asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many policemen were on duty inside and outside the hall at the recent by-election meeting in Walthamstow when Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Defence and the right hon. Member for Middlesborough, East (Mr. Bottomley), were assaulted; how many arrests were made; and if he will make a statement.

Fifteen police officers were on duty outside the hall, with further reinforcements available at Walthamstow police station. The superintendent in charge was inside the hall. He called a number of officers, who escorted some people from the hall. No arrests were made.

Is it not unsatisfactory that Ministers of the Crown can be treated in this way at meetings? How is it that certain members of the Opposition are, able to get 50 or 60 police on duty at their meetings? Should not this matter be inquired into?

I do not think so. The number of policemen used for each occasion is what is regarded as adequate to safeguard those concerned. If the Opposition need more safeguarding than the Government, that may be a reflection of their policies.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Commission on the Constitution started its work.

The Commission held its first meeting on 29th April.

More than six months have passed since the announcement was made that the Commission would be set up. When is it likely to have completed its work? Will it be able to submit a report on Scotland before it has completed consideration of all the other matters to which it must address itself?

That is a matter for the Commission itself. It has not the limited responsibilities that the other Commission to which the hon. Gentleman frequently refers has, but is concerned with the whole of the relationships of the United Kingdom and its various parts.

How long?

The Commission held its first meeting yesterday, so my opinion on how long it will take would not be very valuable. Perhaps I may take this opportunity to emphasise that the Commission has asked for evidence to be addressed to it straight away. The Secretary would like it not later than 31st July. After that the Commission will hold early hearings in Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast and possibly other centres as well as London.

At what stage will the Commission consider the constitution and powers of another place?

That is a matter for the Commission to consider if it thinks it arises from its terms of reference.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the recent attack on the Governor of Leicester Prison, he will now take steps to house prisoners serving long sentences in a special separate prison.

No, Sir. Among other considerations, this would not reduce the risk to staff from dangerous prisoners.

Does my right hon. Friend mean by that that the report produced by Lord Mountbatten is to be entirely ignored? Does not he think that the provision of separate prisons would avoid the kind of thing which happened in Leicester the other day—which is a serious matter—and prevent the long-term prisoners from being held in such conditions that it is practically impossible to avoid further such occurrences? Should not he give consideration to this very important proposal?

I think that my hon. Friend has forgotten that the House debated this matter last October following the Report of the Advisory Council on the Penal System, which recommended that there should not be a special separate prison of this sort, and that the House came to a broad conclusion about the policy being followed at this stage. I would not ask the House to reconsider it again yet.

Quite apart from last autumn's debate, is there not a danger that the right hon. Gentleman may be falling between two stools? He has not implemented the full policy of the Advisory Committee and he has not implemented the Mountbatten Report. Is it not the result that prisoners are being kept in inhumane circumstances when a more secure perimeter might enable both them to have a greater degree of relaxatiton and greater security to be preserved?

Order. Supplementary questions must be brief.

The right hon. and learned Member for St. Marylebone (Mr. Hogg) is wrong about this. The new prisons which are being prepared and the existing prisons being adapted are for precisely that purpose. The only recommendation of the Advisory Committee which I did not implement was that prison officers should be armed. There was general agreement in the House that we should be wrong to accept that recommendation.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that there is an urgent need for a much more realistic use of the working day for the top security, long-term prisoners, and that this is an area where we need to reform the prison system?

This goes very wide of the original Question. I certainly agree on the need to make the best use of the working day, and hope to be able to produce some proposals to that end. Later this year I expect to open the prison at Coldingley, which will revolve around the industrial life of the inmates.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the latest figures available for the number of accidents in the home; if he will publish a breakdown of these in the OFFICIAL REPORT; how many local authorities have notified him that they have home safety committees and how many full- or part-time home safety officers; and if he will take steps to make the provision of home safety committees obligatory.

In 1967, 5,839 persons died as a result of accidents in the home in England and Wales and 1,090 in residential establishments: I will, with permission, circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I understand that there are about 340 home safety committees, but I have no information about the number of staff employed on home safety. The promotion of home safety, whether by means of committees or in other ways, is within the discretion of the local authority concerned; I see no justification for making home safety committees compulsory.

Does not my hon. Friend feel, in view of the terrible number of casualties in the home, that the present situation is completely unsatisfactory?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to complete his inquiries into the representations about illegal entry of immigrants into the United Kingdom made by Mr. R. H. Taylor of Winnersh and forwarded to him by the hon. Member for Wokingham.

As I have informed the hon. Member, Mr. Taylor has been

If my hon. Friend looks carefully at the figures I have given he will note that many of the accidents are to the aged, and it is very difficult to deal with this problem by legislation. We believe that the effort by local authorities is the best way to deal with it.

Apart from the aged, how many of the figures were due to fire? Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that his Department cannot do more to prevent the fire risk?

Perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman will put down a Question on that. We are looking at the fire risk as a matter of urgency. The problem arises with fires in single rooms in houses in multiple occupation.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that it must be right for Members to forward what appear to be properly founded allegations, but will he also accept my apologies on this occasion for having wasted the time of busy officials by an allegation of a man who is quite clearly an ignorant windbag?

I cannot judge that to the same degree as the hon. Gentleman. The allegations were vague and unsubstantiated, and the remarks were ill-considered.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) why a Home Office licence was granted for experiments to be carried out at Cambridge University in which chaffinches were deafened;

Section 3(1) of the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876 permits experiments to be performed with a view to the advancement by new discovery of physiological knowledge or of knowledge which will be useful for saving or prolonging life or alleviating suffering. These experiments, undertaken with the object of gaining further knowledge of brain mechanisms, satisfied the requirements of the Act.

How can that be the case when no indication of the purpose of the experiment was obtained at he time the licences were given? Will the hon. Gentleman take into account the fact that Littlewood has said that it is necessary to replace the present licensing system by one in which the sponsors certify the novelty and justification of experiments? Will his right hon. Friends therefore give time to debate Littlewood, which they have withheld for four years?

I must tell the hon. Gentleman, whose interest in the matter I respect, that if the Littlewood Report had been implemented it would not have altered this situation in any way. I am prepared to provide the information, and if the hon. Gentleman looks carefully at it he will see that the results of the experiment were of great value to those interested in the mechanism of the brain. Whilst I have a certain built-in feeling against experiments of this sort, it is of value to the human race that they should be done.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the licences are granted under an Act over 90 years old, and that it is time a Measure based on the Littlewood Report was introduced, covering cases like this and bringing the whole legislation up to date?

I must make it absolutely clear that, whatever the arguments for or against, Littlewood would not have affected the experiment mentioned in the Question. The number of experiments is increasing every year as biological sciences expand. What we should be thinking about is the basic problem with the use of data processing, tissue cultures and things like that, before introducing legislation which simply improves that which was passed a hundred years ago.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the continuing amount of damage caused by soccer hooligans, he will call a conference of police authorities and football organisations with a view to finding a satisfactory way of dealing with these occurrences; and if he will make a statement.

Towards the end of the football season the police set in train new measures to deal with hooliganism after matches.

Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge the excellent manner in which the crowd behaved in the recent match between Leicester City and Manchester City? It might give some encouragement to others to know that when they behave properly it is recognised. Would my right hon. Friend consider the question of attendance centres being utilised to the full extent not only for juveniles but for older people, so that those who commit such offences can be prevented from going to football matches on Saturdays for many weeks after they have committed an offence?

Order. Long supplementary questions mean fewer Questions.

I think that it would be best for us to wait for the report of the working party, which I hope will come very soon.

As the hon. Member who asked the Question represents part of the City of Leicester, will the Home Secretary make it clear that no criticism of such conduct relates to that city, which, as the hon. Gentleman said, showed such sportsmanship in defeat at Wembley on Saturday?

I am very glad to hear that there is a football team at Leicester.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether in view of the economic importance of the forthcoming Festival of London Stores, he will take special steps in conjunction with the Metropolitan Police to ensure that the free passage of the Festival's inaugural parade through the streets of London on 26th May will not be impeded.

This is a matter for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, who informs me that the police are in touch with the organisers in planning traffic arrangements.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the festival is important for tourism and exports? Will he consult his right hon. Friends in other Departments to see whether it really is necessary next year to refuse permission for the parade to be held in Hyde Park, where it was held last year? I understand that it would be less of a burden on the police there, and it would provide an attractive spectacle for an hour or so on a public holiday.

The question of banning the use of Hyde Park for the purpose is one for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Public Building and Works. It is for the Commissioner of Police to decide upon the action he considers desirable, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has no authority to issue instructions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigrants there are in Great Britain today.

The Registrar-General estimates that at mid-1968 there were some 2¾ million people living in Great Britain who had been born in other countries. These included ¾ million from the Irish Republic, nearly 1 million from foreign countries, and rather over 1 million from the Commonwealth.

I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for those figures. Does the number include the children of immigrants born in this country? Will the hon. Gentleman say what his Department estimates the number will be at the end of the century?

The number does not include those born in this country, because they are not immigrants, whatever the colour of their skin. It is extremely dangerous to guess at the population at the end of the century. But if it is any satisfaction to the hon. Gentleman, I can tell him that the estimate made about two years ago, based on certain assumptions, is now about 1 million out because of the fall in the numbers coming in. As that has happened in only two years, I hope that I shall not be asked to guess at the figure in 30 years' time.

Will my hon. Friend make an estimate of the number of non-Celtic people now living in these islands since the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons, the Danes and the Jutes?

As a Welshman, I have been brought up on the motto that Wales was when England was not.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has now concluded his review of the question of the spread of amusement arcades; and what steps he proposes to take.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield, West (Mr. Lomas) on 17th April.—[Vol. 781, c. 287.]

Is my hon. Friend aware that many local authorities are concerned about the effect on the young of the proliferation of amusement arcades, and that their efforts at controlling them can be overruled by quarter sessions? Is not it time to introduce amending legislation?

I am aware of the feelings of local authorities described by my hon. Friend. My right hon. Friend has considered representations from the Association of Municipal Corporations that the right to appeal should be withdrawn altogether or, alternatively, that the powers of quarter sessions on appeal should be limited to questions of law. He is not satisfied that the introduction of legislation for this purpose would be justified at present, but he is to invite the local authority associations to provide further and more specific information.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the express intention of his right hon. Friend seems to have been frustrated, in that the circular issued on 7th February which says that the power of local councils is absolute is being overturned by quarter sessions recorders? Does he not agree that the strong feeling throughout the country should be recognised, and that the spread of these machines should be stopped?

If there is substantial evidence of abuse, this will be borne in mind by my right hon. Friend in considering whether or not fresh legislation is necessary.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to ensure that all meetings of police authorities should be held in public.

It is open to police authorities to meet in public, and I hope that they will do so when their business is not confidential. I see no need for legislation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the practice of the Stoke-on-Trent police authority of admitting the Press has been overruled by the Stafford members since the enforced amalgamation, and does he agree that the holding of meetings behind closed doors is to be strongly deplored?

It is not for me to comment upon the marriage between Stoke and Stafford police authorities but, whilst agreeing that there may be occasions when it is in the interests of confidentiality that such meetings should take place in private, nevertheless there are many occasions when it would be in the public interest for the information to be made public.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will introduce legislation to remove from illegal immigrants the immunity from prosecution they enjoy if they are not apprehended within 28 days of arrival in Great Britain.

The hon. Member is mistaken in thinking that there is a time limit of 28 days on prosecution for this offence. Under Section 3 of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1968, it is an offence for a Commonwealth citizen to land in the United Kingdom without examination by an immigration officer.

Is the Minister aware that there is a widespread feeling that if illegal immigrants are not prosecuted within 28 days they will enjoy immunity from prosecution?

If there is a wide misunderstanding on this, my brief experience of race relations leads me to believe that it is not the only matter concerning race relations which is misunderstood.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps have been taken, and what action he proposes to take, concerning the sale of archery sets as toys, which constitute a danger to children.

In August, 1967, the trade was asked through the appropriate associations not to sell sports equipment of this kind to children or to persons apparently wishing to give it to children as a toy. This advice was repeated in a Press notice issued to appropriate trade journals in January last year. I have no reason to believe that this request is being disregarded, but if my hon. Friend has a particular case in mind and will send me details I shall be glad to have it looked into.

Is my hon. Friend aware that such an archery set can be as lethal as a gun, and that there was in my constituency an incident when an arrow with a brass tip penetrated two inches into the head of a child who narrowly escaped death? Will he not therefore impose a restriction on the sale and place of use of these archery sets?

There is a question of appropriateness of statute and, although I have looked into this most carefully, there is a problem in distinguishing in regulations between arrows used in normal sport and these arrows, but if my hon. Friend will let me have details of his case I will do all that I can.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the increasing number of car thefts taking place in the Metropolitan Police area and the measures being taken to combat them.

With reference to the number of mechanically propelled vehicles stolen or unlawfully taken and driven away in 1968; this was 11·5 per cent. more than in 1967 but was 4 per cent. less than in 1966. Particular attention in police training and organisation is being paid to the problem of car thefts. Frustration of the thief is nevertheless primarily a matter for car owners, whose intelligent co-operation is constantly sought by the police.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that a proper record, which can be quickly referred to, is kept of the chassis numbers of stolen cars, and has he been able to find out why the police did not have the chassis number of a stolen car which a constituent of mine unwittingly bought and about which I have written to my hon. Friend?

This does not arise on the original Question, but I will look into the case referred to by my hon. Friend.

Is not the unlawful appropriation of cars often a prelude to their use for criminal purposes and, bearing in mind the responsibility of the owner, will the hon. Gentleman consider what can be done to bring home to car owners that they may be encouraging robbery with violence by leaving their cars insufficiently protected?

Yes, this has already been done. A great step forward in the prevention of car thefts was the agreement, announced on 23rd May last year, with the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders for the fitting of anti-theft devices on all new models of motor cars and light vans on or after 1st January, 1970, and on all motor cars and light vans produced on or after 1st January, 1971.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he has refused to recommend the setting up of a Royal Commission on the causes and prevention of violence.

Because, at this stage, this important subject lends itself better to detailed research.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, in view of the serious increase in crimes of violence, it is just as important to understand the cause and prevention of this trend as it is to punish those responsible?

Yes, I do. The only difference between us is whether it would be more profitable to attempt to generalise and produce the cause or explanations of behaviour on matters as widely separated as robbery with armed violence and the behaviour of students at a particular university, or whether it is better to do this by means of detailed individual pieces of research. I would not rule out my hon. Friend's suggestion, but at this stage I think that it is better to proceed with individual studies.

If the right hon. Gentleman does not wish to hold an inquiry, will he undertake to publish the results of such inquiries into individual cases, so that the House can judge what conclusions to draw from them?

I would not want to give a detailed answer to that. Obviously, any subject of research for the Home Office or done by a university for the Home Office should be open to hon. Members and, subject to a general qualification, I should like to make such results available. I am reviewing the scale of research to see whether there are particular subjects on which we might engage our attention, or ask others to do for us.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will introduce legislation to provide for the erasure from police records of the names of children who appeared before the courts only once while minors.

Clause 4 of the Children and Young Persons Bill, at present before the House, proposes that children under 14 should not be prosecuted save for homicide. If this provision becomes law, there will be no central criminal record of offences committed by children under 14. My right hon. Friend has no plans for legislation in this connection in regard to children over 14.

Will my hon. Friend look again at the question of young people over 14? Does not he think it is desirable, when such young people have offended only once and have paid for their misdemeanour or crime, that all records of it should be removed, so that it is not brought up in the course of their adult lives?

These are confidential records, and it would be proper for my hon. Friend to remember that 80 per cent. of all finger-print identifications concern young people under 20. I am sure that my hon. Friend does not intend that records of a serious crime committed just before a child reaches the age of majority should be destroyed as soon as he reaches that age.

Will my hon. Friend seriously consider this because of the question of American passports and such things? Now that we are not bringing children under 14 before the courts, could not those who were prosecuted before the Act came into force have their records cleared?

That is a rather different question, but I am prepared to look into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance he has given to local authorities and fire authorities about allocation of specialist responsibility to chief officers of fire brigades for fire prevention and means of escape in case of fire.

It is for the authorities concerned to decide how best to discharge their statutory responsibilities; but most fire authorities delegate their fire precautions and means of escape work to the chief fire officer, and it is the practice for authorities who are not fire authorities to consult him. Through H.M. Inspectors of Fire Services and the proceedings of the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Councils, and in the normal course of business, the Home Office does what it can to encourage these practices.

Would my hon. Friend agree that it would clarify the procedure if chief fire officers were made responsible throughout the country?

We do what we can by encouraging local authorities to do the sorts of things which we regard as right. Perhaps I could leave the matter like that.

There is the problem that people who want to prepare premises for certain purposes find that there is no standard laid down for the whole of the country. Different fire officers have different ideas which are often contradictory. It is difficult to know whether what one is doing is right.

I should be grateful if the hon. Gentleman could give me precise examples.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that five letters from Mr. Gerald Williams of Kidderminster dated 14th December, 1967, 18th January, 1969, 30th January, 1969, 10th February, 1969, and 26th February, 1969, addressed to the Explosives Department remained unanswered until 3rd March, 1969; and what disciplinary steps he is taking to deal with this matter now, and to prevent a recurrence.

The first letter had no apparent connection with the others, but I much regret that it was not answered at the time and that there was delay in dealing with the later correspondence. I have already sent an explanation to the hon. Member. My right hon. Friend has given instructions for appropriate action to be taken within his Department.

My constituent has been outrageously treated, even if his letter was not connected with the others. Are we to understand that nothing will be done to mark the discourtesy which the Civil Service has shown to my constituent?

I hope that I have marked the discourtesy by apologising. It is sincerely meant. The administrative slip-up will be dealt with.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further study he has now given to the past winter's experience of the working of British Standard Time.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to a Question by the hon. Member for Cornwall, North (Mr. Pardoe) on 29th April.—[Vol. 782, c. 212.]

Could the hon. Gentleman now say where his right hon. Friend stands? When he came to Scotland last December he said that we would have a review this year. When he came south again he seemed to withdraw that. Now, apparently, he has reinstated it. Could he drum into the thick head of his right hon. Friend—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—that the people of Scotland want done with this irrelevant, expensive and unnecessary experiment as soon as possible?

To that ill-mannered question, I would answer that when my right hon. Friend made his remarks in Scotland what he said was that we would now make an assessment of the situation, and we are looking at accidents on the roads, in agriculture and in industry. Those are the preliminary things. I hope that the hon. Member will realise that if the number of accidents to young children in the mornings falls it would weigh heavily with me. Let us look at the figures before we come to a decision.

Will the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend consider the proposition that when in future a matter such as this is considered, it will be on a free vote of the House instead of with the Whips on?

That is not a matter for the Home Office.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will state the total amount of expenditure on civil defence during the financial year 1968–69; and how this compares with the expenditure estimated.

Firm figures will not be available until the autumn. The revised estimate of net expenditure on civil defence for Great Britain during 1968–69 is about £10 million. The original estimate was about £12·3 million.

But is it not a fact that there is now extremely little to show in terms of planning to defend this country against war emergencies? Will the hon. Gentleman ensure that such money as is spent is much better spent than seems to be the case at present?

If the hon. Member can give me an actual example of where he thinks that money is being misspent, I will certainly look at it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has been the net increase in Commonwealth immigrants during the first four months of 1969.

During the first quarter of 1969 10,118 Commonwealth citizens were admitted for settlement. This represents a decrease of about 25 per cent. on the corresponding figure last year. In addition 1,652 United Kingdom passport holders were admitted. I do not have the numbers of those who left during this period.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why, after the hon. Member for West Ham, North, had reported to Scotland Yard on Friday, 25th April that a vehicle 913 XPU had been dangerously and illegally parked in Woodstock Road, N.14, and had become derelict, by Monday, 28th April no action had been taken.

I understand that the prescribed procedure for removal by the local authority concerned was set in motion on 22nd April and completed on the day the hon. Member tabled his Question.

Is the Minister aware that to my knowledge this vehicle was left at this place for 10 days, which made it particularly dangerous to children? Would not the police have been better employed in giving attention to this matter earlier and taking action, rather than in spending time giving tickets to people who pause for a few minutes while they pay money into their bank? They give tickets for those sorts of things, but take no action for weeks in matters such as the one set out in my Question.

Although it is true that the police have power to remove abandoned vehicles, they normally do so only if the vehicle is left on a road where it is likely to cause danger or obstruction. The vehicle in question was left close to the pavement in a quiet side street with no parking restrictions.

On a point of order. In view of the fact that the Minister has been given wrong information, I beg to ask leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

The notice must be given in the conventional way.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has considered the communication dated 28th April from the hon. Member for West Ham, North, about a woman who asked the Metropolitan Police for police protection which was refused on the grounds of lack of police; and whether he will investigate these matters and report his conclusions.

The Commissioner of Police tells me that he can find no support for the allegation that police protection was sought, or refused, in the circumstances described in the newspaper report of an anonymous telephone call to which my hon. Friend has directed my attention.

Will the Minister see that John Gordon of the Sunday Express is so informed?

There is no evidence to suggest that the anonymous telephone call made to the writer of the article in the Sunday Express on 27th April, 1969, has any connection whatever with the murder at Bethnal Green.

asked the Sectary of State for the Home Department if he will now call for a report from the. Chief Constable as to the number of police who will be on duty in Caernarvon on the occasion of the Investiture of the Prince of Wales; what police authorities are supplying them; and what is the likely cost to local and national funds.

The Chief Constable expects that there will be 2,755 police officers—excluding special constables—on duty in Caernarvon to deal with traffic and crowds on the occasion of the Investiture. I will, with permission, list in the OFFICIAL REPORT the police forces from which they are to come. No estimate has been made of the cost involved.

Could the Minister say whether these costs are additional to the estimate of £200,000 which was given by the Secretary of State for Wales? Is it not rather unfair to the citizens of other towns whose police will be withdrawn on that day when there is a possibility that crimes may occur when the police are absent?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his concern for the towns from which police are being withdrawn. But I am sure that he will rejoice with me in the expectation that this will be an extremely popular event.

And an expensive one.

I agree about the expense. If my hon. Friend would care to have them, I will send to him some of the requests which I have been receiving for financial assistance to help with children's tea parties in the streets of my wards.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and productivity if she will appoint a committee to investigate the net loss of 35,000 jobs in Scotland in four years.

All the bodies concerned with economic development in Scotland are well aware of the problem presented by the decline in employment, which would have been much greater had the Government's regional policies not operated, and the reasons for the decline, are well understood. I do not think a committee of investigation would be able to shed more light on the problem.

Will not the Minister recognise that there is an overwhelming need for a most serious investigation of this grave problem? Is he aware that the Government promised an increase of 60,000 jobs net in Scotland for next year, whereas Scotland over that period has lost 35,000 jobs. Is he aware that the Government's honour is at stake? Would he take some action to investigate the grave loss of employment which has followed the hollow promise of the Government?

I am aware of what the Government have promised. I am equally aware of what the right hon. Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph) said in Glasgow recently. He said that they had failed to take action in sufficient time to meet the rundown in basic industry in Scotland, that they had failed to use taxation properly, and that they had neglected the need for new roads and communications. He recognised that if his Administration had done in Scotland what they should have done, the problem facing us would have been considerably less.

As the hon. Gentleman has failed completely to understand the point of my hon. Friend's question, will be explain why there was a gain of 30,000 jobs in Scotland during the four years before the present Government took office?

There may have been a gain in jobs, but unemployment was higher in the last four years of the Conservative Administration than it has been under this Administration.

Would my hon. Friend refer right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite to an editorial in a Scottish newspaper which is not usually congratulatory to the Government, stating that the Government should be congratulated on the work that they have carried out in Scotland? Is my hon. Friend aware that, bearing in mind the decline of the older industries in Scotland, trade unionists are fully aware of the large number of jobs which have been brought to the country and which will bear fruit in the future? Is he further aware that, on that basis, we on this side of the House recognise that the Government are doing a good job for Scotland?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his complacent reply does not conceal the fact that the Government have failed to do what they said they would do in 1966? Is he further aware that the position as regards male employment is even worse in that there was a loss of 60,000 jobs?

I am conscious that if new industry had gone to Scotland in the last four years of the former Administration at the pace at which it has in the last four years of this Government, the economic basis of Scotland would have been much more viable.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what is now the estimated number of jobs which will be lost in Aberdeen city and county by the closure of the Inverurie Locomotive Works and by the delay in finding productive work in the alternative advance factories proposed for and in Inverurie.

In addition to the advance factory announced for Inverurie, a number of inquiries from potential tenants of the workshops are still being pursued. Until the final outcome of these inquiries is known, it is not possible to estimate what, if any, will be the eventual job loss.

Does not my hon. Friend realise that Inverurie is in a key position as regards the whole North-East of Scotland, including the City of Aberdeen, and that the mere promise of inquiries for advance factories is no answer for the wives and children of workers who are deprived of work by the closing of the locomotive works?

My hon. and learned Friend need not remind me about the wives and children of unemployed people. All that I can say is that in the city which he represents there was a fall in unemployment last month, and I hope that that fall will continue.

How many prospective tenants have visited the works at Inverurie in response to the Government's publicity effort?

Quite a number. I will see that the appropriate Minister writes to the hon. Gentleman on that point.

Will the hon. Gentleman deal with the matter urgently, because nearly 600 jobs are due to disappear in a very few months, and the misfortune here is that unless there is alternative work, many of the men concerned may move away to other areas since they do not want to remain out of work?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept that we are dealing with it urgently. We are taking steps to interview all the men to discover their capabilities and capacities and to see how far we can fit them up with work within reasonable travelling distances. I hope that the fact that we have asked a number of firms to look at the works and the possibility of their being taken over will reveal that we are deeply interested in finding alternative employment for those who will lose their jobs when the workshops close.