asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, in view of the fact that certain patients requiring a heart operation must travel to London because of lack of facilities in Scotland, if he will take action to remedy this situation.

In any developing specialty it is inevitable that some very specialised techniques will be available only in a few centres.

Can the Under-Secretary of State assure me that it is only in highly specialised cases that people have to be moved south for operations? Is he aware that in an area where the incidence of cardiac trouble is very high there is a feeling of resentment that we are not able to handle all these cases in our own hospitals in Scotland?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern, but I know that he will keep the matter in perspective. At the moment, some 15 or 20 cases have to go to London, but for very special cardiac surgery which may not be available in Scotland there is to be an upgrading of the Glasgow Royal Infirmary cardiac surgery unit next year, so that the position will improve in due course.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received regarding the size of the Government's winter works programmes in Scotland.

As I announced on 27th October, the additional works to be undertaken and substantially completed by 31st March, 1973, in Scotland will amount to over £60 million. No representations have been made to me about the size of the programme, which was largely determined by the response of local authorities and other bodies to the invitation given them last July to undertake additional work.

Will the Secretary of State agree that the recession in the Scottish economy has reached such an intensity that the temporary jobs created by supplementary public works programmes, while welcome, are trivial in the context of the number at present unemployed in Scotland? Will he further agree that what we need is new investment? In particular, what action is the right hon. Gentleman taking to see that the nationalised industries, particularly nationalised steel, have a massively increased level of investment in Scotland?

A public works programme can be only one component in helping the situation, but it has been pressed by many, and this programme has been endorsed and supported by many. As to the situation in Scotland, the previous Government left us with a raging inflation, with the result that firms have been disposed to draw in their horns rather than to expand, but a favourable climate for industrial, development is now being created and there is every incentive for expansion.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that exactly a year ago the Government went around slashing Government expenditure, including local government expenditure, and that he called it the new impetus? Will the Secretary of State now give details in the OFFICIAL REPORT of all the special projects he has approved, their estimated cost, the number of jobs likely to be provided and for how long? If he wants response from the local authorities, will he not think of introducing a new 100 per cent. grant procedure in respect of this work?

Our operation last year was not a slashing operation of expenditure: it was an operation directing expenditure to the places where it was really effective. There is on the Order Paper today a Question for Written Answer, to which I shall give a full reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT, concerning the public works programme. I will certainly consider whether that reply covers all the points about which the right hon. Gentleman asks and will give him further information as necessary.

The right hon. Gentleman must be aware that in the Lothians, in the mining and paper industries, there is a danger of losing about 1,200 to 1,300 jobs before the end of this year and that this will affect employment in East Edinburgh. In the light of these figures, which are alarming when one considers the size of the population, does not the right hon. Gentleman intend to tell the House today how he can improve employment prospects in the areas I have mentioned?

I am aware of the particular colliery problem in the hon. Member's constituency and have discussed that with him. I know he is in touch with the Minister responsible for the coal industry about it. I am also aware of the difficulties of the paper industry, which is going through a difficult time in general at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to protect Scottish interests in the development of North Sea oil and gas, in particular by ensuring that some part of the financial gain is reaped by the Scottish economy, and that fishing interests are safeguarded against obstruction and pollution.

I am in close touch with the Ministers directly responsible to ensure that Scottish interests are fully protected. The Scottish economy will benefit from this development. All practical steps are being taken to safeguard fishing interests.

Has the Secretary of State made a definite claim that Scotland should benefit directly by acquiring some part of the profits which will be made from the natural resources in the waters of Scotland? Is there any information about the pollution which may be caused in the event of oil being released into the sea or, referring to movement at the bottom of the sea, the pipes taking it ashore being split?

I am doing everything to stimulate activity in Scotland arising from this development. My hon. Friend gave a fairly full report of the present situation in reply to an Adjournment debate last Monday, which is on the record. Regarding any suggestion of Scotland taking the revenues, I will only ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has reflected on the consequences of relating public expenditure in Scotland directly, and perhaps only, to revenue arising within her boundaries or her shores, bearing in mind, for example, that North Sea gas has been piped for some time from off the shores of England.

Would my right hon. Friend be a little more specific when he states that fishing interests will be safeguarded in this matter?

I assure my hon. Friend that the Government will do everything possible to bring together the oil interests and the fishing interests, so that they may keep each other informed of their activities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish his latest estimates of net migration from Scotland.

The latest published estimates covered the year to June, 1970. The estimate for the six months ending December, 1970, shows a net loss of about 12,000.

Will the Secretary of State give some indication of when he expects to publish the figures for June, 1971? Are they not available to his office? There is a suspicion that net migration is rising and that the future Labour Government will have to go through the same procedure of going into office with very high figures and having to halve them again.

I can reassure the hon. Gentleman because, although the figures are not available, the indications are that any changes from the average which was running in 1969 and 1970 are very slight. If the hon. Gentleman wants to make comparisons, I must point out that during the six years from 1965 to 1970, the net migration from Scotland was much greater than during the previous six years of Conservative Government, and that the highest year was 1966, with 47,000, and the next highest year was 1967, with 45,000.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that he inherited a falling curve while we inherited a rising curve? Can he assure us that the curve will continue to fall? When will he publish the precise figures up to June, 1971?

The hon. Gentleman seems more interested in curves than in the totals. The curve appears to have levelled out, and that is the position I have described.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has any plans to visit the railway workshops at Barassie, Troon; and if he will pay an official visit to Troon.

My right hon. Friend received a deputation of shop stewards when he was in the neighbourhood of Barassie on 15th October. He is fully aware of the social factors involved. The future of the workshops is at present being considered by British Rail and the trade unions concerned through a joint working party.

No wonder the Secretary of State is afraid to visit the former Tory stronghold of Troon. Does not he realise that on Thursday, 18th November, British Rail are to give notice of the closure of Barassie railway workshops, throwing 480 people out of a job with no prospects of getting another? As our only representative in the Cabinet, what will the Secretary of State do about it?

With respect, it is very irresponsible of the hon. Gentleman to anticipate the conclusions of a joint working party which includes both the employers and trade unions. It would be much better to await their conclusions before making extreme statements like that.

Order. We had an Adjournment debate about this last night.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many local authorities and other organisations have written to him about the cessation of supplying free milk to the over-sevens.

Eighteen local authorities and 14 other organisations have made representations about the withdrawal of free milk from pupils over seven.

Will the Secretary of State now recognise that virtually every organisation in Scotland is opposed to this Act? Will he also recognise that, unlike the case of school meals, the poorer sections of the community cannot pay for the necessary milk for the over-sevens? Will the right hon. Gentleman now reconsider the position and do something for the future citizens of Scotland?

I would not agree that everyone is against the Act. I am aware that some in Scotland dislike its provisions. Parliament spent a long time over this Act and I have discussed with local authority representatives how the provisions can be best carried out with the minimum of inconvenience and difficulty.

Is the Secretary of State aware that among the organisations which have made representations to him is the education committee of Peebles-shire which by no stretch of the imagination could be described as a left-wing organisation? Will he take note that there is widespread and genuine anger at this very mean Measure which he has introduced?

I did not indicate that the objections had come from any particular political quarter and I am aware, as I said in my earlier reply, that there are objections and there is dislike, but it is not universal. I am aware that there are difficulties and I have discussed these with the local authorities' representatives.

Have these local authorities which have protested brought any proof to bear that the children of Scotland are suffering from malnutrition in any way?

No. The problem I have discussed with them is how the medical side should be carried out, and I have made it clear to them that the decisions about individual children must be left to the medical profession—I am sure that the hon. Member for Greenock (Dr. Dickson Mabon) would support that —and that any child can be referred for medical inspection but that it is not necessary that all children over seven should be submitted for medical inspection.

Can the Secretary of State name one single education authority which has welcomed or approved this Measure? Second, would he now confirm that there is nothing in the Act to stop each and every child in Scotland receiving free milk, once he makes quite clear to all medical officers of health what the Secretary of State for Education has confirmed to me, that preventive factors can be taken into consideration? Is not the way now open for each and every child to be given milk?

The large majority of education authorities in Scotland are carrying out the provisions of the Act. Its interpretation is a matter which should be dealt with by the authorities with their own advisers.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what sums of money were paid by each regional hospital board to private engineering consultants and private architectural consultants in connection with hospital development in the years 1965 to 1970, inclusive.

During the financial year 1970-71 payments by Scottish regional hospital boards to private engineering consultants, private architectural consultants and private quantity surveyors totalled £1,481,304.The component amounts for the various regional hospital boards I shall, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the Under-Secretary concede that £1½ million is a considerable sum? Is it the hon. Gentleman's intention to establish the common services agency under the reorganisation of the Health Service in such a way as to make it unnecessary to employ outside consultants for work which can be done within the National Health Service?

It is entirely up to regional hospital boards or to the bodies set up under the new organisation to make this decision for themselves.

Payments during financial year 1970–71 by Scottish regional hospital boards to private engineering consultants, private architectural consultants and private quantity surveyors:

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce legislation to limit the amount of increase in rents which may be imposed by rent assessment tribunals; and if he will make a statement.

Rent assessment committees must remain free to fix what in their judgment are fair rents. This was provided for in the Rent Act, 1965, introduced by the previous Administration. Under the Housing (Financial Provisions) (Scotland) Bill, published today, tenants who cannot afford to pay the full fair rent will be assisted by rent allowances, and rent increases will be phased in certain circumstances.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that the rent officer at Coatbridgc has agreed to a rent increase from £18 to £110 for a two-room-and-kitchen tenement occupied by retirement pensioners? That is an increase of more than 600 per cent. Does the hon. Gentleman realise that landlords are cockahoop because the rents of similar houses were stepped up by £100 by a rent tribunal? Is it not time that rent tribunals were told to enforce fair and not extortionate rents, because the 1969 Act was never intended to be a lawyers' paradise?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern, but I think he will agree that rent assessment committees are essentially the type of body which must be left independent of interference from governments of any kind. I therefore hope that the hon. Gentleman will agree that it would be improper to interfere with the normal working of these committees. If the new Bill is enacted, tenants will be able for the first time to get rent allowances to help them, if the rent is too much for their needs.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many tenants, particularly elderly ones, are not aware that if they appeal against a rent officer's decision to an assessment tribunal the figure can be substantially increased and not just reduced? As assessment committees have been in the main fixing rents higher than those fixed by rent officers, is there some way in which people can be made aware of the facts and of their rights?

I agree that it is important that people should be aware of the facts. Appeals do not always result in increases. For example, in 1970 in 32 per cent. of cases rent assessment committees reduced the rent and in 28 per cent. left the rent unchanged. Therefore, appeals do not always work to the detriment of tenants.

Will the Government undertake to review the proceedings of these committees, because there may well be a greatly changed situation when there is a recognition that, no matter what the rent is, somebody else will pay. The landlords will be the ones who will benefit and the public will have to pay these rents, many of which could be extortionate for the type of property involved.

I do not entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman. It all depends upon the independence of judgment of the rent assessment committees. I have no reason to think that they are acting improperly in any way.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the average payment made in local rates by householders in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what were the comparable figures five, 10 and 15 years previously.

In 1970-71 the average rate payment by householders, including domestic water rate, is estimated to have been £5320: comparable figures for 1965-66, 1960-61 and 1955-56 were £3810, £28·70 and £21 ·90 respectively.

Do not these figures show the urgent need to consider the whole question of local government reform and finance? Is it the Minister's intention to have a further revaluation before local government reform takes place? If rates in the new larger areas are to be on the basis of the assessments fixed by independent assessors in the present areas, some grotesque anomalies will arise.

These are all matters which must be considered in the light of the current review of local authority finance. I share my hon. Friend's regret that this was not undertaken at an earlier stage than it was. It is worth pointing out that the increases which have occurred over the years have more or less kept pace with the increase in average earnings.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proposals he has for the realignment of the A98 between Portsoy and Cullen.

My right hon. Friend is having schemes prepared for the reconstruction of a number of bridges on A98 between Banff and Buckie, including several between Portsoy and Cullen. Some realignment of the road would be entailed by these schemes.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he bear in mind that when it comes to the railway bridge just east of Cullen at Crannoch Woods there is an area of considerable public amenity and local beauty which should be preserved? In realigning that bridge will he take note that the old bridge was much more direct than any possible proposal he has in mind?

If my hon. Friend is referring to the Seatown Viaduct, I should prefer to see the details of the proposed road works there before answering the question in detail. If the Seatown Viaduct remains, there will be severe limitations on the road improvements which can be carried out on the site.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many new primary schools have been started in 1971; how many have been completed; and what were the comparable figures for the years 1965 and 1970.

In the nine months to 30th September, the latest period for which figures are available, 30 new primary schools were started and 23 completed.

How do the figures for December, 1970 to May, 1971 compare with the figures for December, 1966 to May, 1971? In the latter period 39 new primary schools were started. The present Government have said that they are giving extra priority to the provision of primary education. Can we not therefore assume that the current figure will be much greater than that I have quoted for the 1967 period?

If the hon. Gentleman wanted those figures he should have asked for them. The hon. Gentleman should realise the extent of the acceleration which has taken place in the programme since the Labour Government left office. We estimate that in the present financial year there will be 62 new starts—a very considerable improvement on the programme of 24 that we inherited.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many letters he has sent to individual representatives of local authorities arising out of decisions of these authorities to provide school milk for children over seven years of age; and if he will make a statement.

Forty-one such letters have been sent on my behalf in pursuance of the procedure laid down by Statute. I have no statement to make on this today.

As the right hon. Gentleman must know that in recent times the House has been obsessed with hon. Members who have been faced with issues of conscience and principles, does he think it right that his Department should send treatening letters to decent, God-fearing councillors of Midlothian and elsewhere because they, as a matter of conscience and of principle, are not prepared to deprive school kiddies over seven of school milk?

The position is governed by Statute. [Interruption.] It is governed by other Statutes. These people were affected by the auditors' reports. Therefore, I was statutorily bound to intimate the reports to them and to consider any statements in writing they cared to make to me within 14 days of those intimations. This is in accordance with Statutes preceding the Education (Milk) Act.

Will the Secretary of State comment on a statement which was made in my constituency by an official spokesman of the party which now forms the Government but which is the minority party in Scotland? In answer to a question about school milk this spokesman said that only the rich should have children and that if a person could not afford to keep his children he should not have any. Will the Secretary of State accept from me that that statement caused widespread concern in the area in which it was made?

I am not aware of the statement. It sounds as though it may have been concerned more with the population explosion than with this subject.

Has my right hon. Friend any recollection of what views were expressed by the God-fearing councillors of Midlothian and other local authorities when the previous Government removed free milk from the 12-year olds?

I think my hon. Friend will remember that when our party was on the other side of the House we behaved very much more responsibly.

I should like to take up this question of responsibility. In the letter that the right hon. Gentleman sent to these councils, did he remind them that he was the man who aided, encouraged and abetted the Tory town councils of Glasgow and Edinburgh to flout the will of Parliament in the matter of fee-paying schools?

I am very glad of this opportunity to repudiate entirely 100 per cent. that charge which the hon. Gentleman has already made outside this House. Neither I nor any of my colleagues did anything to encourage any local authority in 1969 and 1970 to flout the law. We did the opposite. We said that we would change that law when we came back into office, and we did so.

I would not boast about that.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many people died from heart disease in Scotland in each of the last three years; how this compares with the other areas of the United Kingdom; and what steps he proposes to take to increase facilities for research and treatement of this disease.

The figures are 21,558, 21,878 and 21,497, respectively. These represent higher death rates than in England and Wales and Northern Ireland. My right hon. Friend expects to continue to support all projects for research into heart disease recommended by the Advisory Committee on Medical Research. I have, however, no reason to think that the overall facilities for treatment in Scotland are inadequate.

In answer to an earlier Question, the hon. Gentleman said that urgent consideration was being given to the upgrading of the cardiac unit at the Royal Infirmary in Glasgow. Do these figures not suggest that greater urgency is required and that there is a genuine feeling of disquiet in the West of Scotland, which we do not want to exacerbate, that the facilities are not quite as good as they should be?

The upgrading of the Glasgow Royal Infirmary is in the programme and will start next year, so that it will be ready the year after. There are adequate facilities in Scotland and, in relation to the original Question, I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are supporting all research facilities that are requested.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he will announce his policy for the assistance over freight charges to Orkney and Shetland.

When my right hon. Friend has completed his review of island shipping services and subsidies. Many of the relevant facts have only recently become available, following the publication on 11th October of Professor Gaskin's Report on freight rates and prices in the Islands.

Will the Minister bear to mind that this matter is now extremely urgent for many reasons, but principally because we have an annual increase of 10 per cent. on freights which is far beyond any of the Government's norms, or targets, and it is disastrous for the Islands?

I can well understand the concern which is felt about these increases. The right hon. Gentleman has been in touch with me about them. There are many factors which have to be taken into account in a change of policy, but we shall waste no time in coming to decisions as soon as we can.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will request his Economic Advising Section to investigate the effects on the Scottish economy of the ending of the regional employment premium in 1974.

My economic advisers keep under review the whole range of regional incentives.

Have not the economic advisers to the Secretary of State told him that the thing to do to hold the job position is to double the regional employment premium immediately?

No. At present the ending of the regional employment pre- mium is three years away. The situation will be considered nearer the time, so that we can see what combination of measures is likely to be most effective to meet that situation rather than the situation today.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether his economic advisers at any time recommended the ending of R.E.P.?

This was a decision taken by the last Government. They decided that R.E.P. should first be for five years and then, when they brought it in, for seven years. We have kept to the same arrangement.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we never find that he is reliable in relation to Tory policy and we certainly do not take his word in connection with Labour policy? It is true that we guaranteed R.E.P. for seven years but we did not say that it would end at that time. Any industrial firm which is making investment plans wants to know very much earlier what the position will be. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has seen the statement made by Sir Eric Yarrow that R.E.P. should immediately be doubled?

I have seen a number of suggestions made by a great many persons, and sometimes they conflict. Of course, I take all these things into account and pass them to the Ministers whose responsibilities these matters are. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that we have at least made it clear now that this particular form of assistance will not continue beyond the end of the seven-year period. In two years' time, when the situation can be assessed, we can see what is the best combination of regional deployment measures for 1975.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now allow the Chevron Oil Company to go ahead with its £50 million development at Hunterston, so giving immediate employment to 3,000 unemployed constructional workers in North Ayrshire.

My planning decisions on Hunterston have zoned the area for industrial development and a deep waiter port. To stimulate the economy and bring down unemployment the Government have introduced a number of measures, including the very large programme of immediate public works which I have announced for Scotland.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that when he turned down Chevron's original proposal he said that Britain's future oil supplies would be guaranteed by the B.P. expansion at Grangemouth, further developments at Shellhaven and by Burmah and Total plans for development on the Thames? Has no one told him that B.P. has postponed its development at Grangemouth and that we have heard nothing further of the other two developments? Why is not the right hon. Gentleman honest and why does not he clearly state that he does not want the Chevron Oil Company development at Hunterston at any price?

I am aware of the announcements by B.P. The situation there was one of many factors which were taken into account in these planning decisions. As the hon. Member must know, this was a planning decision similar to the one which the right hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) made—

It was the right hon. Gentleman's decision.

—concerning another company, Murco, about the particular place to which it had applied to go. May I also point out that the figure of 3,000 given in the Question as the number of construction workers who would be employed is very much overstated? The Chevron Company itself said that the number would be 2,000, and they might not all come from North Ayrshire.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we would not sneeze at 2,000 jobs, quite apart from 3,000? He must realise that there have been two changes since he made his decision—first of all, the cancellation or postponement of the B.P. development, which was a substantial part of the excuse given for turning this down. The Murco decision was quite different because it was based on pollution, and no pollution factor is involved here. The Secretary of State rather curiously, in a way which we have not been able to elicit, is associated with the Hunterston Development Company. We should like to know when the feasibility studies are to be completed, and whether his development company is in discussion with Chevron Oil and other interested developers on their possible position in the development of Hunterston.

On the question of employment, this project, if it had gone ahead at that place, would have provided some construction work, but when that was finished the number of jobs would have been very small—not more than 300.

Will my right hon. Friend hold firm to his view that it would be wrong to let a foreign firm despoil a most important area in Scotland while our own firm is forced to pump its oil inland? Will he stick to that line?

I cannot open up all the considerations which were behind the planning decision, but I would point out that the affirmative planning decisions which I announced last December, at the earliest possible moment, have opened the way to the industrial development which can provide the most jobs in that area and can be most valuable for Scotland. As regards the Firth of Clyde, very large tankers are using the deep water there to pump oil from Finnart to Grangemouth.

To what extent is the Secretary of State himself or the Scottish Office financially involved in the feasibility study and the Development Company? The right hon. Gentleman could well prejudice the position, since he has effectively taken unto himself the decision in relation to planning applications.

The Government have offered financial help with the study, in combination with the Hunterston Development Company, but this in no way diminishes the position of the Secretary of State as a planning Minister.

Order. We have dealt with only 16 Questions in about 22 minutes. The House will have to go ahead rather more quickly now. Mr. Robert Hughes, Question No. 17.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You have drawn to our attention the number of Questions so far dealt with, but I seem not to be able to catch your eye. Could you give the reason for that?

Certainly no personal reason whatever.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the number and grade of medical staff employed on whole-time and part-time contracts in each specialty in each regional hospital board in 1970.

Information by speciality is not available for 1970, but I shall circulate details of staff in post at 30th September, 1969, in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm the impression that there has been a move from whole-time contracts to part-time contracts by consultant staff with regional hospital boards? If that be so, is it not a disturbing trend, since it leads to a growth in the number of people who are able to buy privilege by jumping the queue and getting earlier treatment?

No, I cannot accept the hon. Gentleman's conclusion. When he has the OFFICIAL REPORT, he will find there eight pages of detailed statistics, and I am sure that he will not be able to deduce from them the conclusion which he advanced in his supplementary question.