concern and major constituency problems and that services such as psychogeriatric provision and care for the mentally handicapped, which are supposed to be health priorities for the Government, are suffering as a result? Will the Government therefore re-examine the whole position as it is causing enormous concern in the medical profession and throughout Glasgow?

I accept the right hon. Gentleman's general point about the position of Glasgow in relation to the share allocation. Nevertheless, its expenditure allocation this year is about £316 million, and it feels that it is about £6 million short. I am sure that by good housekeeping a saving of £6 million can be achieved within that total, especially if the position of other boards which have been historically underfunded can be improved as a result. [Interruption.] It ill-becomes the hon. Member for Stirling, Falkirk and Grangemouth (Mr. Ewing), who started the share formula on its way, to interrupt from a sedentary position.

Whatever the predilections of rich people in the London metropolitan area, will the Minister ensure that there are no inroads into the Health Service in Scotland of the kind that the Government have suggested in some parts of the United Kingdom? Does he agree that there is no place in Scotland for the kind of private medicine that the Government are trying to encourage?

The allocation of money to the Health Service in Scotland is unrelated to the situation in London. We intend to continue the share distribution formula in order to be fair to health boards which, historically, have been underfunded. I am certain that private medicine has a place in the general sphere of medicine in this country. If an individual wishes to use private medical facilities, in a free country he must have the right to do so.

Although my hon. Friend agrees that the share formula perhaps does not work so well for Glasgow, does he agree that, for boards such as the Ayrshire and Arran board, it works even less well and there is a desperate shortage of funds?

My hon. Friend draws specific attention to one of the least well funded boards in Scotland. It is because of the position of that and other boards that both this Government and the Labour Government decided to take a responsible all-Scotland position. That is why the share formula was started and why we intend to continue it.

Will the Minister take on board the simple point that the share formula was never intended to reduce in real terms the resources provided to any board? There must be a continuation of more equitable sharing out of the total resources to the health boards. However, the system works in a way which, especially in Glasgow, means that it is impossible for the Greater Glasgow health board to meet the Government's priorities, quite apart from doing what it wishes in expanding its services.

I welcome the right hon. Gentleman's assertion that he appreciates the need for shares. I readily accept that one problem in Glasgow has been the excessive rate increases that the health board has had to bear from the district and regional councils and the increased pay awards that have been made during the past two years. However, I reiterate that, with an expenditure allocation of £316 million, the Greater Glasgow health board can keep within it and not overshoot it by £6 million.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the future financial provision for private sector housing repair grants in Glasgow.

Glasgow district council has at present a large number of applications before it for repairs grant. District councils were informed on 16 November that they may increase their expenditure on home improvement and repairs grants without limit during the remainder of 1982–83. I shall give provisional allocations to councils for their housing expenditure in 1983–84 very shortly. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that if authorities that are anxious to make progress with grant-aided improvement and repairs work can show next year that they need more resources for it, additional allocations to meet those needs will be given.

I thank the Minister for his reply, which is most welcome. However, will he guarantee that that money will not be made available at the expense of the home loans scheme, the slum clearance scheme or the environmental improvement grant scheme?

Yes, Sir. The allocations on the HRA account are on a different basis. If an authority can show that it has devoted 80 per cent. of its non-HRA block grant to improvement and repair grants, it can incur additional expenditure above that without limit in 1983–84.

Has the Minister had discussions either with Glasgow district council or with COSLA on the level of rateable value above which such grants will not be provided?

I have received representations from COSLA on that point and they are being considered. I welcome the interest of COSLA in this matter and I welcome especially the fact that COSLA has agreed to participate in a review of the details of the improvement and repair grant system which now has an increasingly important role in Scottish housing policy.

Am I correct in thinking that the Minister said yesterday that the allocation of the non-HRA account would be similar to last year? If the additional money for the repair grants can be provided only after 80 per cent. of the allocation has been spent on repair grants, does that mean that slum clearance, home loans and environmental grants will be confined to 20 per cent. of a budget largely similar to last year's?

The remainder of the non-HRA budget will be confined to 20 per cent. of the total. A district council must show that it is giving priority to improvement and repair grants. When it has done so, additional expenditure can then be incurred without limit. I hope that that will be widely welcomed by hon. Members on both sides of the House. I know that it will be warmly welcomed by all those who have an interest in housing improvements in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when next he plans to meet the Scottish Trades Union Congress to discuss the prospects for industrial regeneration in Scotland.

I frequently meet the Scottish Trades Union Congress to discuss industrial issues.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the Scottish Trades Union Congress, will he discuss with it the need for the congress to control its local officials? Will he remind the congress that the hot-headed local industrial action at Hoover's put in jeopardy that vital plant and the jobs and hopes that go with it? Will he also point out that industrial resurgence in Scotland depends on stable industrial relations and responsibile trade unionism?

I agree with my hon. Friend's remarks. Everyone must play a part in the improvement of Scotland's industrial performance. I am glad that the problems at Hoover's seem to have been resolved and I hope that the company can now go ahead and produce more goods with increased profits.

One matter on which the Secretary of State has received representations from the Scottish Trades Union Congress and from hon. Members on both sides of the House is the need to preserve the independence of Scottish companies. Is he aware that there has been a leak from either the Mergers and Monopolies Commission or the Department of Trade about the Charter Consolidated bid for Anderson Strathclyde, saying that the Monopolies Commission has recommended that the bid should go through? Does he agree that that has prejudiced proceedings under the Fair Trading Act? Will the Secretary of State take steps to ensure that such a bid, which will undermine a vital firm in the Scottish engineering industry, will be blocked?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern, but I am not responsible for leaks in newspapers. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade has received a copy of the MMC report and he must consider the case.

When the Secretary of State meets the STUC, will he present it with a balance sheet of the figures, which were absent during our previous Question Time, of the 7,000 closures that have taken place as against, on balance, the 8,000 firms that he said were registered for VAT and the insignificant number of jobs that those 8,000 firms can provide? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that we need a major initiative to bring new jobs to Scotland?

The Government are undertaking many major initiatives on many fronts. The right hon. Gentleman knows the details of those initiatives as well as I do. As to the balance, the only point that I was trying to make during our previous Question Time was that it is not the case that a smaller number of companies are coming into existence than are going out of existence. I accept that new companies starting up do not employ as many people as do old companies going out of business. That is the sad difficulty that we have had to face in recent years.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Conservative Members are extremely grateful for his outstanding efforts on behalf of the Scottish steel industry? Is he further aware that unemployment could be eased substantially if local authorities would provide green field and brown field sites to the construction industry to get on with building houses, which it is anxious to do? However, it has nowhere in which to do it.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the first part of his remarks. I too, have been worried about the lack of ground available for such development. I shall do what I can through my Department to encourage authorities to make land available for construction.

Will the Secretary of State remind his hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram) that the principal reason for the Hoover management's decision to keep open the Cambuslang plant last year was the fact that it had good industrial relations? Will he further suggest to his hon. Friend that interventions by hon. Members who know very little about the position at Cambuslang assist neither the management nor the trade unions in working out the good system that has been achieved?

I need not remind my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram) of any of the details of those cases, because he follows them closely. I was encouraged when Hoover decided to place its major development in Scotland. I hope that the factory can now look forward to stable industrial relations and a prosperous future.

As to the Secretary of State's meeting yesterday with the STUC about the Scottish steel industry, hon. Members on both sides of the House would welcome it if the outcome of the current review is that all the five major integrated steel plants are retained. However, we do not accept that that is the final extent of the Government's responsibility in this matter. We shall not accept the Government shuffling off the responsibility to the British Steel Corporation. Is the Secretary of State aware that there could be damaging rundowns at the Ravenscraig plant, added to the redundancies at Craigneuk and elsewhere, that would make the plant so uneconomic that it could be a victim of complete closure at a later date? A major rundown at Ravenscraig would be as unacceptable as a complete closure.

I appreciate and share the right hon. Gentleman's anxiety about the steel industry. Major decisions must still be taken, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry hopes to make a statement next week, which we must await.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress has been made in raising Scottish art teachers to the level of salary and status of their counterparts in England.

All the Scottish art colleges now offer students in art and design the opportunity of pursuing a course leading to an honours degree which is recognised as such for salary purposes.

Is the Minister aware that that does not answer the question which has dragged on for a number of years? Can he assure the House that Scottish arts students, whose courses are one year longer than those of their counterparts in England, will be equal in status and salary to people who qualify south of the border?

They are equal in salary status. Where they hold an old-type Scottish diploma they have to sit a short extra course to bring their qualifications up to date.

Why?

That was a decision taken by the Scottish teachers' salaries committee in 1977.

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

After some deterioration in the middle quarters of the year, the latest figures for October and November point to some easing in the rate of increase in unemployment. Over the past year the gap between Scotland and United Kingdom rates of unemployment has narrowed from 1·9 percentage points to 1·7 percentage points.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the figures he has given are inaccurate, as we have had an upsurge of unemployment in Scotland? Is he further aware that the people of Scotland are now most despondent because the Government's policies are not working? Will he assure us that the over-forties will get a job some time during the Government's lifetime. If he cannot give that assurance, will he fight once and for all for Scotland, and if the Cabinet does not agree with him will he and his hon. Friends on the Front Bench resign, as a sign that they are fighting tenaciously for Scotland?

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman said that the figures were inaccurate. He did not produce any evidence to support that and, of course, they are totally accurate. The differential between Scotland and England has marginally improved. It is also worth noting that, as regards the index of industrial production, during the year ending June 1982, in the United Kingdom total industrial production fell by 0·6 per cent. whereas in Scotland it rose by 1·6 per cent. In the United Kingdom, manufacturing production fell by 0·4 per cent. and in Scotland it rose by 2·1 per cent. It is encouraging news for Scotland compared with the United Kingdom.

Can the Secretary of State clarify his answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Mabon) when he said that the Government were engaged in major new initiatives of which he would know and which would lead to new jobs? Is the Secretary of State referring to developments in the North sea, North Alwyn and the Clyde? That cannot be regarded as doing more than replacing existing jobs?

If one puts it that way, all efforts to produce new jobs are replacing existing jobs. The list is far too long for me to give all the other initiatives, but we start with the industrial development drive and continue with the youth training scheme and the £2 billion of help for unemployed people. Those are major initiatives by any standard.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that yesterday's White Paper on defence, which announced that frigates were to be built by Yarrow's on the Clyde, is good news for Scotland?

I thoroughly agree with my hon. Friend. I am somewhat surprised that we did not find an early-day motion on the Order Paper tabled by Opposition Members welcoming that decision.

What effect on employment trends does the Secretary of State expect from his further pressures on local authorities in Scotland and on public expenditure generally?

My policy is directed to increasing employment in industry and wherever it can be productive. In Scottish local authorities there are approximately 10 more persons per thousand population employed than in local authorities in England. The cost falls entirely on the ratepayers and taxpayers, who are finding it hard to carry the burden.

Is the Secretary of State aware that we are not interested in the reduction in the rate of increase of unemployment? We are looking for a reduction in unemployment. The Chancellor has calculated that over the next year unemployment in the United Kingdom will increase by no less than 300,000. What is the Scottish percentage of that and when will the figure start to decrease?

The right hon. Gentleman spent five years in office looking for a reduction in unemployment, but presided over its doubling. He knows all about that. With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's last point, when at the Dispatch Box he always refused to make forecasts of unemployment. I believe that on that, at least, he was right.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is satisfied with the effectiveness of the Highlands and Islands Development Board in relation to encouraging more efficient land use.

It is the policy of the Highlands and Islands Development Board to encourage the best use of natural resources within its area. Given the poor quality of much of the land in its area I am satisfied that the board makes every effort to encourage the most appropriate use of land and to promote alternative uses where these can be profitable.

Does the Minister agree that the board considers that its powers in relation to this are inadequate, as it has stated in representations to the Government? In a case such as the Knoydart estate, which the Ministry of Defence is considering purchasing, does the board have any opportunity to express a view that can be taken into account?

On the first point, the chairman of the board made it clear in this year's annual report that the board would not be pursuing any extension of its powers in regard to land use. The proposals for the Knoydart estate are a matter in the first instance for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence. I am aware that he is at present consulting the Highland regional council. I do not believe that the House would expect my right hon. Friend or myself to comment further on such a matter.

Is the Minister saying that he has no interest in what happens eventually to the Knoydart estate? The estate does not belong to the Ministry of Defence. Does the Minister accept that it would be much better to give the HIDB far greater powers for the acquisition of land, planning and decisions about developing land use once that land has been acquired? The Minister should not sit back and allow his colleagues in the Ministry of Defence to decide the future of an important piece of land in the north of Scotland, which is badly needed for purposes other than defence.

The hon. Gentleman's ignorance out of office is equalled only by his ignorance in office. He seems to know nothing about the fact that my right hon. Friend, like his right hon. Friend when he was Secretary of State, has a planning duty and therefore it would be incorrect for my right hon. Friend or myself to make any further comment.

Does my hon. Friend agree that some conservation groups, through their blind passion to preserve everything, are holding back development in much of the Highlands? Is he aware that the development of land for agriculture and the creation of new jobs has been stopped by some of those groups?

I am bound to agree with my hon. Friend. There are some groups in some parts of the Highlands that are rather uncertain whether they want fresh employment opportunities, judging by their attitude to schemes that are put forward. Such schemes are given the most careful consideration by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

Is the Minister aware that there is great disappointment in the Highlands that the HIDB has never used its existing powers with regard to land? The Highlands requires legislation to wipe out the curse of landlordism once and for all.

I agree with the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's question. I disagree totally with the Socialism that he advocates in the second part.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will seek to bring Scottish building regulations into line with those of England and Wales.

In the review of our regulations, as already announced, we are noting developments in England and Wales. But we must have close regard to the views of Scottish interests and the different emphases in building design and practice north and south of the border.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the scope, form and administration of building regulations in England and Wales will be radically altered, I believe to the benefit of all, if parts II and III of the current Housing and Building Control Bill 1982 go through? Does he think it would be appropriate then to change the Scottish regulations, wherever practical, to bring them into line with the rest of Great Britain? Does he think that there is a good case for strengthening the Scottish thermal insulation standards to bring them into line with those in England and Wales?

With regard to my hon. Friend's first point, I assure him that we continue to pay the closest attention to developments in England and Wales. I entirely agree with the objective of my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction of simplifying building regulations. I accept what my hon. Friend says about thermal insulation standards. We shall be introducing regulations to require higher standards in Scotland in the interests of energy conservation and to harmonise building standards throughout the United Kingdom.

Is the Minister satisfied that the building firm of Barratt is complying with all the building regulations? Is it not building the slums of tomorrow in Scotland? Is the Minister aware that I and many others would not have one of those houses as a gift?

The hon. Gentleman wishes to dictate his preferences to others. Barratt is subject to the same building regulations as every other builder. Private builders build houses that people want to live in, where they want to live and at prices that they can afford. The hon. Gentleman might not like that, but the process is of great benefit.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many people in Scotland were charged with a breach of the peace during 1981; and how many were convicted.

In 1981, 39,697 persons were proceeded against on a charge of breach of the peace. Of these, 36,352 had the charge proved against them.

Is not the charge of breach of the peace a crude catch-all device to convict people whether or not they are guilty?

It certainly caught the hon. Gentleman.

Does it not bring the courts into disrepute, particularly when it is used against political activists who rightly demonstrate against the Government, against mass unemployment and against cuts in living standards? Will the Solicitor-General do something about this?

I have no intention of altering the crime of breach of the peace. The figures show that there are serious incidents that must be dealt with at law. Freedom of speech or the liberty of the individual would not be protected by allowing those who call themselves political activists to engage in disorderly conduct.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that causing fear to the lieges must never be allowed to become a substitute for democratic dialogue?

I could not agree with my hon. Friend more. If Members of Parliament and ordinary members of the public do not have an abiding respect for the law, no one else can be expected to.

Is it not the case—[Interruption.] I am trying to be quiet. If two police officers testify that a person's conduct is likely to cause a breach of the peace, is it not difficult to offer any defence except that of alibi? As someone can be charged with a breach of the peacef, even for talking a little too loudly—irrespective of any individual case that the Solicitor-General may be thinking of—does not the situation genuinely need to be looked at?

One safeguard of the liberty of the individual and freedom from conviction in Scotland is the requirement for corroboration. I do not understand the hon. Gentleman's objection. It is an important safeguard that should be retained.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many charges of vandalism have been brought by his Department in the past six months.

The latest figures available for charges of vandalism are for 1981, when 2,619 persons were prosecuted. Of these, 2,379 were convicted. The only figures available for 1982 are for the number of compensation orders made following conviction. During the six-month period from 1 April to 30 September over 900 cases of vandalism were subject to compensation orders.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware of the increasing anxiety and fear, particularly among the elderly, in constituencies such as mine about vandalism? Will his Department ensure that the invidious crime is dealt with by consistent and effective prosecution?

The figures are unacceptably high. It will be the Crown Office's policy to ensure that, where possible, people who have committed crimes of vandalism are caught, prosecuted and, we hope, convicted. An important feature of the new crime of vandalism is that about two-thirds of the cases have attracted compensation orders, which are of great benefit to the victims.

How many people convicted of the new crime of vandalism would have been convicted anyway under another part of Scottish legislation? Is this not purely a cosmetic exercise, as the offenders would have been charged anyway?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the figures. I am surprised that, after two years, he still takes that attitude. Is he aware that SCOLAG believes that having the specific crime of vandalism brings the situation home to the offenders, the victims and the public at large?

Would not a little bit of corporal punishment administered shortly after the incident reduce the number of such crimes?

I am happy to say that that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

Is not the Solicitor-General a little alarmed and annoyed by the fact that the Conservative Party chairman in Scotland, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram), after four years of Conservative Government has anxiously to seek assurance that the Crown Office is doing its best to combat vandalism?

Not at all. When we introduced the crime the hon. Gentleman opposed it and said that it was purely a cosmetic exercise. It is recognised in Scotland as a useful addition to our armoury in the fight against crime, particularly when accompanied by a compensation order.

When will we deal with the vandals in the Government who are responsible for mass unemployment, cuts in our living standards and other ills? Should not the workers have the right to demonstrate, and will not demonstrations occur more frequently as the situation gets worse? Does the hon. and learned Gentleman accept that the Government will inevitably have to face a winter of discontent?

No, Sir.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what guidance he has given to procurators fiscal about the use of tape recordings made by the police on the questioning of suspects detained under section 2 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he is satisfied that the procurator fiscal service is making full use of tape-recorded questioning of suspects.

Although no specific guidance has been issued on the use of tape recordings, those procurators fiscal in the experiment are closely involved with the monitoring exercise. I am satisfied that they are making full use of tape recording.

Why are the Solicitor-General and his colleagues in the Scottish Office refusing to publish the report prepared by the Scottish Home and Health Department in the first two years of the experiment? Is it not wrong and a serious discourtesy to the House that we have to rely on selective leaks to the press? Does not such a procedure damage rather than protect the police? To refute the suggestion in The Economist this week that the police have systematically avoided tape recording by preliminary interviews before the suspect is taken to the police station, should not the Government publish the report in full so that we can make a judgment on the evidence?

The experiment is being conducted by the Scottish Office under the guidance of the Secretary of State. The hon. Gentleman has been advised in a written answer that the report has been kept confidential to ensure a free and frank exchange of views with the police. I deprecate the fact that the report has been leaked. It will not help those involved to iron out and properly resolve the difficulties if at every turn confidential reports are subjected to publication.

Is it not a disgraceful breach of the promises made by the hon. and learned Gentleman's predecessor during the passing of the Criminal Justice Bill that the report is not being made available to Members of Parliament? Is he aware that during the passing of that Bill his predecessor gave an assurance that there would be clear monitoring, in which Members of Parliament would be involved?

There is careful monitoring. From time to time my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, my predecessor and I have answered questions on this matter. The hon. Gentleman is asking that a confidential report by those working on the experiment to see whether the difficulties can be successfully ironed out should be made public. As my right hon. Friend and I have already said, that would be wholly counter-productive to trying to make sure that the experiment works.

Mr. Dennis Canavan.

No. 34.

I called the hon. Gentleman to ask a supplementary question on question 32, despite the time. Does the hon. Gentleman want to ask a supplementary question?

No. 34.

We cannot go on to that question.

How long does my hon. and learned Friend think the experiment will continue? When, eventually, will a report be made to us on the results?

The experiment is being conducted, not by the Crown Office, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. It has been going on for some time. What is important is that its area of experimentation has been extended. What is most important is that it is now being carried on in Glasgow. Once we know fully what has been found out in Glasgow, I have no doubt that there will be a full statement both to the House and interested members of the public on the success of the experiment.