asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, in view of the increasing unemployment in Scotland, what particular steps he is taking to implement the Government's policy not to allow the return of heavy unemployment; when he anticipates his action will reverse the growing unemployment in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

Measures taken to this end include preferential treatment in the deferment of public investment announced in July and the exclusion of Scotland from the control of office building. All forms of private building are unrestricted, except in the Edinburgh area. Government advance factory building is continuing, with seven further advance factories for Scotland announced last week. As regards credit, the Scottish banks have been asked to make allowance for different conditions in Scotland. The reversal of present trends will depend on our success in overcoming the national problems with which the Government's economic policy is designed to deal.

Without the Secretary of State hiding behind Tory kilts, will he tell the House why he is satisfied that unemployment in Scotland should be three times what it is in England? How much longer does he think that this Government-organised unemployment will last?

The hon. Gentleman is about as mixed up with his kilts as he is with his facts. Scottish unemployment is not three times higher than that in England. Indeed, after the recent changes it was shown that it had risen proportionately less in Scotland than in England over the past month.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that there is a case for selective reflation in the regions, particularly in Scotland, and that the injection of Government investment, preferably the beginnings of Government-owned industry, would help to reverse this trend, which is serious in areas like Linwood?

The Government are not unaware of the need for reflation and of the need to take any of the steps which my hon. Friend mentioned when the time comes. He will appreciate that the step announced last week by the President of the Board of Trade in respect of advance factories in development areas, with particular reference to Scotland, is an indication of our thoughts in this direction.

In what parts of the public investment in Scotland is Scotland specially exempted from the measures of 20th July other than in advance factory building?

The cut in central and local authority investment was £55 milion over the whole country, against which the cut in Scotland was only £3·5 million.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the subject of signs on the Forth Road Bridge Motorway to advertise the Royal Burgh of South Queensferry.

There have been representations from West Lothian County Council, Queensferry Town Council and local business interests suggesting the erection at the Dolphington junction of a motorway type "services" sign. My right hon. Friend considers that an advertisement sign off the highway would be more appropriate and probably more effective.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the simultaneous negotiation of teachers' salaries between Scotland and England.

No, Sir. This issue does not arise immediately.

Do I understand that, in any future negotiations, Scottish teachers will not be at a disadvantage compared to their colleagues in England?

There is no reason why they should be at any disadvantage. They are at no disadvantage at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has had regarding his proposal to de-trunk route A92, Dundee to Stonehaven; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend has had objections from the county councils of Angus and Kincardine and town councils of Arbroath, Montrose and Monifieth. Their views will be fully considered before a decision is taken.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the two main Toads to the North-East, the A92 and the A94, serve quite different purposes? Before reaching any final decision about this, will he bear in mind the very good reasons for maintaining both those roads as trunk roads, as this would be in the interests of the best development of the North-East?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will want to keep in mind all the factors drawn to his attention, including, of course, the views of both the North-East Consultative Group and of the North-East of Scotland Development Committee.

Would my hon. Friend consider arranging for better directions to be given on how to reach these trunk roads? After leaving the north end of the Forth Bridge, there is no indication of how one gets to the recently-built Tay Bridge.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the losses incurred by producers of store stock; and what action he proposes to ensure a fair return for those in this sector of the agricultural industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, in view of the drop in prices of livestock in the Highlands this autumn and the consequent fall in incomes, he will give a direction to the Department of Agriculture to expedite the payment of all grants and subsidies due for 1966.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has in mind for the necessary assistance to hill farmers in view of the poor prices received for lambs and weaned calves at the autumn sales.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he intends to take in the immediate future to recompense hill and upland farmers for the losses suffered in the autumn store sales.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what measures he proposes to alleviate the position of hill farming in Scotland.

I am aware that hill farmers have had a difficult year. My Department is undertaking in conjunction with the N.F.U. of Scotland, and at their request, a special survey in order to provide a full and accurate picture of the position. The results of this survey will be taken into account in our review of the assistance to hill farmers at the 1967 Annual Review.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that such expressions of sympathy make the lot of these farmers any easier? Does he not realise that what is needed is action? Will he not do something, such as a special Price Review, to help these people?

The hon. Member should appreciate that we debated this subject last Thursday.

There was no answer on that occasion.

I went into this matter pretty fully then in relation to the limitations which exist about making special payments.

In view of the position in the upland areas, does not the Secretary of State agree that it is very important indeed that all subsidies and deficiency payments should be paid immediately to relieve the people in those areas?

We are governed by Statute. As the hon. Member knows, in certain of the payments we cannot act until we get the returns. In respect of hill sheep, it will, I think, be some time in December before the returns are available. I think that we are pretty well on the way to getting the payments made for the hill cow subsidy. We shall speed the payments which can be made as far as we can within our statutory obligations.

Does not the Secretary of State agree that basically the trouble here is lack of confidence among the primary producers—the hill farmers? Could he not give an assurance here and now that the cattle producers, calf producers and sheep producers will have an increase in their subsidy at the Price Review, if not before?

I think that the best thing to do is to wait and see what are the facts in relation to this matter before we make up our minds on what will be the hill sheep subsidy. That decision will be taken at the Price Review.

Does the Minister remember the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. Hoy) saying in May, 1965, about the hill sheep subsidies, that the Government would take action if a disaster occurred? Why have they not taken action?

The hon. Member should appreciate what we did. We gave a very considerable advance in respect of the hill sheep subsidy, very much beyond anything that had been given before. As against an average of 9s. 6d. over the previous four years, we advanced the figure to 17s., and it has been up to that figure since then.

Is the Secretary of State aware that comparisons may be odious and do not necessarily help in the present situation? Would he not reconsider the possibility that some retrospective payment should be made, for example, of the hill sheep subsidy?

The hon. Member should appreciate that the payment of this subsidy is retrospective anyway.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many hill farmers had difficult times last year because of the rather heavy increases in rents charged by landlords? Is he aware that recently sheep farms have sold at enormous prices and that farmers have had to borrow money from the banks? One of the biggest sales was by a very prominent Member of the Front Bench opposite.

There is certainly evidence that there is no lack of long-term confidence. What I am most concerned about is the effect of this very bad year on the hill lands and the farmers there.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that he himself expressed anxiety about this matter in the debate last Thursday? In view of the urgency, which I am sure he appreciates, will he not take up the suggestion made by my hon. Friend the Member for North Angus and Mearns (Mr. Buchanan-Smith) of a special Review? In order to do this, could he not perhaps consider the low returns, as well as possibly the higher costs, such as those caused by a 9 per cent. Bank Rate?

My answer is the same as it was last Thursday—"No, Sir".

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland by what year he estimates that a supply of teachers, schoolbuildings and other educational facilities, adequate to provide for the raising of the school-leaving age, will be available in Scotland.

The Government intend to proceed with the raising of the leaving age in session 1970–71. I do not underestimate the difficulties, particularly over the supply of teachers, but the Government are making every effort to ensure that the provisions made by education authorities are adequate.

Does not the Minister agree that all the indications are that these facilities will not be available? Does the Minister agree that it would be criminal folly to go ahead with raising the school-leaving age if we are not able to make provision for those required to teach the additional pupils?

There will be no difficulty at all with the school-building programme, because that programme has been recently very substantially increased. As I have said, there are difficulties about the supply of teachers, but the Government are at present considering this matter.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the time has come to resume the open-ended discussions begun with the teachers' representatives a year ago, which might lead the way to achieving the kind of relationship in which the immediate problems facing the Teaching Council could be resolved?

No, Sir. I do not think that it would be appropriate for the Minister to enter into discussion with the teachers' organisations. At the moment the Secretary of State is awaiting recommendations and advice from the General Teaching Council.

The Secretary of State merely sits back and waits and does nothing, or appears to do nothing, about a problem which is growing very urgent indeed. Will he not seriously re-examine the question of the open-ended discussions, about which he held such high hopes in May, and see that they are resumed in order to do something to meet this ever-growing, ever-present problem?

I remind the hon. Gentleman that the decision to raise the school-leaving age was taken by the last Conservative Administration in 1964, and that they then did absolutely nothing about increasing the supply of teachers. Quite apart from the representations and advice which we shall receive from the General Teaching Council, only a week ago I started another publicity campaign for the special recruitment scheme. There has been an improvement in the incentives to married women to come back to teaching, and a number of other developments are going on at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland by what percentage the amount of revenue raised in rates by Scottish local authorities in respect of the year 1966–67 will exceed the amount raised in respect of the year 1965–66.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what has been the average increase in rates in Scotland during the current year; and which were the highest and lowest.

On present information, I estimate that the amount of revenue raised in rates by Scottish local authorities has risen in the current year by about 16·5 per cent. The range is from an increase of 57 per cent. to a reduction of 15·6 per cent.

Is not this a staggering figure in view of the promise by the Under-Secretary of State that he was exhorting local authorities to be prudent in their spending this year? Why have these representations failed, and precisely what does he intend to do about it?

I do not agree that the representations have failed, although I hope to get the hon. Member's support for one point here. The figure in 1961 was 19 per cent., and there was not then, as there is this year, an increase in teachers' salaries, which accounts this year—let us be fair—to 3 per cent. In the Government's opinion, another 9 per cent. or so can be regarded as due to the expansion and improvement of local services. But I agree with the hon. Member and other critics of local authorities that there seems to us to be a tendency in a revaluation year—and we think that this might amount to 4 or 5 per cent. this time—to put on additional projects and improvements. I have appealed to local authorities not to indulge in this practice.

Does the Minister realise that this rate burden weighs heavily on many people who are not at all well off, and that this increase in rates and prices is quite contrary to what was promised at the General Election? If the hon. Member cannot deal with it, why does he not resign?

I did not notice any antagonism on the other side of the House to the teachers' salary awards. I cannot see how people can quarrel with the 9 per cent. which is due to the expansion of services, and we have certainly heard nothing to that end. It seems a perfectly fair point that local authorities must have these forward planning programmes. There is nothing here which the Government have accepted which is not reasonable, except for the comments which I made towards the end of that reply. The Rating (Interim Relief) Act, which was passed in the last Parliament, has now been very much welcomed by lower-paid workers and those with small fixed incomes.

As my hon. Friend's appeal to the local authorities has not been very effective, what further action is he proposing to take about it?

We are in a much stronger position in relation to future matters because of the Local Government (Scotland) Bill, which will be discussed later today, and, under the rate support grant machinery, which we will also discuss later, we are in a position to influence these matters much more effectively than hon. Gentlemen opposite ever did.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans have been made by the Highland Development Board for educational projects in Scotland.

The planning of educational projects in the Highlands and Islands is not primarily a responsibility of the Board, but my right hon. Friend is, of course, very willing to consider any views and recommendations the Board may put forward.

Would my hon. Friend direct his attention to the Scottish Plan, and particularly to the missing paragraphs following the section on education, with a view to filling in this missing space by writing in projects for a much-expanded educational effort for the Scottish Highlands?

Answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why he will not change the rule which prevents him and his Department from issuing full descriptions of an escaped prisoner or other dangerous inmates from similar institutions, in order to enable innocent citizens in the locality to take due precautions.

I am sending the hon. Gentleman a copy of my letter of 25th October to the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Wylie) about the information which my Department issues on escaped prisoners. Additional information, including a description of an escaped prisoner, may be issued by the police if they consider it necessary to assist his recovery.

I am glad to hear that that is possible, because is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the recent past prisoners or mental patients have escaped from institutions and the police have not been allowed to issue their descriptions or even give the public any record or note of their backgrounds? Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that all the information possible should be made available to the communities concerned for their own safety in matters of this kind?

The important point is that it should be possible to give the information that is necessary both in the public interest and in the interests of the police in recapturing the person concerned.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that this change of practice on the part of the Scottish Information Office has been widely welcomed by the Press in England and in Scotland and by the people of Scotland as a whole? Will he further accept that my only criticism is that this should have been done a long time ago?

Things get done under this Government, anyway. I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman for his interest and help in this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is yet in a position to assess the effects of the Selective Employment Tax and the credit squeeze on all aspects of industry in the North-East of Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what has been the effect of the Selective Employment Tax on the Highlands and on the North-East of Scotland.

It is too early yet to assess in any detail the effect of the July measures and the Selective Employment Tax on the Scottish economy as a whole or on any particular part of Scotland. The Government are, however, keeping the position under close review.

Would the right hon. Gentleman ally the North-East of Scotland with the reported statement of his noble Friend the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland; that, if necessary, action will be taken to safeguard the Highlands against the effects of S.E.T.? Does this indicate a change in Government policy?

No change in Government policy was indicated in that statement. We have always said that we would keep a close watch on this matter. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate, of course, that the latest figures for Aberdeen, which many people thought would be very badly and immediately hit by S.E.T., show that the unemployment situation is better now than at this time last year.

May I assist the right hon. Gentleman in his failure to make estimates by telling him that the effects of S.E.T. have been disastrous on these areas because the service industries represent the main proportion of the provision of employment in these areas?

Let us measure the extent of the disaster as we know it. The unemployment percentage for the North-East and Aberdeen last year was 2·6. This year it is 2·8 per cent. I do not think that those figures justify the remarks of the hon. Gentleman.

While accepting what my right hon. Friend says about estimating the effects, would he not accept that what can easily be estimated is the fact that this tax bears more heavily on the North-East of Scotland than on any other part of the rest of the country? Will he therefore give an assurance that he will watch this matter very carefully indeed?

I accept my hon. Friend's remarks. The assurance for which he asks has already been given.

Does the right hon. Gentleman still think that S.E.T. is good for Scotland?

In that S.E.T. as a whole was related to the nation and gave an advantage to manufacturing industry, and in that S.E.T. will help us in Scotland to get more manufacturing industry, the answer is "Yes, Sir."

Is not the Secretary of State's original Answer a prime example of Government inaction? Does the right hon. Gentleman really believe that S.E.T. will bring industry to the Highlands and the North-East of Scotland? If so, will he examine the facts, one of them being that unemployment in these areas has been consistently—[Interruption.]

Order. We must have questions at Question Time, even from the leader of a party.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that unemployment in these areas has been consistently higher than the Government's targets for these areas, and is this not a strong case for varying the credit squeeze and removing it from these areas?

I can think of nothing better than to tell the right hon. Gentleman that for the first time we have an instrument in the Highlands directly and specifically designed to bring industry in, and that will receive the full support of the Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why the A709 Lockerbie-Langholm road and the A708 Moffat-Selkirk road will not be treated in the future as principal roads for grant purposes.

Preliminary proposals have been made to Scottish highway authorities for the composition of the future principal road system. No firm decisions will be taken until my right hon. Friend has the views of the highway authorities on these preliminary proposals.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that the Selkirk and Dumfries County Councils strongly opposed this? Is he not further aware that, at a time when we are trying to encourage tourism and industry to come to these areas, it is ridiculous to be down-grading these two main roads?

I would not like to get involved at Question Time in discussing the roads affected in Dumfriesshire, including the two roads mentioned in the hon. Gentleman's Question. I prefer to wait until such time as we are able to consider the county councils' views.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he takes to ensure that the particular circumstances of Scottish farmers are adequately considered when fixing guaranteed prices at the Annual Price Review.

Economic and statistical data about the current position of Scottish farming are compiled by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland for each Annual Price Review and Scottish farmers are represented at the Review by senior office bearers of the National Farmers' Union of Scotland. My right hon. Friend maintains close touch during the course of the Review and senior officers of the Department participate throughout.

Is it not a fact that no Scottish Minister takes part, on behalf of the Government, in these discussions? If so, is adequate care taken to assess the particular difficulties of Scottish farmers; and is this not a case for having a separate Price Review?

The hon. Gentleman is misinformed. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland sits in during the Review discussions—[Interruption.]—and participates.

Does my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State give consideration to the position of consumers when fixing guaranteed prices for farmers?

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is, of course, always giving evidence of his concern for consumers.

Will the Minister of State regard as a matter of importance relating the efficiency factor to Scotland, because obviously in a livestock-producing country the efficiency factor bears more hardly?

Certainly. The material that is compiled on the profitability of different farms in Scotland comes from independent surveys carried out by the agricultural colleges. These figures are discussed and agreed in advance of the Review by all concerned, including the economists of the Department, the farmers' representatives and others.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what will be the cost of preparing the report on the development in the Western Borders to be submitted by the planning consultant.

About £55,000.

Does the Secretary of State agree that this planning survey will not be carried out on the same scale as the Falkirk-Grangemouth survey, in that it does not involve the Department of Social Science? In view of the concern, rightly or wrongly, now being expressed in the Western Borders, might it not be wise to have a more widespread survey?

The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that this is not the only thing being done in this area. We now have the interim report and the full report will, we hope, be available by September 1967. We have been anxious to get as much information as possible on this issue. We desired to get the interim report stage over so that we can study the implications of the full report in due course. However, I accept that we will always get objections.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the Government's proposals in regard to construction of the proposed road across Glenfeshie Forest to Link Deeside and Speyside; and if he will make a statement.

Our view is that this project is worthy of further examination along with several other proposals for new roads in the Highlands and Islands. The Highlands and Islands Development Board is now doing this, and my right hon. Friend looks forward to having its views.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this road would be a tremendous asset to the tourist industry in particular, and also to the forestry industry, which are the only two industries in North-East Scotland which are now capable of mopping up the shake-out caused by the Selective Employment Tax and the other redundancies due to the credit squeeze in the area?

I am aware of the road's importance, and I met the county councils about it in, I think, 1965. The matter has been discussed for some time, and I understand that on 18th October both the county councils involved met the Highlands and Islands Development Board to discuss not only the road and its importance but its priority in relation to other new roads.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will initiate a rural development survey, on the lines of the survey now being carried out in Sutherlandshire, to establish the location and extent of land suitable for forestry development in North-East Scotland.

A survey of part of Upper Aberdeenshire and Upper Banffshire, on similar lines to the survey which is being made in Sutherlandshire, has already begun.

Is the Minister of State aware that this survey is meeting with an extreme lack of co-operation on the part of many of the landowners concerned; that there are only 18,000 or 20,000 acres of suitable planting land left in reserve, and that even the reduced rate of planting which the Eastern Conservancy is undertaking will give only about four or five years of planting reserve, when those concerned like to bank on six years or more?

I am not aware of hostility on the part of owners. My information is that they have agreed to this survey being undertaken. We are aware of the shortage in the area, and that is why we are taking these steps.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the survey being carried out in Sutherlandshire is giving rise to some concern amongst local agriculturists that it is being carried out with a view to determining what land is suitable for afforestation?

Sutherlandshire is rather a different question; the main question is about North-East Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why the Scottish Agricultural Securities Corporation is being restricted in its ability to make loans to farmers.

I understand that the Corporation is now in a position to continue to approve applications for loans which it considers acceptable.

Is the Minister of State aware that that reply is precisely contrary to what the secretary of the organisation has said? Is not this a clear example of his right hon. Friend's not sheltering Scotland's agriculture in any way from economic difficulties and an absolutely appalling example of his complete indifference to agriculture?

Special arrangements have now been made to continue to approve applications for loans, as I said in my original Answer. As to safeguarding Scotland, I would remind the hon. Gentleman that the Scottish Agricultural Securities Corporation was running short of the ability to be able to borrow when he was a Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why he made no announcement about the deaths of the six patients at the Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, until after a report had appeared in a Scottish newspaper.

I did not consider it appropriate to make any announcement about this occurrence while investigations were being conducted and the question of a fatal accident inquiry was being considered.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that at the time there was newspaper speculation and it was reported by the newspapers that the fatalities were due to post-operative treatment? Is it not the case that the Royal Infirmary was extremely vexed about this slur on its reputation and wanted to make a statement denying it, but was forbidden to do so by his Department?

I am not commenting on that last remark. If the hon. Gentleman wants a comment on it he will be far better to put down a Question. I deplore, as I am quite sure he does, premature leaks of information that cause widespread anxiety: the statement had to be made in order to reassure patients. The hon. Member will appreciate the difficulty in respect of those who had been through a very, very trying time and to whom further agony was being caused. I hope that the hon. Gentleman, like myself, deplores these premature leaks of information.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what arrangements he is making to compensate local authorities who have acceded to his request not to raise rents, thereby making themselves ineligible for grant.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take action to ensure that those local authorities who hold back rent increases as requested by the Government do not thereby lose Exchequer equalisation grant which they would otherwise have had.

I hope to announce a decision soon.

Does not this place local authorities in an intolerable position in that if they agree to the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion that rents should be kept down they forfeit the right to have the grant? Will he not come clean and tell the local authorities exactly where they stand? Perhaps he can tell us what was the view of the meeting that I understand he had with local authorities at the end of last month to discuss this very subject? This matter has been going on for a long time.

This is a new line for the hon. Gentleman, because the formula that has got us into this trouble was introduced by his Government. I have discussed this subject with local authorities and have said that I will be reconsidering it towards the end of this month and will let them know my decision then. I can go no further than that here.

Is not the Secretary of State for Scotland aware that a lot of local authorities are extremely disturbed about this situation and that it is not possible for them to plan ahead until they know the answer? Will he please bring forward his decision and let the local authorities know where they stand?

The decision must be related to the facts. The hon. Gentleman must appreciate that there are 233 housing authorities in Scotland. About 59 of them have written to me—that is, much less than one-third of them. They are not all affected in the same way, because it will depend entirely on the period. In respect of the amount involved, the hon. Gentleman will find that for some local authorities the sums are very minimal, indeed.

In coming to his decision, will the Secretary of State ensure that no local authority loses any part of the grant because it has acceded to the Government's request on rents?

I cannot give that decision today.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his latest estimate of the number of men and women of working age, who emigrated from Scotland over the past two years; how many persons he estimates to be out of work at the present time; and how far these figures conform with the estimates in that part of the National Plan which applies to Scotland.

The latest available estimates are that the net loss by emigration of men and women of working age was 59,000 in the two years to June, 1965. There were 67,300 persons out of work on 10th October, 1966. These figures cannot be directly related to the National Plan because it covered the six-year period to 1970 and year by year figures were not given.

Does not the Minister of State realise that these figures make a complete mockery of all the Labour Party's promises during the last election? Can he say what emergency action he will take in order to try to alleviate the hardship that is bound to arise if we have even an average hard winter following on top of the Government's economic policies?

I do not agree that it makes a mockery of Labour Party policies. The Government have already taken a number of measures to alleviate the position in Scotland, and the results of them were shown in the figure I quoted—67,300 persons out of work on 10th October, 1966. That, of course, was lower than for the last three years of the Tory Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has now completed his study of the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) Report on emigration; and if he will make a statement.

The report by the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) was far from exhaustive; but the conclusions on the need to reduce net emigration from Scotland are in accord with the Government's policy.

What is the right hon. Gentleman doing to bring this famous Government policy into effect? Has he noticed that the Scottish Council has pointed out that since Labour has been in power a new trend of net decline in population in Scotland has set in? Has he also noticed that 50 per cent. of the emigrants are now going abroad? Is not this a fair commentary on his Government policies?

The trend may be there, but the hon. Gentleman should not mistake when it started. When the Central Scotland Plan was announced there was a figure which caused his Government concern of 25,000 a year. When we became the Government, we discovered the figure for that period was not 25,000, but over 40,000.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the present net annual increase in the Scottish schoolteacher force; and, on this basis, what he estimates to be the average size of classes after raising the school-leaving age to 16 years as compared with the present time.

Between 1964–65 and 1965–66, the latest session for which figures are at present available, there was a net increase of 444 in the number of certificated teachers in public and grant-aided schools. A significant expansion of the teaching force is in prospect with the increasing number of teachers entering training, but it is impossible at this stage to give an estimate of the average size of classes when the school-leaving age is raised in 1970–71.

Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, even if it means having temporarily larger size classes, the Government will not abandon the principle of raising the school leaving age?

We have no intention of abandoning the principle of raising the school-leaving age.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, in view of the number of potential consumers of electricity in Ross and Cromarty who are still unsupplied because of the substantial sums asked by the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board for connections, if he will take action, by legislation or otherwise, to help those people to get a supply.

I understand from the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board that, except for a small number of isolated areas, Ross and Cromarty is already connected but if the hon. Member has any particular cases in mind the Board will be glad to investigate.

Would the Under-Secretary agree that while most of Ross and Cromarty is already connected up that is no consolation to those who still have to go without? Will he do something to speed it up?

I most certainly agree with that. I understand that one of the areas concerned has been visited and that a report by the Board is available. I am willing to write to the hon. Gentleman about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what account he takes of the views of local authorities in planning to meet future educational needs.

Responsibility for planning to meet the future educational needs of different areas lies primarily with the education authorities concerned and my right hon. Friend considers their individual proposals very carefully in fulfilling his own statutory responsibilities.

If that is so, can the hon. Gentleman explain why, when Renfrew County proposed a partial two-tier system for the county, because of the conditions in the county and because it was in the interests of education there, the Secretary of State refused to give his permission? If he is going to brush aside the wishes of local authorities and local people in this way, why should they pay any of the cost of education at all?

There is no question of brushing aside the wishes of local education authorities. As I have said, the Secretary of State also has certain statutory responsibilities. He has asked the Renfrewshire authority to look again at its proposals, because he does not think they provide the best system of comprehensive education there. I am very glad to say that the authority is looking again at its proposals and is to supply us with amended proposals in due course.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind, when he is considering the proposals from local authorities for the reorganisation of education on comprehensive lines, the necessity to take into account considerations of future industrial and other development in the area as well as purely educational needs?

Certainly, and we have asked the Highlands and Islands Development Board to give us a report about the Highland area specifically from that point of view, as well as from the educational point of view.

Why is the Secretary of State insisting on a straight-through comprehensive system for Renfrewshire? Is he not usurping the rights of the education authority to determine the shape of its own local education and thus flying right in the face of the consultative terms of Circular 600?

No; my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is not insisting on an all-through comprehensive system for Renfrewshire. In fact, in a part of the county where the two-tier system has been proposed it has already been agreed, but there are other parts of the county where an all-through comprehensive system would be, in the Secretary of State's view, a much more preferable system, and that is what is now being considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why the increase in doctors' salaries effective from 1st April, 1966, had not been paid by 20th July, almost four months later.

The report of the review body set out only the broad principles of the award and it was necessary for a joint working party of representatives of the professions and the health departments to work out its detailed application to hospital salaries. The award could not be implemented before the working party had completed its task, which was on 27th July.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this upset is in direct breach of the undertaking given by the Prime Minister to the House on 4th May? Is he further aware that one of the anomalies created by the statement of 20th July was that the doctors failed to receive their increase, whereas the dentists received theirs, while both stemmed from the same recommendation? Is he aware further that this administrative delay has caused widespread concern amongst and much financial distress to doctors?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman said in the first part of his supplementary question. In the case of the dentists, the discussions with the profession were rather less protracted, but in the case of the doctors I remind the hon. Gentleman that the profession itself accepted the Review Body's recommendations only on 14th June, so that there was a considerable delay there from the Prime Minister's announcement on 4th May. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the particular negotiations on the working party I have referred to were carried out with all speed on the Departments' part.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the estimated expenditure this financial year by the Highlands and Islands Development Board on projects in the Highland counties.

The estimates for grant-in-aid to the Board in this financial year include £320,000 for grants and loans to industry and other projects. The whole of this provision is likely to be used for grants and loans, and my right hon. Friend may have to seek a supplementary provision.

Is the Minister of State aware that the cost of the Selective Employment Tax in these same Highland counties will be between £2 million and £3 million in a full year? Is he aware further that this is nearly 10 times as much as the aid, welcome as it is, being provided by the Board? Will he look again seriously at the impact of this monstrous tax on the Highlands?

That is the hon. Gentleman's estimate. There are a number of factors here. The hon. Gentleman asked about the Highlands and Islands Development Board. He has the answer.

Is the Minister of State aware that it is not the hon. Gentleman's estimate but one provided by the Government themselves, who said that £2 million a year would be removed from the Highlands by the Selective Employment Tax?

Answer!

I answered this question many months ago in the Scottish Grand Committee. There are a large number of factors involved in calculations of this kind, which make it exceedingly difficult.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proposals he has for increasing the number of full-time procurators fiscal, in view of the existing delay in the trial of criminal cases.

The Lord Advocate is responsible for the staffing of the procurator fiscal service. Increases depend on the volume of work in a particular district and new posts are created whenever necessary. During this year two districts have received an additional depute procurator fiscal.

Is the Minister of State aware that the delay in the prosecution of criminal causes in Scotland is causing a great deal of alarm, that it has drawn comments from the High Court bench, and that at the moment in Dundee, for example, it appears to take over a year for an indictable case to come to trial? Will he at least assure us that he is alive to the serious danger of the system of public prosecution breaking down unless something is done about the staffing of the procurator fiscal service?

I know that there are delays in the courts, but they are not all attributable to the procurator fiscal service. I have given the facts about this. If there is shown to be a need for additional procurators fiscal, my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate will give authority to recruit more. As the hon. and learned Gentleman knows, there is a general shortage of legal civil servants.

Will the Scottish Minister who is dealing with the problem of procurators fiscal also extend their powers so as to make them more commensurate with the needs of today?

I am not quite sure what that means. In any case, it is a different question.