asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will review the block grant for education, with a view to giving an increase in grant to Lanarkshire because of its new town commitments; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer which my right hon. Friend gave him on 16th May.—[Vol. 764, c. 279–280.]

Would my hon. Friend not agree that Lanarkshire has a heavy responsibility for the new town of East Kilbride, where most of the money has to be spent, because of the young popula- tion? Is he aware that there are other parts of Lanarkshire, in my constituency —Baillieston, Bothwell, Carmyle, Garrowhill and Bellshill—all requiring schools too? Should not serious thought be given to reviewing the situation?

If my hon. Friend is referring to rate support grant, he will know that this is being reviewed by a working party of officials, including representatives of local authorities, of which Lanarkshire is one. If he is talking about the school building programme, the special needs of East Kilbride, as I have made clear to the authority, are already taken into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider the appointment of a committee to inquire into the relationship of the consumption of alcohol as a contributory cause of the increase in violent crime.

Alcohol is a contributory factor in the commission of crimes, including crimes of violence. But my right hon. Friend does not think that it would be useful to set up a committee for the purpose of trying to establish more closely the nature and extent of this link.

In view of the mounting evidence from the courts, the recent remarks of Lord Stott, the evidence that one sees in hospitals and the increase in teenage drinking, is there not sufficient reason to justify my request?

I do not think that there is sufficient reason here to justify this particular request for a committee. There is certainly a case for research on this as one of the many complex factors in this situation.

Is the Minister aware, following his Answer, that a Committee would seem to be something of an irrelevance? Does he appreciate that what the public in Scotland require is action to deal with this problem?

It depends on what the hon. Gentleman means by "action". Thought is being given to this. There are changes of attitudes towards this question in some of our industrial cities, and we have debated this at some length in Scottish Grand Committee.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the cost to public funds of criminal legal aid for each of the past three years at any convenient date.

Criminal legal aid, which was introduced on a statutory basis in October 1964, cost £42,000 in the financial year 1964–65, £242,000 in 1965–66 and £396,000 in 1966–67.

In the light of these figures, will my hon. Friend set up an inquiry to find out whether these increasing sums are always justified, and whether the steps taken to recover such moneys from applicants are sufficiently vigorous to comply with the Act?

I share the concern expressed by my hon. Friend. My right hon. Friend is examining, in consultation with the Law Society of Scotland, possible ways of containing the growth of expenditure.

As the criminal legal aid scheme, which replaced the voluntary scheme under which the legal profession gave its services voluntarily under an Act of 1424, provides a smaller umbrella than the voluntary scheme, would the Minister agree that the need is to increase the coverage of the legal aid scheme to restore it to its previous extent? May I also suggest—

Order. Questions must be reasonably brief.

Would the Minister agree that it would be worth while looking at the possibility of imposing costs by scale according to the income of the applicant, as is done in the civil scheme?

I said that we were examining the whole system. I do not share the hon. Lady's opinion of the success of the voluntary scheme. There is a better case for the statutory scheme now operating. We must avoid abuses.

Will the Minister endorse the views of his learned friend the Solicitor-General for Scotland that this scheme, and I quote:

"… does play a useful and socially necessary rôle in our system—"

No quotations in supplementary questions.

Will he assure us that there is no question of reducing the scope of the legal aid scheme, which has performed such a useful social rôle?

I have emphasised that we must maintain this socially useful rôle of the scheme in order to protect the rights of the accused and especially the innocent. Clearly, however, there is room for thought and investigation into the cost, which is mounting up.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give consideration to introducing legislation to prohibit the granting of legal aid to individuals appearing in court on charges of assault involving offensive weapons on the person who have had previous conviction for similar offences; and if he will make a statement.

The present statutory scheme enables persons of inadequate means to exercise their right to have what can be said in their favour brought before the court. Any proposal for modifying the scheme which might have the effect of denying legal representation to persons accused of serious offences is open to objection on grounds of principle. My right hon. Friend has no plans for legislation on these lines. However, he is concerned at the rising cost of criminal legal aid and he is at present considering, in consultation with the Law Society of Scotland, possible ways of containing the growth of expenditure on the scheme.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in Airdrie sheriff's court recently three persons charged with assault on individuals involving the use of dangerous weapons, some of whom had previous convictions, were defended by three advocates and three solicitors at the expense of the Legal Aid Fund? Does he not think that this is an abuse of the system? Is it not time that he looked at this?

It is precisely because I am concerned about certain aspects of the situation that I have said that we are investigating it.

While appreciating the need for proper legal representation for all, would the hon. Gentleman ensure that the funds available to local authorities concerned in the battle against crime will grow at least as fast as the amount available for the Legal Aid Fund?

As the hon. Member will know from the figures I gave a week or two ago, as compared with the previous Administration we are considerably increasing expenditure.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is growing concern over what appears to be the increasingly extravagant use of counsel, both in criminal and civil proceedings? Ought he not to look at this very seriously?

The question of day-today administration of the scheme rests with the Law Society and, as I have said, we are investigating this and other matters with it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, in view of the outbreak of violence in Glasgow over Easter weekend, what action he intends taking to strengthen the forces of law and order.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement on the proposals he has framed to meet the crime wave in Glasgow in view of its continuing increase.

This is a problem which is under continuous review. My right hon. Friend and I have already described on various occasions the steps the Government have been taking to encourage and support those dealing with it. Furthermore the subject was debated in the Scottish Grand Committee on 9th May.

Does the hon. Gentleman think that it is good enough to keep on saying that this matter is under continual review when everyone, the Church, the magistrates and ordinary people are asking for stronger measures? It cannot be right to refuse the police greater powers of search. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is not the Tiber but the Clyde in Glasgow which is foaming with blood? Will he do something about it?

There are two Questions on the Order Paper about this. As to taking action, one of the means open to me is to encourage the police in every possible way by putting the right kind of facilities at their disposal—by spending money. If one looks at 1962–63, under the previous Administration we were spending only £2 5s. 6d. per head of the population. This year we are spending £4 6s. l0d. per head of the population —nearly double that spent by the previous Administration.

While we are debating this problem in the House and in its Committee Rooms, is my hon. Friend aware that every weekend in Glasgow and district there are fights between gangs with hatchets, razors, hammers and other lethal weapons? If he is in favour of disarmament among nations, why does he not start by disarming these gangs?

As I thought I had made clear, responsibility for law and order in Glasgow rests with the police and the magistrates—

And this House surely?

This House can advise and bring forward ideas and help in that way. This kind of sensationalised picture detracts from the real task, which is to make clear to every thug in Glasgow that very real and effective powers of immediate arrest exist. It is only aiding and abetting the thug to suggest that they do not.

Why, if the hon. Gentleman's aim is to encourage the police, does he continue to prevaricate on the one thing that the police and magistrates have all asked for?

This will be dealt with in a later Question, as the right hon. Gentleman should know.

Has the Minister given any thought to my proposal that the 500 policemen needed in Glasgow could be recruited from B.A.O.R.? Is it not better for them to be fighting the real enemy here than some mythical enemy in Germany?

We are interested in all sources of recruitment.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that answer, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland in the light of the report of the National Board for Prices and Incomes on rents of local authority houses, what steps he intends taking to encourage local authorities to raise rents to a reasonable level and so reduce the burden on the rates.

My right hon. Friend has always encouraged local authorities to fix rents at a reasonable level. The principles for determining rents proposed in the Board's report will be discussed with the local authority associations.

How much longer will the hon. Gentleman continue with this double-talk? Is he in favour of higher rents or not? Why cannot he come out fearlessly, as the Church has done, in favour of rents which charge people what they can afford? Is he aware that the present system of indiscriminate subsidy is grossly unfair to the community, and prevents wealthier people from providing houses for themselves? Will he do something about it and not just talk?

Assuming that the hon. Gentleman is not being hypocritical and reviewing his own record, we can only conclude that his Government colleagues at the time prevented him from doing what he is now preaching to us. I can only say that the report has been received quite recently. There are five important principles in it which have to be discussed by the local authority associations. We must give these associations respect —the hon. Gentleman used to have respect for them—and we must allow these discussions to continue.

Is my hon. Friend aware that while there is no objection to increasing rents up to a reasonable level, the object is not to decrease the burden on the rates but rather that the money should be used for other social services which are absolutely necessary in the cities?

I agree. It would repay every hon. Member to re-read the N.B.P.I. report, particularly the five principles I have mentioned.

Will the Secretary of State fully compensate by grant the ratepayers of any local authority who will have to pay increased rates because rent schemes have had to be altered?

The hon. Gentleman ought to have accepted my admonition which I gave in general terms and now give to him personally. There are five important principles to be studied by the local authorities, individuals and by hon. Members. The answer is contained within a good study of these principles.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has held with Edinburgh Corporation about tourist facilities in the city.

None, Sir, but the Scottish Tourist Board has been discussing these matters with the Corporation.

Does the Minister realise that because it is the capital and because of its fame Edinburgh is the greatest tourist attraction in Scotland? Will he give an assurance that, as regards grants and loans, builders, hotel owners and other people in the city are to be treated exactly the same as those in any other part of Scotland?

I am certain that Edinburgh—the Lord Provost in particular— will welcome the announcement in the White Paper of the hotel incentives scheme which will apply to Edinburgh. He may remember that in the tourism debate I referred to the Edinburgh Accommodation Study which, to some extent, bears out what the hon. Gentleman said about his own city.

In view of the attractions of Edinburgh and the acute shortage of hotel accommodation there, will the hon. Gentleman at least repeat that in the new scheme Edinburgh will receive the same grants for hotel building as those given in development areas?

I do not want the hon. Gentleman to do harm to his city by giving the impression that there is not ample accommodation, let us say for the Games, in Edinburgh. There is. According to the study which I have mentioned, Edinburgh accommodated something like 2 million bed nights in the year under review. We accept that in 1981 there will be 3 mi lion bed nights so required. [Laughter] This is the way it is measured. A good study of the White Paper would repay hon. Gentlemen.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received from Edinburgh Corporation concerning extension of the city's boundaries; and what reply he has sent.

None, Sir.

Will the Minister announce as a matter of policy that the Government are not in favour of extension of boundaries in Edinburgh and that if there is a great increase in population the answer lies in a new town, not in extending boundaries? Will the Scottish Office pay particular attention to open spaces in Edinburgh and draw attention particularly to Alnwickhill?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman reads the letter of intention of 9th May which the Secretary of State issued to the corporation following the public inquiry into the quinquennial review of the corporation's development plan. He will see that the Secretary of State commends the view that the regional approach towards housing accommodation in the city and in the surrounding counties is the right way to go about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he will reach a decision on the proposal to introduce legislation to provide the police with powers to search individuals for offensive weapons.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has com- pleted his consideration of the proposal that the police should have power of search where the possession of an offensive weapon is suspected; and if he will make a statement.

The present view of my right hon. Friend is that time should be allowed for the effects to be shown of the recent clarification of the existing law of arrest in relation to offensive weapons.

Will the Minister take more definite action? Will he, for instance, consider bringing in early legislation of an experimental nature to see whether it will help in Glasgow?

I thought I had made my answer fairly clear. In terms of the present request, no.

The hon. Gentleman has been considering this question for some eight months. Will he accept that the police and the magistrates are in the front line of the fight against crime and are more aware of the problems and the needs than the hon. Gentleman can possibly be in his ivory tower? Will he take action at last to provide the police with the powers which they and the nation require?

The hon. Member has not been reading the Press as diligently as perhaps he should. I have been very much involved in the situation in Glasgow over the past few months. I have seen the kind of problems facing the police. But with the new clarification they have received, I am sure that their confidence of their right to arrest people in situations for which search has been demanded introduces a new and helpful factor.

Does my hon. Friend accept that many people in this House deplore the kind of sensationalised and extravagant campaign which has been running for re-vamped police powers, which many local authorities feel will be unhelpful and will complicate life for the police and bring Glasgow into unnecessary disrepute in the eyes of the world?

This is absolutely true. I think it would have been more helpful in the situation and more helpful now if more constant reference was made to the real powers which do exist instead of aiding and abetting the thug by suggesting that no real powers exist.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that it is the long delay more than the decision which has had such a serious effect on the morale of those fighting the battle against crime? Why cannot he come to a speedy decision?

I thought I had made my answer clear. I am glad to know that the hon. Gentleman thinks it was the delay rather than the decision which was significant. I am pleased to know that he realises that at best the suggested powers were only marginal and possibly not helpful.

Does my hon. Friend agree that some hon. Gentlemen opposite would not know a council housing scheme in Glasgow if they saw it; that it would be quite helpful to those of us who have some intimate knowledge of the problem if they would desist this kind of campaign; and that many of us are satisfied that the police have adequate powers at the moment?

I think the answer is, yes, to all three questions.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I will seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will consider introducing legislation to increase the maximum penalty for carrying an offensive weapon on summary conviction under the Prevention of Crime Act, 1953, from three months in prison to six months.

I am not aware that the normal limit of three months in the powers of imprisonment of the sheriff summary court creates difficulties in disposing of offenders convicted of this offence.

Will my hon. Friend accept that there is a body of reasonable opinion alarmed by the rise in the crime rate and the prevalence of this kind of offence who feel that a little more flexibility in sentencing policy would be an advantage and of help to the Bench in dealing with this kind of incident?

Yes. But the sheriff's summary court can already impose borstal and detention sentences, so there is flexibility in length of time in that connection, and two years not three months, is the maximum sentence on indictment. So there is an element of flexibility on both counts which is adequate to deal with the problem.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the remedy is largely in the hands of the Lord Advocate? If he chose to take more cases on indictment, there would be no problem of three months, as he has pointed out.

The hon. and learned Gentleman is correct to say that this is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate, and no doubt he will be noting the views expressed here this afternoon.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now make a statement on the siting of an aluminium smelter in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will now announce his decision on the siting of an aluminium smelter in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he proposes to announce the siting of an aluminium smelter in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot yet add to the statement made by my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Board of Trade, during the debate on the Adjournment on 16th May.

Since the Prime Minister's optimistic statement last September, there seems to have been nothing but disappointment and uncertainty for Inver-gordon. Can the Secretary of State say how the negotiations are going with E.F.T.A. and when he hopes to be able to make a definite statement?

I do not think there is disappointment. There may well have been uncertainty. What the hon. Gentleman and others fail to appreciate is the magnitude of the projects, the complexity of the negotiations, and the number of people involved. I can only reiterate that a statement will be made as soon as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is not beyond the wit of man to erect an aluminium smelter at Invergordon or anywhere else quite quickly, provided the decision and the will do so is there? Does the statement by the Prime Minister on 9th May that he has been in day-to-day touch with the problem perhaps give some indication why this terrible delay has taken place?

It is fairly obvious that the hon. Gentleman has not even gone into the problems. He has not considered the recent negotiations and the concern of people internationally concerning this matter, concern which we hope to get over.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many people in Scotland still feel that the projected Aloan smelter should go to Invergordon in the hope that the mining industry might derive some benefit?

My hon. Friend should know that the Minister of State, Board of Trade, in the debate which I mentioned, said that Alcan had agreed to the Government's request to consider the suitability of alternative sites in North-East England. The reason for that is so that they would be adjacent to the coal they were to use.

Though we all appreciate the difficult international negotiations that are going on, we also realise the particular uncertainty that is felt in the Dingwell area. Could not the Government announce that one smelter at least will go to that area?

It is much tidier to wait —I hope not that much longer—and get the announcement about the whole position. I, too, suffer from the measure of uncertainty, but I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that there is no need to express disappointment at this stage.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if this project had been formulated in the years between 1951 and 1964 it might have been in production now? Can my right hon. Friend say what the time lag will be between the completion of the negotiations with our EFTA partners and the announcement of a decision in this House?

I hope very little indeed. My hon. Friend should appreciate that the negotiations are very complex. It is not just a matter of the international aspects, but aspects relating to the provision of finance, services, power and all the rest. A considerable effort will be made to cut to the absolute minimum any delays which will be involved.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that grave concern is felt at Invergordon at the delay in making an announcement? Is he further aware that many people who have been unemployed for the past year have remained at Invergordon in the hope that the smelter would be coming along? For their sake, will my right hon. Friend do his utmost to expedite a decision, if possible before the Whitsun Recess?

I can understand and appreciate the feelings in Invergordon. As the hon. Gentleman rightly said, this Government have created the hope. It is this Government's direct initiative which has created the opportunity. The hon. Gentleman can smile. I hope that before we are finished the people who have reason to be happy and smile will be the people of Invergordon.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when building of the aluminium smelter will begin; when it will be completed; and how many it will employ when fully operational.

My hon. Friend must await the announcement of the Government's decisions on new smelting capacity, on which these matters naturally depend.

Yes, that is just what I meant.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how he proposes to apply the ceiling on increases in local authority housing rents in Scotland; and whether he will fix a limit below 7s. 6d., in view of the fact that such an increase would represent a much higher proportional rise in Scotland than in England.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what special action he proposes to take on local authority rents; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government announced on 25th April that we will not normally accept increases in average standard rents exceeding 7s. 6d. a week in any one year, which was the upper limit recommended by the National Board for Prices and Incomes. This does not mean, of course, that rent increases of this order will be generally acceptable, and my right hon. Friend told local authorities that they will be expected to restrict increases to what is needed to meet increased costs or to bring down unduly high rate fund contributions.

My hon. Friend will, of course, bear in mind that there is a different rent structure in Scotland from that in England and a different wages structure in many industries. Would he, therefore, bear in mind that a 7s. 6d. increase would be a very high proportional rise in many parts of Scotland, and possibly an unjust one? Would he remember that it is, indeed, a maximum of 7s. 6d.?

Yes, Sir, I agree with everything my hon. Friend has said. However, although the proportional increase could be very substantial, it is the actual increase which counts for the tenant, and this is one of the many factors which we must weigh together. That is why the discussions which we are to have with the local authority associations are so important.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that there are many council tenants in Scotland living in areas of high unemployment and low wage rates who would find it difficult to pay weekly rent increases of 7s. 6d.?

I accept that, and we must bear in mind all the factors surrounding each case.

But would the hon. Gentleman not agree that it is very striking that four out of five of the burghs with the lowest contribution from rents to historic cost examined by the Prices and Incomes Board are in Scotland? Does this not suggest that the need is for a speedier move towards recovery of historic costs and not a slower move?

The hon. Gentleman is misinformed. Four of the local authorities referred are in Scotland—[Interruption.]—with respect, he said that there were four out of five of those referred. In fact, the Minister of Housing referred considerably—[Interruption.] Well, I misunderstood the hon. Gentleman, or he did not say it properly. In fact, the increases proposed by four local authorities, including one in his own constituency, are the subject of discussions, and we will take the appropriate action on these.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the proposals for organising brown trout fishing in the report of the Hunter Committee.

I should prefer not to comment on individual recommendations until my right hon. Friend has completed his consideration of the Report as a whole.

Although some of the decisions of the Hunter Committee on salmon will require time for the careful consideration necessary, why cannot the Government start action on the trout recommendations, as urged from this side in the debate last summer, since this would be of great help to the Scottish tourist industry?

I am interested to know that hon. Members opposite differentiate between salmon and trout, but the Report should be seen as a whole—

They are different fish.

I recognise that they are different fish and that there are different attitudes to these different fish from certain people. Our view is that the Report should be considered as a whole, with all its implications.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the Halliday Report.

For the present I have nothing to add to the reply I gave in answer to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Hannan) on 10th April.—[Vol. 762, c. 1343–4.]

Why cannot the Government yet proceed, on the basis of this useful Report, with changing and modernising the feu system and conveyancing?

The way the hon. Gentleman puts it one would think that this was a modest and slight change, when in fact it would change the whole land tenure structure of Scotland and is completely revolutionary. We have discussed this with all the authorities in Scotland, and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we have received varied reactions. This must be the subject of further discussion and consideration and, as early as possible—I hope before the end of this Session—I shall make a further statement.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the general public in Scotland resent the heavy cost of conveyancing fees, which are partly due to the intensely complicated method? Does he agree that the public realise that it is full of mumbo-jumbo and that this brings the law into disrepute? Would he press for legislation to simplify the law on conveyancing?

Yes, this is one aspect, and only one, of the Halliday Report. I assure the hon. Lady that, as far as I know, Scots object to all kinds of legal fees. I am glad to be able to enrol her into the anti-lawyer lobby, although I suspected earlier that that would not be worth while. We are considering conveyancing to see whether there are certain aspects which might be separated from the main issue, and whether we could promote a separate Bill for those.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, although the question of feu duties is a complicated one, many proposals in the Report are much more simple and could be intro- duced much more quickly and would simplify the conveyancing procedures and spare my colleagues in the legal profession the embarrassment of charging high conveyancing fees?

I am glad to have the support of my hon. Friend. He will note what I have said—that I am still considering the possibility of separate legislation on this aspect.

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman's attitude to this useful Report will not be coloured by his well-known antipathy towards the legal profession.

I have been very kindly to the legal profession. Everyone here has. All the supplementary questions so far have come from the legal profession. It is time that we heard the layman.

Speaking as a layman, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that a debate not only on the Halliday Report but on the whole feudal system is long overdue, that a majority of legal opinion would maintain that the whole system of feu duties and the feudal system could be easily dealt with by separate legislation, and that those parts of the profession who do not agree with this are those who consider simplification to be a vice?

Everyone wants reform, but they cannot seem to agree on its nature and how the financial problems which arise will be dealt with. Everyone wants feu duties abolished, but the consequence is the question of who would undertake the financial burden which is inevitably involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to receive the report of the Royal Commission on Local Government.

I hope to have the Report by the end of this year.

Would it be the right hon. Gentleman's intention on receiving this Report, and in the light of the statesmanlike and forward-looking speech made by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition at Perth, to consider how these recommendations can be allied to the devolution of real responsibility to a Scottish elected assembly?

I do not make decisions on recommendations until I have seen the recommendations. When I have, I shall discuss, in Scotland, with Scottish people and Scottish local authorities and the other interests affected just where we can move from there.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to establish passenger transport authorities in Scotland.

I intend to consult the local authorities and other interests concerned before deciding whether to establish any passenger transport authorities in Scotland.

Precisely what was the reason for the new measures which the right hon. Gentleman is bringing in next week to enable local authorities to give grants to railway lines? Will he guarantee that he will not hold a pistol to the heads of local authorities and force the railway deficit on the rates?

I have never been a Secretary of State who held pistols to the heads of local authorities, despite invitations to do so from hon. Members opposite. The hon. Member knows the position. It has been considered fully in the Standing Committee on the Transport Bill and will no doubt be considered further. We have just received the report of the Greater Glasgow Transportation Study and we are still awaiting the East Central Scotland Study. Until we get it, we would be unwise to make up our minds about P.T.A.s in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied that the present rate of progress with the building of the new Tain Royal Academy is sufficient to enable the Academy to be opened on the target date in 1969; and if he will make a statement.

I understand that Ross and Cromarty Education Authority is satisfied with the rate of progress and sees no reason to change its forecast of the completion date.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that Answer will give much satisfaction to my constituents in Tain? Will he accept the appreciation of my constituents and myself for the efforts of the local authority and the contractors concerned?

indicated assent.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why the Forestry Commission has not acquired any land under compulsory powers; and if he will make a statement on the difficulties the Commission has in obtaining land from landowners unwilling to sell it, including land at present put to no use.

In general, the Forestry Commission has had no special difficulty in acquiring enough suitable land in Scotland by agreement; and accordingly, the need to use compulsory powers has not so far arisen.

Is the Minister aware that the potential of the Forestry Commission in Scotland to expand is immense and that, while many landowners are selling their land, many others are driving a hard bargain by selling job lots of unsuitable land with suitable land which the Forestry Commission must accept on a take-it-or-leave-it basis? Is he aware that the present state of affairs will remain unsatisfactory as long as great tracts of land in Scotland remain in the hands of a few people who are not putting it to any use? Is he also aware that no other country in the world allows this situation to prevail?

I cannot agree with the hon. Lady's final words and I am not certain that I fully understand the point she is making. If she will give me specific instances I will look into them. About 200,000 plantable acres are already at the disposal of the Forestry Commission. In the last year for which we have figures we purchased 50,000 plantable acres. We are, therefore, doing very well and the announcement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister last October was welcome to Scotsmen everywhere in that we are going to raise the position in Scotland to an all-time record.

Have the difficulties that exist in connection with obtaining land in the North-East been overcome?

Not completely. I readily accept that our reserves in the North-East are low. That is the one area where that situation prevails. This is a difficult problem, but we are still pursuing the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made to the cost to the Exchequer of implementing the Johnston Marshall Plan for the Borders.

I cannot yet estimate how much of the necessary investment will be in the public sector.

Will the right hon. Gentlem;m assure the House that before he commits the taxpayer to vast sums of expenditure he will first of all consider the future of the Borders in terms of a balanced population with a balance in age groups rather than in terms of large numbers simply for the sake of large numbers?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong to think that the Government are so blind as to race into this without thinking of this very obvious problem. We appreciate the difficulty. A Conservative Government produced a demographic report about the Borders and that showed clearly how unbalanced things are, particularly in connection with age groups. Any move of population into the area will be designed to correct that rather than to aggravate it.

Of particular interest to my constituents is whether the Government are making any firm commitments in connection with the various projects in the Plan. Is he aware that we are especially interested to know if a starting date for the new hospital has been agreed and, more immediately, if a firm starting date has been fixed for a new bridge over the Tweed at Gala-foot?

If the hon. Gentleman will table specific Questions on those matters I will answer them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the loss of arable land for farming due to housing developments in Scotland over the next 10 years.

I have nothing to add to the reply my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Fife, East (Sir J. Gilmour) on 25th January, 1967.— [Vol. 739, c. 294.]

Would the Minister agree that as the world becomes increasingly short of food arable land will become increasingly important to this country? Will he therefore consider a scheme of incentives for local authorities to persuade them to do more of their building on land which is of less good agricultural value?

It is the policy of the Department and has been our policy for some time that where all things are equal we choose to build on poorer rather than better land. However, as the hon. Member for Fife, East (Sir J. Gilmour) was informed, about 5,000 acres of agricultural land of all qualities is being taken out of agricultural production for development. That is the present rate. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any assurance beyond saying that we will keep looking at the trends to ensure that the policies being followed are correct.

Taking into account the figures projected over the next 10 years and considering this problem in terms of land use—a non-transferable asset for children yet unborn; this is non-inheritable land, as it were—would my hon. Friend agree that we must be particularly careful in this matter?

I will examine my hon. Friend's remarks closely.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many people in the City of Edinburgh deplore the decision of his right hon. Friend to take out of production about 120 acres of very fine arable land at a famous farm called "East Craigs"?

I have noted the hon. Gentleman's remarks. He must realise that many painful decisions must be taken by Secretaries of State from time to time to cope with the problem of housing our people. He will, of course, accept that this, too, is a primary matter of social concern.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many representations he has received to date in favour of the introduction of British Standard Time; and how many against.

Since the Government's decision was announced on 22nd June, 1967, I have received no representations in favour and about 114 representations against. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, the Government have reconsidered this matter in view of the many representations received and have tabled an Amendment to the Bill to provide for an experimental period of three years.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's Answer, is it not clear that everyone in Scotland is totally against the introduction of British Standard Time, so why not drop the idea altogether?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman is being somewhat sweeping when he refers to everyone in Scotland being totally opposed to the introduction of B.S.T. He usually tells me to consult everyone in Scotland. He may be interested to know that the Scottish Office of the Confederation of British Industries the Scottish Trades Union Congress and the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) were among those I consulted at the start and that they were in favour of the introduction of B.S.T.

Why not leave Scotland alone until the three-year experiment has been conducted in England?

That would not be a practicable idea.

Why not?

Many people in Scotland are in favour of this change.

Will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that this proposal will involve serious hardship to agriculture in Scotland and will probably intro- duce some new perils for schoolchildren in rural districts? Is he aware that this places a totally intolerable new burden on Scottish life for a questionable commercial advantage?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that once again he exaggerates the difficulties in this matter. We naturally took into consideration most seriously the effects that this change would have on agriculture. We always seriously consider these matters. We also considered its effect on schoolchildren. It will mean that schoolchildren will travel to school— that is, if present school hours remain the same—in darkness in parts of the country, but they will get the advantage at the other end of the day.

Is there any real reason why Scotland should not have different time from England?

I think we have enough complications without that.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received regarding the division of Scotland into areas where certain hotels receive refund of the Selective Employment Tax and where others do not; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further representations he has received from outside bodies about the discrimination of the Selective Employment Tax on the hotels in the eastern part of the country; and what reply he has sent.

I have received 30 representations, of which 16 were from bodies in the east of Scotland, including East Lothian, Fife, Kincardine and Roxburgh County Councils. In my replies I have said that the selection of areas listed in Schedule 17 of the Finance Bill broadly achieves the object for which the concession was designed and that there would be an opportunity for the matter to be discussed in detail at the Committee stage of the Finance Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that most of us will be unable to discuss this matter in Committee on the Finance Bill? Is it not clear, from the weight of representation that has been made-against this iniquitous and arbitrary distinction between areas of Scotland, that once again the Secretary of State is completely out of touch with the people of Scotland?

I have been very interested indeed in the desire of certain towns in Scotland to be designated as rural towns, particularly since hitherto many people have thought themselves to be veritable centres of metropolitan thought in Scotland. I assure the hon. Gentleman that this is a matter which will be further discussed on the Finance Bill; and that is the time for the subject to be debated.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is far too ready to practise discrimination, that discrimination against hotels in my constituency and in other parts of the country is totally unjust and that these hotels need the same chance as every other hotel in the country to contribute to the growing tourist industry?

The hon. Gentleman raises two questions; first, that of tourist development and the need for incentives to aid tourism and, secondly, that of regional development and the need for help in particular areas. I remind him that his hon. Friends are constantly asking me to discriminate—for example, in favour of the Highland areas—and I suggest that we have gone a good deal beyond what has been sought in an endeavour to be of help. I sometimes wonder if we should have done it at all.

As the proposal is obviously designed to help hotels which are busy only seasonally, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend is aware that to set a line of this kind is bound to cause anomalies because of a certain amendment of rigidity caused by that line? Will he bear this in mind and perhaps formulate a system whereby hotels which are busy for only parts of the year and which at present fall on the wrong side of the line can be considered?

My hon. Friend will appreciate that: no matter where the line is drawn there will be anomalies. No matter how one discriminates, anomalies will occur between those who are within a scheme and those who are just left out. Whether or not this whole matter is serious enough to merit an amendment of the proposal is a matter for consideration in further stages of the Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that it is bitterly unfair on hotels competing in the same market as other hotels in these areas which have to face the same problems and markets and put up their prices? Will he reconsider this? Will he tell us who drew this line, he or the Minister of Labour in London?

The hon. Member knows well that the decision was a Government decision and that is how it is properly to be expressed. As to competing in the same market, that is not always true— [An HON. MEMBER: "Of course it is."] —no, it is not always true. For instance, in Girvan and in Ayr there is very considerable difference.

Do not the words used by the Secretary of State, saying that wherever the line is drawn anomalies would be created, confirm again that there is only one thing to be done with this tax and that is to abolish it?

If that were done it would have to be replaced by another tax and there would be a bigger outcry than ever.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what information he now has as to the number of housing authorities in Scotland who insure their properties against storm damage.

I now have information from 116 authorities. Four counties, two large burghs and 40 small burghs insure against storm damage. The four cities, 14 counties, 18 large burghs and 34 small burghs do not.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the rate payers of those prudent local authorities which have insured will benefit from the prudence which their leaders have shown?

I think that follows without saying.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many people he now estimates will be eligible for exemption from prescription charges.

The number of exempt patients in Scotland is expected to be just under 2½ million.

Can the Under-Secre-tary say whether he has concluded satisfactory arrangements with the pharmaceutical trade in Scotland about the method of repayment?

That is something which will be debatable on the regulations. Other discussions with the chemists are going on and the scheme will come into operation on 10th June.

In regard to the large number of exclusions, will the actual cost of recovery and working out the exclusions make the scheme worth while?

Certainly it will be worth while in finding a saving.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that I heard him aright in suggesting that 50 per cent. of the people in Scotland will be exempt?

Yes, that is what I said.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why he will not recommend the appointment of a Royal Commission to investigate the causes of violence in Scotland.

My right hon. Friend does not think that the appointment of a Royal Commission would make a worthwhile contribution to tackling this problem.

Will the hon. Gentleman bring to the attention of the Secretary of State the fact that violence in Scotland is now a matter of national concern? The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Glasgow has voiced it, and the Observer voiced it last week-end. Will the right hon. Gentleman take advantage of the interest in this subject, apart from the fact that Glasgow is a crime laboratory of the two universities, and reconsider the decision?

I think the hon. Member has benefited from the discussion we had privately last week. If he is concerned with research, he knows that we are paying a great deal of attention to that and certain helpful moves are going on in this direction. We are using research advice which has come from Glasgow and other areas.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there seems to be too much concentration on punishment after the trouble has come? Is he not aware that there is a great advantage if someone can find what is causing all this and see whether education, the Church or other bodies can help to eradicate the trouble before it starts?

I agree very much with what my right hon. Friend has said. This has been the main burden of the many discussions I have had over several months and of a number of suggestions I have put forward. I was interested to see that the senior magistrate in Glasgow is pursuing the same lines of research into understanding the causes and taking social measures to deal with the problem.

Would the hon. Gentleman agree in view of the terrible complexity of the matter that an inquiry by a Royal Commission, such as is suggested by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Wright), may be a very appropriate way of investigating the underlying nature of the problem?

I do not think it would be. I am concerned with this as an urgent as well as a long-term problem and Royal Commissions have never been notorious for speed. The number and variety of people involved require a different solution, certainly not that of a Royal Commission.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress has been made in the talks between the Scottish Education Department and Glasgow Corporation over the proposal to institute a single date of entry into Glasgow primary schools.

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the Answer I gave to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor) on 15th May.—[Vol. 764, c. 1220–1.]

Does the Under-Secretary appreciate fully the anguish which this problem has caused a great many parents in Glasgow? Will he consider making the administration of infant and primary schools a great deal more flexible than it is in order to cope with this problem?

I do not understand that question. If the hon. Member will look at the Answer I gave last week he will see that the Secretary of State has asked Glasgow Corporation to go back to two entry dates for primary schools.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the political opportunism of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Wright) almost rivals that of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor)? Will he recognise that the very genuine concern by parents arises from the teacher shortage and part-time education which he inherited from hon. Members opposite?

I agree with both propositions.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met officials of the Scottish Tourist Board.

In June, 1967. My hon. Friend the Minister of State met the Board's Director, with one of its members, in February of this year.

Will the Secretary of State not take some trouble to meet the Tourist Board again to discuss with it the bogus S.E.T. concession, which means that the tourist industry in Scotland will be paying more after the so-called concession than before? Will he reconsider his views about the arbitrary line, which shows total ignorance of the problem facing the industry and that the tax should be abolished altogether?

I can assure the hon. Member that if the tourist industry or the Tourist Board have anything useful to say to me they will do so, as they have done in the past, but so far they have made no representations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further consideration he has given in consultation with the Lord Advocate to the appointment of a second full-time member of the Scottish Law Commission; and if he will make a statement.

The Lord Advocate and my right hon. Friend have decided to appoint a second full-time member of the Scottish Law Commission in place of one of the part-time members whose term of office expires on 16th June; and I am glad to announce that Mr. A. M. Johnston, Q.C., has accepted this appointment. Mr. Johnston will relinquish his present appointment as Sheriff of Dumfries and Galloway.