asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what has been the reduction in Government housing subsidies per thousand four-apartment houses built by local authorities, comparing 1951 with 1962.

None, Sir. The amount of subsidy paid per thousand four-apartment houses completed in the local authority financial year 1950–51 was £26,220. The figure for 1961–62 was £29,614.

Nevertheless, is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great financial morass into which Scottish local authorities are getting because of the imposition of high interest charges on loans, even those running over the full course of 60 years? It is making it very difficult for them to tackle the outstanding housing programmes which are needed in every area in the country.

The difficulty which some local authorities may be getting into is, to some extent, a different question, but the policy of helping by open housing subsidies and not by means of artificially low interest rates is the right one.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to provide primary school accommodation in the new town of Cumbernauld.

In addition to the three schools already in use, the education authority has a fourth school under construction and hopes to start a fifth within the next few months. Two more are included in its programme for the next three years.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that schools planned today for completion in two years' time will not even accommodate all the children who are without accommodation today? Will he recommend to the county council the use of portable units, provided by his Department, which could be added to the present schools to accommodate the few children who cannot get places until next August?

I do not entirely accept the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary Question, but I agree that it is difficult to forecast for any new town the likely arrival of children in primary schools. The local education authority is in touch with my Department, and I am certain that, if there is some method by which the development corporation, the local education authority and my Department can combine to avoid trouble and overcome the temporary shortage, we will adopt it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress has been made in the provision of recreation facilities in the new town of Cumbernauld.

Fourteen halls and two community rooms in housing areas are available for community activities. A further hall, two community rooms and a youth and community centre sponsored by the Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A. are under construction. There are at present two football pitches and a large number of children's play areas. Work is in progress on a 20 acre sports field with the help of a grant from the Wolfson Trust.

Will the right hon. Gentleman do what he can to speed the completion of this recreational area, which will be equipped by a grant from the Wolfson Trust, since I understand that it is nowhere near ready for equipment? I understand, also, that the district council, which will be responsible for administration for the area, is being sorely pressed to provide facilities, although the basic provision is not yet available.

I am sure that the corporation will take note of what the hon. Member has said. I know that it is keen to speed up the provision of these facilities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the total amount of Government grant which will be given to the Scottish Tourist Board for 1964–65 and for 1965–66.

A temporary grant of £15,000 a year was introduced in 1959 for a three-year period. It has since been extended for a further two years and will be continued for another year to cover 1964–65.

Does that roundabout Answer mean that the paltry sum of £15,000 a year, which has been received by the Tourist Board for the last five years, is to be discontinued in 1965–66 and that thereafter the Board will receive no Government grant? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Government of Northern Ireland gives its Tourist Board £150,000 annually and that the Government of Eire spends £500,000 annually to boost its tourist facilities? Will he not try to measure up to those smaller countries and do something for Scotland?

The hon. Member is wrong in thinking that it was a paltry sum. It was a sum provided for a specific experimental purpose, and it has produced very useful results. As I told the hon. Member in our Second Reading debate on the Tourist Amenities Bill some time ago, this is not the sum total of Government help. About £1,250,000 is given through the B.T.H.A. to help tourism, and on its calculations a direct sum of £40,000 is given to the Scottish Tourist Board and up to £400,000 is spent on services which are directly applicable to tourism in Scotland.

But if the £15,000 has had such beneficial effects as the right hon. Gentleman claims, why is he discontinuing it?

Because the experiment for which it was designed is practically complete.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the number of persons held in prison before trial in 1962; what was the average period for which they were so held; and what proportion of such persons, when tried, were found not guilty or sentenced only to a fine.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland in how many cases in the last year for which statistics are available accused persons have been detained in prison pending trial who were eventually dealt with by fine, probation discharge, or acquittal.

During 1962, 9,303 men and 540 women were admitted to prison untried, on an average they were held between 12 and 13 days. These figures include those refused bail and those who had not yet arranged bail. Of these, 4,787 men and 370 women paid fines or were admonished, placed on probation or disposed of otherwise than by detention; 964 men and 93 women were found not guilty, and the remaining 3,552 men and 77 women were sentenced to detention. I regret that there is no separate information available regarding the number fined.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this is a shocking indictment of what is happening in Scottish courts? Is he aware that this is much more than double the English-Welsh proportion? Is there not strong evidence that our courts are using remands in custody as an additional punishment? Will he look into this question and see that if this practice is followed—and all the evidence suggests that it is—it is stopped at once? Is it not a fantastic position that 900 people should be sent to prison and then found not guilty? I hope that he will tell us now what he intends to do to stop this kind of practice.

Whether people appear in court and are found not guilty is not a question over which I can have any direct influence, but I will certainly look at the matter in the light of what the hon. Gentleman has said. I am aware that the position is worse than it is in England, and I am not pleased that that should be so.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many hydroelectricity schemes undertaken by the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board have proceeded without public inquiry.

Thirty-one, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that Answer more or less proves that what he has now done in respect of the Laidon scheme, which is being held up even though there are no objections, by his insistence on a public inquiry, is unprecedented? Will he inform his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister that he has chosen his constituency in which to hold up the modernisation of the Highlands?

Anything which is done for the first time is unprecedented, but that does not necessarily mean that it is wrong. I am sure that the Prime Minister knows where Loch Laidon is.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. W. Hamilton), the Prime Minister said that hydro-electric schemes had been held up because there were objections? Here is one in the Prime Minister's own constituency which is being held up and where there are no objections.

I accept that that is so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why it is necessary to have a public inquiry when there are no objections?

I explained this to the House at Question Time a fortnight ago. The whole problem of whether the use of hydro-electricity is economic is just as important to the Highlands as to the rest of Scotland and seems to be a sensible reason for an inquiry. Hon. Members opposite may not care whether things are economic, but I can assure them that the Highlands do.

I agree that the right hon. Gentleman explained it a fortnight ago, but he should tell the House that, following his explanation, he sent me a letter telling me that the information he had given was wrong.

I am prepared to admit it when I am wrong. I wrote, rightly and courteously, to the hon. Gentleman saying that in giving the information to the House I used the phrase "capital costs", which was a kind of shorthand. However, it was wrong and I should have said "on what terms capital should be offered to finance electricity".

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action has been taken on the plan for Central Scotland, and on what parts of the plan; what are the planned priorities; and what is the estimated time table.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the meetings between his Department and local authorities in respect of the Government's proposals for growth and development in Central Scotland.

As the Reply is rather long, I shall with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is it true that the Secretary of State has begun only in the last week or so to get down to the practical possibilities of the Central Scotland plan? It is not rather strange that the Government should wait until the last months of their term of office to start on a plan for Scotland which should have been prepared twelve years ago? Is it not a piece of window dressing to produce a plan on which no work behind the scenes has been done and for which no preparations have been made or dates given for the starting of main roads which will be highways from Edinburgh to Stirling and Stirling to south of the Border, or even for the Glasgow road which will cover the area?

When the right hon. Gentleman gets my reply, he will see that a great deal of work has been done and that it is by no means true to say that it has started only in the last week or two. It is true that it is only in the last week that my right hon. Friend the Minister of State has had consultations with local authorities, but they, too, wanted to have time to consider the implications of the scheme for their areas.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that, on an earlier occasion, he said that there had been long and careful preparation before these plans were announced? Is he aware that the preparation was so careful that in my constituency the Burgh of Motherwell and Wishaw, a single, joint burgh, was split in two? Does he intend that it should be cut into two and that one part should be in the development area and one not? Was this the result of careful preparation? What is the evidence that anybody in the area considered where the demarcation line should be placed?

The division between Motherwell and Wishaw is a separate matter and, if the hon. Gentleman puts down a Question, I will deal with it in detail. These problems are concerned with a great deal more than the physical position of places on the map. There are questions of employment exchange areas and so on, and I can assure the hon. Member that if he had tried to produce this plan alone it would have taken him a very long time.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that according to the plan Motherwell and Wishaw appeared to be in the development area, but that according to the appendix Wishaw is not? Does not this show a startling confusion among the people responsible for the plan?

It does not show anything of the sort. If a map had been produced to show exact delineation of all the areas, hon. Members would have had the greatest difficulty carrying it around with them. It was clearly said in the White Paper that the lines on the map were not meant accurately to delineate the exact areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what hospitals were substantially rebuilt in 1963.

The Dundee Royal Lift Hospital and the Mackinnon Memorial Hospital at Broadford in Skye.

May I ask the Secretary of State whether, unlike his right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, he would be kind enough to venture a definition of the distinction between a substantially rebuilt hospital and a new hospital? When is a new hospital a new hospital but not a substantially rebuilt one, and when is a substantially rebuilt hospital not a new hospital?

I am always extremely nervous of making definitions, because generally they confuse the issue a good deal more. I imagine, I hope correctly, that a new hospital is one which is built where no hospital existed before.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the bed capacity of each new hospital built in Scotland between 1952 and 1963.

The hospitals are Vale of Leven, Alexandria, 155 beds; Victoria, Kirkcaldy, 123 beds; Gilbert Bain Memorial, Lerwick, 65 beds and Bellshill Maternity, 132 beds.

May I ask the Secretary of State whether I am correct in assuming that the rate of starting and completing new hospitals in Scotland is one per 1,098 days, representing something substantially less than half a hosiptal bed every day since the Conservative Party came to office?

The hon. Gentleman can calculate it that way if he likes, but it is none the less true that at the moment we have under construction ten new or substantially rebuilt hospitals. Five of them are expected to be completed during this year, and another five new big hospitals will be started during this year, so perhaps at the beginning the rate was due to not enough starts before we took over rather than to our failure.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland to what extent he was consulted before the recent decision was made to use oil for heating in the new Edinburgh Royal Infirmary and Western General Hospital; and what was the nature of his advice.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what consultations he had with the National Coal Board about the fuel to be used for heating installations in the new hospitals in Edinburgh; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what decision has been reached concerning the type of feul to be used for the heating of the new hospitals in Edinburgh; what were the factors which determined the decision; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will reconsider his decision to approve the installation of oil-fired heating appliances in the proposed new hopsitals in Edinburgh.

The regional hospital board asked for my guidance on policy before it reached a decision. I had no direct consultations with the National Coal Board. I advised the hospital board that after considering any functional factors which might affect the choice it should compare the cost of the fuels available on the basis of an annual charge, including fuel, operational and maintenance costs, together with an appropriate annual allowance for the capital cost; if the difference was more than marginal it should be regarded as pointing to a decision in favour of the lower cost installation. The board took revised offers from all the fuel interests concerned and the engineering reports then showed that the annual costs with oil would be about £10,000 less than with coal, and the board accordingly proposed that oil should be used. I have since approved the use of oil at these two hospitals and authorised the board to plan on this basis.

Did the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that he has rather wider responsibilities than merely considering the simple economic balance sheets of the hospital board? Can he tell us whether the differential price for coal, which operates against Scottish miners, played a big part in ensuring that oil came out better than coal? If so, what representations did the right hon. Gentleman make to the Minister of Power to ensure that the price of coal was such that it would have been possible to use it for this purpose and so benefit the coal industry in Scotland?

I accept the fact that my interests are wider, but an annual increase of cost of £10,000 over a period that could be as long as 60,000 years—[HON. MEMBERS: "60,000 years?"]—is a considerable sum.

Is it not the Government's policy that preferential consideration should be given to offers made by the National Coal Board where there is a question of using indigenous fuel? This is the oft-declared policy of the Government. The question is whether the selective coal price increase of 10s. a ton imposed upon Scotland just over two years ago has made it impossible for the Divisional Coal Board of Scotland to quote a price that is competitive with that of oil. Does not the right hon. Gentleman have a responsibility to consult the National Coal Board to see whether it would waive its selective coal price increase, especially in view of the fact that in Edinburgh the market for coal is being lost, although it is alongside the rich Midlothian coalfield.

It is for the Coal Board to decide what price it is prepared to quote for any particular tonnage in any particular place. If anything, the figures that I have given favour coal because, for example, they have taken no account of the fact that after 25 years the initial plant would have to be replaced, and the figures ignore the amount by which the replacement of oil plant would be cheaper than that of coal plant. I can assure the House that I do my best to help the coal industry, but it must be on the basis that the cost is only marginally above the price of others.

How does the right hon. Gentleman define the word "marginal"? Is he aware that the economy of Central Scotland, if not the whole of Scotland, depends basically on coal, our indigenous fuel? What has Scotland got from the oil industry that the right hon. Gentleman should give it preferential treatment? If he is arguing for the purely economic test, will he apply that same test to farms? If Scottish farms had to pass that test, virtually all of them would be shut down.

The hon. Member's last comment is neither accurate nor particularly appropriate —

It is very fair.

but the fact remains that important as coal is—and the decision about the big new electricity station shows the amount of time and trouble that we try to take to get the right answer—we must have regard to costs both in respect of industry and in things like hospitals, because although these sums of £10,000 a year may be regarded by the hon. Member as only marginal, over a long period they involve a substantial sum.

On what does the Secretary of State base his argument that oil will be cheaper than coal in 60 or 1,000 years' time? I give him credit for searching for jobs for Scotland, but he is bound to agree that in this case instead of helping Scotland he is doing it a disservice. This continual nibbling away at the Coal Board's trade can only mean that the Government are prepared to run down the industry more than at the moment. With due respect to his decision, the Secretary of State should consider the question again.

Order. I must observe that the introduction to the hon. Member's question seems a little prolonged. Will he ask his question?

The hon. Member is unfair in saying that the Government have decided to run down the coal industry. That industry has made tremendous strides in the last year, as he knows very well, and it is becoming far more competitive and more productive than ever before. This should—and I am sure that it will—result in its obtaining many of these contracts in the future. But it is just as impossible for me to forecast what the price of oil will be in 60 years' time as to forecast what will be the price of coal. Therefore, the present price is the only possible basis of comparison.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I am delighted to have seen the care over the expenditure of public money? Can he say what is the objection to using oil—especially if it is British-controlled oil?

There is certainly no objection to using oil. In fact, a tax of 2d. per gallon has been put on fuel oil in order to help the coal industry.

In the interests of the whole of Scotland, will the Minister enter into discussions with the Minister of Power in relation to differential price increases?

I will certainly do that.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of all those answers, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter in the Adjournment debate on Wednesday next.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what arrangements are contemplated for the distribution of milk in marginal and upland rural areas where the only distributors at present are producer-retailers who will be ineligible for assistance under the Winter Keep Scheme.

My Department is at present examining the general question of rural milk distribution, including the position of producer-retailers, in consultation with the milk trade. As regards the Winter Keep Scheme, I would remind my hon. Friend that disqualification of upland farms only arises where the sale of milk constitutes the main enterprise.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether it is really wise, by excluding dairy farmers and milk producers from the Winter Keep Scheme, to risk disrupting normal supplies from areas which at short notice are liable to be cut off from the rest of the country because of blizzards?

That point was brought to my notice by a delegation from the Scottish N.F.U., and we are considering it. I think that, in general, the possible ineligibility under the Winter Keep Scheme of some of these dairy farmers is not in itself a decisive factor.

May I ask the Minister whether he can give an explanation of the actual reasons why upland dairy farms are being cut out of the Winter Keep Scheme when previously, under the M.A.P. Scheme, they received a grant? This is inexplicable and is causing great resentment in every constituency which has upland farms.

I know that there is a lot of feeling about this, but in the days of the M.A.P. grant there was also a good deal of feeling because in some areas these grants were given to dairy farmers and in others they were not. It is always difficult to take anything away from somebody who has had it, but I think that it is of advantage that these schemes should be universal in their application and should be seen to be fair.

Does this apply to places like the Slamannan area where the ground is not suitable for cultivation, and where it may not be possible to maintain farms at all unless they are allowed the grant in addition to supplying milk?

I cannot speak about individual farms in any given area. I know a number of farmers who have failed. This applies only to those farms on which more than 40 per cent. to 50 per cent. of the output is milk.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the widespread concern felt by experts at the future of Scottish milk supplies; and if he will reconsider the exclusion from benefit under the Winter Keep Scheme of all those who derive more than 40 per cent. of their farm income from milk products.

I am aware that concern has been expressed on this subject in many quarters. This question and my hon. Friend's point about the Winter Keep Scheme will be further considered at the forthcoming Annual Review.

With the number of dairy cattle in Scotland down by 24,000 in the past year, would it not be prudent of my right hon. Friend to encourage rather than discourage milk production from the upland areas?

I do not think that I should anticipate the results of the February Price Review.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into this shortage, since some factories in Dumries-shire are idle because there are no milk supplies, at a time when we are importing tremendous quantities of dairy products?

Yes. My Department is aware of this.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that a mass meeting of upland farmers from Orkney, Caithness, Sutherland. Ross-shire, Inverness-shire, Argyllshire, Banffshire and Aberdeenshire took place at Inverness on 11th January; and, in view of the difficulties facing upland farmers in the north of Scotland as a result of rail closures, withdrawal of grants, unrestricted duty-free imports of mutton and lamb, and almost duty-free imports of beef totalling about 14 million hundredweights per annum, and the annual price review giving lower prices at a time of rising costs, if he will take action to correct a situation which will impoverish the farmers, create unemployment and depopulation, and allow land to go to waste.

I have seen reports of the meeting referred to by the hon. Member, but I cannot accept the picture he presents of the position or prospects of upland farmers in the north of Scotland. The state of hill and upland farming, in common with that of other sections of the industry, will be considered at the Annual Review next month, and I cannot anticipate the results of this comprehensive examination of the farming situation.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is implying that between 200 and 300 farmers who were present at the meeting in Inverness were lying to three of his colleagues who were present at the meeting? May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that a week or two ago a hill farmer in my constituency sold his land for £85,000? The stock was valued at £55,000, making an investment of £140,000, which is yielding an income of £270 per annum without a wage or contribution to the farmer and his son? Is not my right hon. Friend completely misinformed? If he doubts what the farmers said, why does not he call for an immediate inquiry? Balance sheets can be procured. Any accountant can be asked to produce balance sheets if the farmers are willing to have that done, as I am sure they would be only too glad to do. Why should the Government always take it out of the farmer and the crofter to maintain a cheap food policy?

I have access to a great many economic reports that are produced by colleges and other people who study these things. Having been in farming circles myself. I am also not unaware of the fact that, when a case is put forward, one generally puts forward the best case that one can in the hope of getting the most that one can. That is natural and is accepted.

Has the Minister read the full report of this meeting at Inverness? The terms of the resolution of censure passed on the Government were so extreme that I was appalled. Now that the right hon. Gentleman has become a Minister, is he so completely out of touch with farming opinion that he does not know that all over Scotland farmers are concerned about milk and about winter keep, and want to know when the Government are going to introduce this large-scale programme for the revival of agriculture in Scotland which has been urged on us almost daily by the Scottish N.F.U.?

I am delighted to have the hon. Gentleman's sympathy. Most of my friends in the farming community know that the prospects for next year come out in the February Price Review and are awaiting them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the number and amount of agricultural grants and deficiency payments refused to Scottish farmers in respect of season 1963 on account of alleged irregularity or lateness in giving notice or making application to his department.

This information requires a search of Departmental records, which is proceeding. I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

I thank my right hon. Friend for the trouble that he has taken in this matter, but is it not a fact that the figures will show a very harsh and oppressive attitude on the part of his Department, involving, in some instances, penalties of several hundred pounds for what, after all, are technical breaches of the regulations? Will he consider laying regulations before the House with a view to imposing modest penalties in such cases, in order to make the punishment fit the crime?

I do not want to anticipate what the picture will show, but I have seen a little of it in the past. The number of farmers who are late now represent only a tiny percentage. We are operating a scheme under which people are expected to forward their applications by a certain date, and the scheme will immediately run into chaos if we forget that fact altogether.

But does not my right hon. Friend agree that a loss of £850, which was inflicted upon a constituent of mine—my right hon. Friend has details of the case—is quite harsh and unconscionable in the circumstances? Will not he give the matter further consideration?

I will certainly look at the matter, but if that amount of money is at stake it is all the greater reason why my hon. Friend's friend should have taken the trouble to put in his claim in time.

On a point of order. In view of the quite unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter at the earliest opportunity on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has decided on the regulations to govern fishing within the six mile limit round the Scottish coast under the draft Convention drawn up at the second session of the European Fisheries Conference; and whether he will make a statement.

I can add nothing at this stage to the statement made to the House on 20th January, 1964, by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture Fisheries and Food about the draft Convention, which will be further considered when the European Fisheries Conference resumes on 26th February.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this proposed extension of the limits, small as it is, could mark a definite improvement in the fortunes of the Scottish inshore fishing fleet? Can he say how soon this draft Convention can be brought into force? When he is considering the necessary regulations, will he pay particular attention to the need for the conservation and development of our own natural fishery resources?

As I have told my hon. Friend, the Conference resumes on 26th February. I cannot forecast how quickly after that we may be able to move. It depends how the Conference goes. But the Conference is also very much interested in the other problems that my hon. Friend mentioned.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also take into consideration what consequential effects any of these conferences may have on the middle-water and distant-water fleets, which are not very enthusiastic about what has been achieved up to date?

We keep in very close touch with them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give priority to the building of a dual carriageway between the Forth and Tay road bridges.

I am giving priority to the provision of dual carriageways on A.90 which, between Inverkeithing and Milnathort, is part of one of the routes between the two bridges.

Is the Minister aware that the Prime Minister said only two or three months ago that the Tay road bridge would be of great importance to Dundee as it provided a direct route to the South? Has he considered whether this will provide a direct route to the South?

I agree that this road is not a direct route. But in the circumstances it is the best one on which to spend money at this stage.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now make a statement on the scale of tolls to be charged on the Forth road bridge.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to announce his decision on the Forth Road Bridge Joint Board's recommendations in respect of the toll charges.

The Joint Board have submitted for my approval their proposed toll schedule, which provides for a flat rate toll of 2s. 6d. on mechanically propelled vehicles. I have, as required by the relevant Order, specified the newspapers in which the Board are to publish a notice; thereafter there will be a period of not less than six weeks during which objections may be made.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that a 2s. 6d. flat-rate toll is fair? If so, will he make the announcement quickly so that it can be implemented, until we get a Labour Government when we shall get rid of it? Is he aware that industrialists who are anxious to come into the area are concerned about what the rate of toll will be?

It would be quite improper for me to express my opinion about this before any objection which may be made has been lodged. I think that the hon. Gentleman's suggestion about when the toll would be removed is in the hypothetical class.

Is the Minister aware of the anger and disappointment in Fife at the long delay in accepting the recommendations of the Joint Board and, further, that this delay is having a bad effect on the development of the new town of Donibristle?

I do not accept that anyone can complain of the length of the delay as there is a statutory period during which objections may be lodged. Nor am I convinced that it is having a bad effect on Donibristle.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what consultations he has had with the South-Eastern Regional Hospital Board which, in a letter to hospital boards of management, has stated that two terms of four years should be regarded as the normal period of service on such boards; and if he will make a statement.

The appointment of board of management members is a matter for the regional hospital board, and I have had no recent consultations with the board about it. In 1960, my Department wrote to the board suggesting that it might wish to consider adopting the practice which I follow in relation to regional boards, which is not to reappoint members after two four-year terms unless there are special circumstances.

Does not the Minister agree that age and ability to make a worth-while contribution to boards of management should be the criteria to determine length of service rather than the arbitrary one of two terms of four years? Is not he embarrassed at the particularly "blue" tone of the complexion of the membership of the South-Eastern Regional Hospital Board?

I have never thought that politics played an important part in the capacity of people to help in the Health Service. This is a matter in which one has to keep a balance. I quite agree that experience is important, but so are new ideas.

Is the Minister suggesting that two members of one political party out of a board membership of 16 represents keeping the balance? Is he aware that the hospital at Kirkcaldy, which is the largest hospital in Fife, is not represented on the regional board and, since there are two vacancies, would he take steps to remedy this omission?

I should certainly look at the qualifications of people which would make them suitable for membership of a board without considering for a second what might be their political parties.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the number of additional general medical practitioners which would be required in Scotland if the present permitted maximum number of patients on a doctor's list was reduced from 3,500 to 2,000.

Such an estimate would involve studying in detail the distribution of doctors and patients, and would not be realistic without an assumption about the period over which this reduction in maximum list sizes could be achieved.

In view of the inability of a doctor properly to look after 3,500 patients; the highly desirable need to reduce the list to about 2,000; the known shortage of doctors in Scotland at the present time and the increased numbers which would be required if such a reduction in the lists were brought about, is the Minister prepared to urge the creation now of an additional medical school, because the present medical school output could not meet the needs were the steps taken that I have mentioned?

The problem which faces us in Scotland is not related to the number of doctors but to distribution. If we divide the number of patients by the number of doctors it will be found that we are, on average and over the whole country, below the 2,000 figure. But this does not alter the fact that the moment there are about 2½ million people on lists of over 2,000, 1½ million on lists of over 2,500, and 600,000 on lists of over 3,000. It is a problem of distribution, but we are doing our best to help.

Do the Minister's calculations take into account the known increase in the population which will take place over the next few years?

The figures which I have given are the present figures.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total number of general medical practitioners in Scotland; how many are associated in group practice; how many group practices are in operation; and how many of these are housed in fully equipped centres.

At 1st October last there were 2,775 general practitioners, including 121 assistants, practising under the National Health Service in Scotland. The term "group practice" is not precisely defined, but nearly three-quarters of these doctors were in partnerships. Twenty-five practitioners practice from health centres.

In view of the small number of medical practitioners practising from properly-equipped group centres, is the Secretary of State prepared to initiate talks with the medical profession to see how this highly desirable development might be expedited?

It is my view that this is a desirable development, but at the moment it is experimental. I am certain that if the experiments are successful the medical service will seek my advice about whether I can promote it more quickly.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the latest available figure for houses under construction in Scotland.

At the end of 1963 there were 44,687 houses under construction in Scotland by all agencies.

May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on this splendid achievement? Does not he agree that this is an all-time record for house building in Scotland?

It is certainly the highest end-of-year figure since 1947.

Is the Minister aware that he cannot get away with this, and that he is much too glib? Is he aware that we are not concerned with the number of houses it the course of construction, but we are concerned about the completions each year? Is he aware that these have been decreasing rapidly, compared with the houses built in 1952?

I agree that at the end of the day it is the number of completions that count. But it is difficult to complete a house if a start is not made.

Is the Minister aware that we on this side of the House congratulate him on his achievements in catching up in 1963 with what we were able to do two years after the war?

I willingly accept the hon. Gentleman's congratulations and I wish that his party had done as well with hospitals.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how the yield of sugar per acre in the Cupar sugar beet factory area compares, over the last three years, with the rest of the United Kingdom factory areas.

The average sugar yield per acre in the Cupar factory area in the three years 1961 to 1963 was respectively 35·35, 33·75 and 27·08 cwt. The comparable average figures for all English factory areas were 45·01, 40·98 and 43·45 cwt. The lowest individual factory area yield was in England in 1961 and 1962 and in the Cupar area in 1963.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in general, these figures tend to illustrate the lower return per acre which sugar beet growers are getting, and will he take this into consideration at the Price Review?

Will the Secretary of State give us an assurance that he will not show the same attitude to this lower production of sugar beet per acre in Scotland as he showed to the use of coal in Scotland?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what acreage of sugar beet for the 1964 crop has now been contracted with the Cupar factory of the British Sugar Corporation.

Offers from growers now total some 12,000 acres.

In view of the considerable reduction on previous years which this figure shows—which I understand, is shared with other factory areas in England—will my right hon. Friend consult the Minister of Agriculture with a view to redressing this loss of acreage in this year's Price Review?

I think my hon. Friend is right. Probably the poor return last year has had some effect in diminishing the number of acres under the crop in Scotland. I shall have to consider with the Minister of Agriculture the best thing to do.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the concern of Scottish farmers regarding the working of the Winter Keep Scheme; how many appeals have been made regarding the category into which their farms have been placed; and how many have been successful.

Yes, Sir. I have received representations from the Scottish National Farmers' Union on this matter and these will be further considered at the Annual Review.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that these figures express great dissatisfaction? In view of that, how could the Under-Secretary, in a Written Reply last week, give certain figures without taking into consideration these appeals? How could the Under-Secretary reach an approximate figure about what the subsidy would be under the new Board even if he did not know what the results of the appeals would be?

Quite frankly, one cannot give a firm figure until all the appeals are settled, but the House would find it rather boring if Ministers said that they could not give a firm figure until all the appeals were settled, and I am sure that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary did his best to help the House.

Would the Secretary of State consider cutting down the categories from three to two under the winter feed scheme? This would obviate a great many applications being put into category A as it is usual for those in category A to wish to go into Category B. Will the right hon. Gentleman say what machinery is in operation to dispense justice in cases where people appeal against being put into a category?

In a great many cases there are inspections by independent panels of arbiters appointed by me. They report to me and my decision then has to be taken. In reply to the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, the N.F.U., which has made representations to me on a number of points, has not asked me to consider that one.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many organisations have been invited to submit nominations for membership of the proposed Scottish Tourist Amenities Councils; how many individual invitations have been sent out; and with what result.

Twelve organisations have been asked to submit nominations for consideration when appointments are made to the Council. I have not invited any individuals to serve.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say how many have replied saying that they would be willing to serve on a council of this kind? Will he at the same time tell us what his intentions are in regard to the Bill?

The second part of that supplementary question is clearly a different matter. Four associations have written to me suggesting nominations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the approximate cost of improving the Stranraer to Ayr road, A.77, to trunk road standards.

Until we have completed the reconstruction of the trunk roads in Central Scotland which carry heavy industrial traffic, it will not be possible to contemplate comprehensive works on this road. No estimate of the possible cost has therefore been made.

Is my right hon. friend aware that Ayrshire County Council has estimated that its section of this road would cost over half a million pounds? Would it not be better, as it will be very expensive to provide adequate alternative travel facilities, to keep the railway open and not to go into this rather expensive exercise?

I have to await the result of the T.U.C.C.'s consideration before committing myself on the second part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. Certainly, south of Girvan the traffic is still fairly light for this road.

Will my right hon. Friend say that the T.U.C.C. can take that sort of point into consideration?

I am afraid I must tell my hon. Friend that it cannot be so; it is considering solely hardship.

Does the Secretary of State not recognise that this is causing growing resentment throughout Scotland? Certain lines are listed for closure or withdrawal of passenger services, and there is no blueprint for road improvement works. If this line is listed for withdrawal of passenger services, surely his Department has some idea of what the cost of road improvement would be?

I did not say that my Department had no idea. I said that it had not done a detailed study of the case. There is a considerable difference between the two.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will publish a development plan for Galloway and South-West Scotland on the lines of that produced for Central Scotland.

As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. Wolrige-Gordon) on 2nd December, my intention is that the Scottish Development Group should complete its surveys on the remaining regions of Scotland within the next year or 18 months. I cannot, however, at this stage forecast dates by which it will be possible to publish programmes based on any particular survey.

Could my right hon. Friend say what will be included in the survey? In particular, will it include industrial development?

It will certainly consider industrial development, although obviously I cannot say what will be in it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many railway lines will be left in these outlying areas when these plans are made?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, if he has now completed his review of the effectiveness of the Air Guns and Shot Guns Act in its first year; and what further measures he proposes.

Scottish chief constables are of the general opinion that the Act has been of considerable assistance. They have suggested that more publicity should be given to its provisions and I am considering this.

While appreciating that Answer, may I ask the Secretary of State to refer to the evidence which I sent to him last August concerning three attacks with these weapons involving children in my constituency? Will he bear that in mind in the consideration he is giving to this matter?

I shall certainly bear that in mind, and if other hon. Members have similar evidence I hope that they will write to me.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what areas have been designated as national parks; in what year they were so designated; and what proposals he has to establish facilities for recreation in them.

In 1948 five areas of high amenity were made subject to directions under the Town and Country Planning Act. These directions require local authorities to refer to me all applications for planning permission in these areas. In June 1962 I asked local planning authorities to survey and define in their development plans areas of great landscape value and to make proposals for recreational and tourist facilities. As the hon. Member will be aware, it has not been found necessary in Scotland to designate national parks in the English sense.

As this Act was passed in 1949, does the Secretary of State not feel a sense of shame that all these years have passed without any action being taken by him to provide such facilities? Is there not an added sense of urgency in this matter in that no mention was made of it in the recent White Paper, but it becomes now almost a necessity in view of the imminence of the General Election when so many hon. Members opposite will be put out to grass?

I have no sense of shame about this at all. Thirty of out 31 counties and 23 out of 26 Scottish burghs have made interim surveys. The ball is to some extent at their feet, but in the meantime Scotland has better access to lovely country than any other part of the United Kingdom.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, when the unit for the treatment of, and research into, rheumatological diseases in Glasgow will be in operation.

Late this summer, I hope.

Is the Secretary of State aware that this has been a very long awaited unit—since 1957? Will he ensure that it will be provided not later than the time he has stated?

I have the greatest hope that I shall not be disappointing the hon. Lady over this matter. In reply to a Question by her last year, I said that I hoped it would be ready in the latter half of 1964. I see no reason why it should not be.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he proposes to announce his decision on the proposed payment of £50 above the scale to teachers in certain areas of Scotland.

I intend to seek the views of the body which I am setting up to replace the National Joint Council. I shall announce my decision as soon as possible thereafter.

Will the Secretary of State give some idea when that will be? Is he not aware that in many of the areas where it is not proposed to give this extra £50 already there are added difficulties in attracting teachers who will not move from areas where they expect to get the £50? Does he not realise how urgent is a decision on this matter?

I shall make a decision about it quickly, but, as the hon. Lady knows, Lord Johnston's judgment, which declared the National Joint Council improperly constituted, was announced only a day or two before the National Joint Council was to give me its advice. It is important as well as courteous that I should get the views of the new National Joint Council which I shall set up. I shall set it up as soon as I can.

Cannot the Secretary of State give us any idea when he expects this Council to be set up? Can we have a definite date? When can we expect a report from it? Is he not aware that it was not the National Joint Council which suggested to him in the first place that he should make this payment to teachers in certain places outside Glasgow? That was a decision which the right hon. Gentleman himself took, and a decision which he should now himself rescind.

The National Joint Council is the body to which I refer all questions of salaries, and so I think that it would be discourteous not to give the Council the opportunity to comment.