asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many of the council houses in Scotland built before 1939 have been modernised; and how many still require to be modernised at the present date.

About 80,000 houses built by local authorities have been included in improvement proposals approved for Government grant. I regret that I cannot say how many of these were built before 1939 or how many pre-1939 houses still require modernisation.

Would my hon. Friend agree that there is a very large job to be done in bringing houses up to the proper standards for modern requirements? Is he satisfied that the date he set for the extra improvement grants gives sufficient time for this work to be undertaken?

I agree that there is a lot of work to be done on this in the coming years. I am sure my hon. Friend will be as encouraged as I am to know that the total number of houses owned by local authorities which were improved in the year 1971 was 24,859. This compares with 10,790 in 1960, 9,700 in 1968 and 3,500 in 1967. The object of the terminal date on the scheme is to encourage authorities to get ahead as quickly as possible with the work.

In any modernisation programme will the Under-Secretary give consideration in the very near future to making coal-fired central heating an integral part of the programme, to safeguard jobs in mining areas?

That is a matter for consideration by the local authorities concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when the Coatbridge and Airdrie stretch of the Glasgow transport plan is likely to be approved and started; and if he will make a statement.

The first stage within Coatbridge, of a new east-west primary route on the line of the Glasgow-Coatbridge-Airdrie expressway recommended by the Greater Glasgow Transportation Study, is included in the preparation list of schemes to be authorised during the present financial year. I will consider further stages as they are put forward by the local highway authorities concerned.

Will the Minister accept my thanks for that informative reply? Is he aware that the delay in producing firm proposals has jeopardised industrial development in my area, which is top of the unemployment league in Scotland? Can he do his best to live up to the timetable so that we can get something moving in this direction?

I thank the hon. Member for his initial remarks. I agree that it is necessary to get ahead with these matters as quickly as possible, particularly on industrial development.

I thank the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how much money has now been allocated to local authorities under the Urban Renewal Scheme.

Twenty-three applications—some comprising a number of minor schemes—have been received from local authorities for grant under the special £1 million environmental recovery scheme. The total grant represented by these applications is £446,000. Two have been approved, one is being approved today and others are about to be approved.

Are more than 23 expected?

Yes. We expect that a good number of local authorities have still not had time since 7th February to prepare schemes. But we are encouraged by the initial response.

Can the Under-Secretary say whether this takes account of the announcement by the Secretary of State for the Environment during the Budget debate? I take it that it does not. Will Scotland be affected by the announcement that further funds will be available for urban renewal and related purposes?

The scheme is only a small part of the total amount of Government help for improving the environment and does not include west-central Scotland and the Glasgow area, which have their own scheme. But it will be up to us to consider, if and when the £1 million is exhausted, whether it is necessary to provide more money. In the meantime, to get this amount of money between 7th February and now is a good achievement.

Can my hon. Friend tell me how Operation Facelift is getting on in Glasgow?

That is another question. I understand, however, that it is going well, and my hon. Friend may have noticed that a certain amount of publicity material is going out on this which has been very helpful.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will amend the National Health Service (Charges for Drugs and Appliances) (Scotland) Regulations so as to grant a one year exemption from prescription charges to any woman whose child is either stillborn or dies within the first year of birth.

No, Sir. Much as I sympathise with these mothers, the existing arrangements already ensure that exemption is available for anyone who cannot afford to pay the charge for any prescriptions she may need.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that is identical to the answer I was given yesterday by his hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services? Will not he listen to the representations of the medical profession in Scotland, through the Scottish Association of Executive Councils, and consider the small cost of removing this rather cruel and heartless regulation?

When he puts down the same Question, I am sure the hon. Gentleman will expect to get the same answer. My Department and I have considered the views of the bodies he mentioned, but at present there is no intention of changing the regulations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what directive has been issued by him to new town development corporations on the level of house rents.

New town development corporations were officially informed in October last year that having regard to the White Paper on the Reform of Housing Finance in Scotland (Cmnd. 4727) they were expected to fix their rents under broadly similar arrangements to those applying to local authorities and with the same limitations on average and maximum increases in standard rents.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us what the average increase in the rent is expected to be, whether the directive indicated to the corporations that they were to have an annual increase in rent over the next four or five years, and whether there will be an amendment to their existing rebate scheme or they will be asked to submit to the scheme prepared by the Government?

As I said in my original answer, their progression of rents will be the same as that for local authorities—that is, a maximum average weekly increase of 50p in a year with a weekly maximum for any individual of 75p in a year. I understand that the new towns are to bring the rebate schemes into line with the model scheme. This produces substantial reductions in standard rents for those in need.

Will the hon. Gentleman take the opportunity of explaining to the House why he is proposing for the new towns and other local authorities increases in rents related to the needs of the person and his capacity to pay but is not introducing that principle into housing improvement grants? Why not have a means test for housing improvement grants if there is a means test for council house rents in the new towns?

I do not agree that the two points are necessarily connected. The question of improvement grants is a separate matter. It is necessary to have a uniform national rent rebate scheme so that all tenants in need may be protected from having to pay a rent they cannot afford. I should have thought the Opposition would welcome such a scheme very warmly.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we are informed that the new town corporations had a meeting and decided collectively that they would introduce rents in accordance with the White Paper? Does he not agree that it pays scant regard to the functions of parliamentary democracy that a corporation should seek to implement a Bill before it had become the law of the land?

As nobody, not even a local authority, is obliged to do anything before a Bill becomes the law of the land, I cannot see how that is so. The new towns have made their decisions in a sensible way in anticipation of legislation, but they are not obliged to do so until it is law.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's answers, I beg to give notice that I will seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has for his Department to encourage Scotland to support and co-operate in the National Tree Planting Year in 1973.

I am consulting the Scottish local authority associations about how best to encourage a nationwide tree planting effort.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he know that since my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment accepted my proposal that 1973 should be a national tree planting year I have received many letters from Scotsmen supporting the venture, the whole purpose of which is to show what a dramatic improvement in their urban environment can be made by people living in towns and cities at relatively little cost?

We are glad in Scotland to be joining in the praiseworthy purpose of improvement of the urban environment, and we have a very large tree planting programme on the forestry side.

Is not the Secretary of State aware of the large question mark that hangs over the future of the Forestry Commission's planting in Scotland? We have had to wait a long time for the completion of the Government's review of policy on that, When does he propose to announce its result?

A large percentage of Great Britain planting is put down in Scotland. Reviews of the exact figures are continuously carried out by Governments of the day.

Will the right hon. Gentleman convey to his hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hands worth (Mr. Sydney Chapman) the fact that anything that brings work to Scotland—tree planting or anything else—is welcome against the background of our very high unemployment figures, brought about by the present Government?

What the hon. Gentleman said at the beginning of his question is accepted, as is shown by the various schemes for the improvement of the environment mentioned by my hon. Friend. In particular, aid will be available where appropriate under the derelict land rehabilitation programme, the provisions for the improvement of the amenities of residential areas and the special schemes for environmental improvement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will commission a report into the state of the building industry in Scotland.

No, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that building land is now being sold in Edinburgh at over £30,000 an acre? What action will the Government take to stop young couples who want to buy a house putting over £1,000 into the pockets of the land speculators?

The increase in house prices causes great concern to many people, but it is necessary not to get the facts wrong. The hon. Gentleman may have noticed that the recent survey by the Nationwide Building Society showed that in the years 1966–71 the increase in house prices in Great Britain as a whole was 52 per cent. whereas in Scotland it was only 34 per cent. We are keeping the matter closely under watch, and we shall help if there is anything we can do.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there is an imbalance of the trades within the building trade and that pushing on with the modernisation of houses brings into play the sort of trades not catered for in the industrial type of building that we have now? If we push forward with modernising existing houses we can utilise much more of the building labour available in Scotland.

I agree that in order to get a general housing policy which makes sense it is necessary to consider every form of housing at the same time. It is no use thinking that one form of housing alone can solve our problems, and to that extent I warmly agree with my hon. Friend.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the price increases are becoming scandalous in Scotland, not least in his own constituency? Does he think it was the best use of his time to open a group of eight houses costing £20,000 each? Would he not do far better to look into why the price is so high?

With respect to the right hon. Gentleman, I will decide what I do in my constituency, and not he. As the right hon. Gentleman should know, the firm that built those houses builds a large number of houses throughout Scotland at very low prices by normal standards. It is selling some at under £5,000 each right now. I have encouraged local authorities to make more land available, which is the best way to bring the price down.

While the hon. Gentleman is right in saying that what he does in his own constituency is for him to decide, does he recognise that his responsibilities in Scottish affairs make it incumbent upon him to bring down the price of houses in Scotland? The rate of increase is astronomical, particularly in Edinburgh. What has been the rate of increase since the Government came to office?

I only wish the hon. Gentleman's Government had taken that view when they were in office. They imposed the burden of selective employment tax on the building industry which directly put up house prices. The hon. Gentleman may have noticed, in the new industrial development arrangements which were announced recently, the grant for the purchase of plant and machinery in the building and construction industry, which should be of some help.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give an estimate of the demand for the provision of day centres for severely mentally handicapped children in the county of Fife.

The local authorities concerned are in the best position to estimate local requirements, but about 20 places per 100,000 population are needed in a typical area.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. The indication in my part of Fife is that there is great demand for these services. Is he aware that doubt exists as to which organisation should be responsible for the services—the hospital authorities or the social work department? Does he intend in the near future to allocate funds to social work departments to provide day centres?

I expect shortly to issue to local authorities a circular of guidance on services and facilities required for the mentally handicapped. This will include an indication of the scale of provision of day care centres regarded as desirable. I am sure that the local authorities in general will be willing to shoulder their responsibilities to meet local needs of this kind. There is a rapid increase in expenditure by the social works services and this is, of course, eligible for rate support grant.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has held with the Scottish Area of the National Union of Mineworkers about the conversion of coal-fired power stations.

I met representatives of the Scottish Area of the National Union of Mineworkers in Glasgow on 3rd May, 1971, to discuss the proposed conversion of Portobello power station.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that it is a rather new concept of the Government, since they are pledged to create more jobs, if they are to consider a £2·1 million power station conversion from coal-firing to oil-firing, a consequence of which would be the loss of about 1,400 more jobs to the coal industry? Can he give an assurance that he will not pursue this rather strange contradiction?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, we have had a proposal from the South of Scotland Electricity Board that this station should be converted. We are considering it in the same way that we and our predecessors have considered similar proposals—in the light of the cost involved, of fuel policy generally, and of the social consequences. We are considering the matter very fully in the light of all these considerations.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry consistently refuses to answer on matters of fuel policy, and that I have been endeavouring to extract from him for the last three months his intentions during the next seven years as to the division of fuel between coal, oil and nuclear energy for the whole United Kingdom, because under the Electricity (Scotland) Act, 1955, there is only one grid and we want to know whether the grid is to be fed by any coal-fired power stations in Scotland in future?

The same position in Scotland applies as before—that decisions about future fuel policy and power stations must be taken in the light of the full studies being made on a United Kingdom basis. Any question on that is for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is not the first time that this proposal has been put to the Scottish Office? Before he makes a decision will he remember that it is particularly important at present to preserve every job one can in Scotland? When can he make his decision?

I confirm that that is one of the things we shall be considering in making the decision, the date of which I am unable to give the right hon. Gentleman. We will consider the proposal fully in the light of all the considerations, as is usually done.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what reply he has received from the South-East Regional Hospital Board to his representations for an accelerated provision of geriatric beds in Fife, arising from the delegation to St. Andrew's House on 17th March.

The board has reviewed its plans and has made proposals which will enable the provision of 60 beds in Glenrothes to start in 1974 instead of only a first phase of 30 beds; these proposals are being urgently considered. Thirty-five additional beds will become available at Cameron Hospital in 1973 by conversion of an existing ward; tide other schemes which will start between 1972 and 1975 will provide a further 360 beds.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, while he has made some progress since 17th March, he has still given a disappointing reply? I thought we had made him aware of the tragic circumstances which obtain in Fife and that in any case Kirkcaldy area is most in need of beds. I ask the hon. Gentleman to be bold and demand from the Treasury the extra money required to remedy the worst position in Scotland, which is in Fife.

I was grateful to receive the deputation led by the hon. Gentleman, the hon. Member for Dunfermline Burghs (Mr. Adam Hunter) and my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, East (Sir J. Gilmour). I felt that the discussion we had was most valuable. The hon. Gentleman must appreciate that Fife is receiving a very fair proportion of the money spent on geriatric accommodation, and if it is possible for the planning of the new provision at the Victoria Hospital to be expedited it could start on site at the end of 1974.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make available additional financial assistance to education authorities to accelerate the primary school building programme.

My right hon. Friend has already done so. Capital investment to the value of £9·5 million was allocated in July of last year for primary school improvements and replacements starting in the period to March, 1973; and the additional works programme includes £16·8 million for primary school building projects.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that recently I have been in correspondence with him about two primary school problems in my constituency—Grangemouth Primary School and Comely Park Primary School? Does not he agree that the Stirling County Education Authority is a very good one and that it wants to solve this problem? Is he aware that in talks I have had with members of the authority, their complaint is that insufficient capital resources are available? As my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy Burghs (Mr. Gourlay) has said, will the hon. Gentleman be bold and demand that more resources be allocated to this very important part of education?

I have nothing to add to what I have written to the hon. Gentleman on this matter. I remind him and the Opposition that in the last four years of Labour Government Stirling received £510,000 for primary school building, whereas in our two years of office it has received £880,000.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is now in a position to report on the negotiations to establish an iron ore terminal at Hunterston.

This is a matter for the British Steel Corporation and the Clyde Port Authority. I understand that discussions between them are still in progress.

I am disappointed by that reply. It is the same as I have been receiving for the last two years. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last night Dr. Finniston, Chief Executive of the British Steel Corporation, confirmed that the development engineering department of the General Steels Division at Mother well is to be closed? Is he further aware that this department has taken part in the planning of the iron ore terminal at Hunterston? Does not this confirm fears which are being expressed in Scotland, coupled with the right hon. Gentleman's reply today, that the iron ore terminal will never be completed?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman has observed during those two years that on 31st January last the corporation announced that it was to go ahead with the iron ore terminal at Hunterston. According to a report in one of the Scottish newspapers, Dr. Finniston said last night

"I am telling you that a £26 million ore terminal at Hunterston will be built."

Will the right hon. Gentleman enlighten us about the work undertaken by the Hunterston Development Company? What plans and proposals have been submitted by the company for the development of the very valuable land site there? It is all very well saying that this is a subject for the British Steel Corporation to determine. but what about the right hon. Gentleman's own responsibility?

The hon. Gentleman is right—this is a separate point. The Hunterston Development Company was set up with the assistance of the Government last year in order to carry out the necessary preliminary work before any major development at Hunterston. But a start on the terminal need not necessarily await the feasibility study commissioned by the company.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement on his official meeting on 27th March with the Scottish Assembly.

As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has already told the House, the Standing Commission of the Scottish Assembly welcomed the Government's new regional measures and suggested that certain further measures be considered.—[Vol. 834, c. 230.]

In the discussion with the Assembly delegates about the situation in Scotland did the right hon. Gentleman remember that we have over 150,000 unemployed in Scotland, and does he realise that since he had that discussion two factories in my constituency have been closed? Can he now give us some assurance that in discussions, not only with those delegates but also with Members from this side of the House, he will tell us what he is going to do, at least to give some hope to Scotland, and will he give an undertaking to the people in Scotland that they are not forgotten?

In the discussion, which went on for nearly two hours, the question of the high unemployment in Scotland was, of course, one of the matters which was underlying the discussion. The particular points which have just been announced were welcomed, such as free depreciation over the whole country, the setting up of a new industrial development office in Scotland which would be able to take initiatives besides administering grants and loans north of the Border and, particularly equal treatment to industry wishing to expand as to incoming industry, thereby removing an anomaly which, incidentally, resulted from the measures introduced by the last Government.

While welcoming its splendid work, which has been very widely welcomed, may I ask my right hon. Friend to tell us what further measures were suggested at this meeting?

Yes. There were discussions about how R.E.P. would be phased out and what might replace it, and there was a catalogue of a number of matters about which I can tell my hon. Friend, but I cannot give him the total now. We were mainly concerned with what could be done to improve the prospects for employment.

Bearing in mind that this time last year the Secretary of State told us that he expected there would be an improvement in the employment position in Scotland by the end of that year, and that by that time it was worse than it had ever been, could the right hon. Gentleman venture to predict today when he expects to see an improvement in the figures, and by how much?

The right hon. Gentleman has been in this House long enough—some would say too long—

Cheap.

Withdraw.

—wait for it—to know that Governments have never made predictions and forecasts on unemployment figures ahead. The right hon. Gentleman referred to something I said, but I was then expressing a hope—[Hon. Members: "Ah".]—about employment, and the hope was shared, I thought, at the time by both sides of the House.

Since I have been long enough here to take note of the right hon. Gentleman's answers and consistently to hang his own words around his neck, may I suggest to him that he went further than that and said there would be an improvement? As there has been no improvement I am asking him now whether he expects that there will be an improvement in the employment figures by the end of this year?

I am now expressing a similar hope. Of course, it is our intention to do all we can to improve the figures, but I cannot make a forecast.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement about the future of local authority selective schools.

I assume my hon. Friend is referring to the proposals put to me by Glasgow Education Authority for the reorganisation of some of its selective schools. I have replied to the authority and it has asked for a meeting to discuss my letter. This meeting has been arranged for 14th April.

When that meeting takes place will my right hon. Friend reject any proposals which make educational nonsense? Will he defer the whole question of the schools until the structure of local government is reformed, and will he also make arrangements for the usual intake of pupils into these excellent schools for the coming academic year?

On the first point, no amendments to the authority's schemes have yet been received so I do not have proposals which I can accept or reject. As regards intake schemes for the future I have told the corporation that I am assuming that it will be going ahead with its existing normal schemes till a decision has been made about future changes.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the people of Glasgow—the electors of Glasgow—have already decided on this and that, whatever agreements he may be able to reach on Friday about improving organisational arrangements, the principle that there should be no further selective intake of pupils has been firmly established? Will the right hon. Gentleman at least accept that the electors of Glasgow have already come to a decision on that?

No, I would not accept that the decision to stop intake has been taken. Secondly, I would not accept that the electors of Glasgow have decided on this question. I have received no fewer than 6,104 separate letters up to today containing approximately 48,000 signatures, and in petitions as well, and only 36 of the letters are in favour of the first proposals put forward by the corporation.

The right hon. Gentleman cannot get away with that. Will he confirm that according to his own circular he must allow the local authorities to adopt the form of reorganisation which they desire? Secondly, will he withdraw his remark that the people of Glasgow have not decided this issue? They did, and they did so decisively at the last local elections.

On the first point, a scheme must make sense and pass certain basic tests if the Secretary of State is to give his approval under the Acts. Secondly I will not withdraw that remark about the Glasgow electors. There were a number of matters before them at the time of the election, and I do not believe that this was one on which they took a decision at that time.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland for how long each of the private fee-paying schools providing for mentally-handicapped and other handicapped children has been provisionally registered; and how many similar schools have been ordered to close in the last 10 years.

Corsbie Hall School, Thornton, has been provisionally registered for 18 months, the Monken Hadley School, Newton Stewart, formerly fully registered as Corsbie Hall School, Newton Stewart, for four and a half months following a change of proprietor, and a new school, Merton Hall, Newton Stewart, for two and a half months. No school has been ordered to close in the last 10 years.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that for 18 months Corsbie Hall School has been occupied by 50 or more children who are handicapped in one way or another and that some of the staff, if not all, are unqualified academically in any way whatever? Does he not recall that the English Secretary of State for Education advised English local education authorities to withdraw their children because it was thought the school was inadequate, and that that recommendation was based on a report made by the Scottish Education Department? This is an extremely unsatisfactory situation. Can the hon. Gentleman indicate what was the result of the latest inspection at Corsbie Hall?

The latest inspection was carried out three weeks ago. I have not yet studied the report—

Why?

It is no use giving answers about a report before one has studied it. I shall study it and when I have studied it, and in good time, I will make an announcement. I think the hon. Gentleman is being a little hard on this school at the present time. A school must be allowed to settle down and time allowed for the carrying out of improvements which have been suggested. It does not follow, however, that conditions during that period are intolerable. Indeed, if they were I would not allow them to go on.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has completed his consultations on the Cameron Report; and if he will make a statement.

Consultations are continuing, following the European Economic Community settlement, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Is the Under-Secretary of State aware that there is some concern in the inshore fishing industry about the recommendations contained in the report and about what may be done? Can he indicate when he is likely to make a formal statement?

I am sure that the hon. Member appreciates that it would be wrong to give an indication till the consultations are completed. They were conducted with the agreement of the industry during the Common Market negotiations. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are having discussions, and when we come to a conclusion I will announce our intentions.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what percentage of Scottish education costs goes on the provision of nursery classes; and if he will make a statement.

Education authorities do not distinguish between expenditure on nursery education and other kinds of school education in their accounts. It is estimated that £1·4 million, representing 0·8 per cent. of local authority current expenditure on education, was spent on nursery education in the financial year 1970–71.

Does not the 0·8 per cent. compare very unfavourably with the rest of the United Kingdom where I understand that the figure is 2 per cent. of the total cost of education? Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that the growth of nursery education in Scotland is far too slow, and will he say what progress is being made?

Yes, I agree that it is a small proportion and I should like to see it increased as soon as the resources are available. It is small in relation to education expenditure as a whole because successive Governments have been unable to allow a general expansion of nursery education in the face of prior claims from the rest of the education services. From information which has recently come before us a general tendency for the emphasis to go towards the under-fives can be seen.

Does the Under-secretary accept that training for the under-fives should be done as much as possible with the participation of the parents? To this end has any guidance or encouragement been given to local authorities to provide facilities free of charge to properly organised play groups?

Certainly in the wider sense authorities have been encouraged under the urban programme to go ahead, but each education authority by its own initiative can encourage play groups.

Will the Minister go further—this is not a parliamentary point—and agree that the figures are grossly inadequate? Will he further agree that it is generally recognised that we can get a better return from investment in nursery education than from any other aspect of education and that it is now a "must"?

I think the hon. Gentleman will realise that there has been a huge increase in expenditure in recent years on primary and secondary education. As the facilities become adequate—and they are well on the way to becoming so—we must change the emphasis to the under-fives.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further consultations he proposes to have with local authorities about his draft boundary proposals in the reorganisation of local government.

My right hon. Friend has already had full consultations with local authorities on local government boundaries. Consultations about electoral divisions are still proceeding.

The hon. Gentleman must be aware of the grave disquiet about the draft boundary proposals. Will he assure the House that there will not be inflicted upon us the type of protests we are receiving from every English local authority about the boundary proposals? Will he do a better job than that?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I can and will do a very good job. He may not have been in the House on 15th March when I gave an assurance and spelt out the procedures for consideration of the proposals. He may also have omitted to recognise that the proposals we put forward are of a provisional nature and subject to consultation and discussion.

Does my hon. Friend know that Edinburgh should remain an all-purpose authority and that that is the wish of all the citizens of Edinburgh?

I know that that is the wish of my hon. Friend but it does not really arise from the Question.

I believe that Lady Tweedsmuir was in charge of these negotiations. Which Minister is now in charge?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State takes responsibility for the negotiations. My Department is dealing with electoral reform to which the Question specifically refers.

On a point of order. I wonder, Mr. Speaker, whether you will bear in mind that the Government have refused to give parliamentary time to debate the question of local government reform in Scotland?

No question of order can arise on that.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now postpone the proposed reorganisation of local government in Scotland in order to carry out an investigation into local government finance.

No, Sir. The Green Paper published last July, together with public discussion and consultation, provides an adequate basis for reaching decisions.

As the Government are not prepared to postpone the reorganisation of local government in Scotland until an investigation has been undertaken into local government finance, surely we are entitled to a White Paper on local government finance which will clearly spell out the Government's intention of retaining the present system of financing local government expenditure from the rates.

The hon. Gentleman's argument is with his own Front Bench. When the Wheatley Royal Commission was set up by the previous Government the question of finance was specifically excluded from its remit and no other Royal Commission or body was given the task of considering it. When we came to office in June, 1970, it was nine months after the Wheatley Commission had reported and still there had been no outside inquiry. An internal inquiry had been started which we naturally had to finish.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Green Paper on how rating should be carried out in future has not met with satisfaction from any body of responsible people and that it is high time a fresh look was taken at this matter?

The Green Paper is a paper for discussion. I, too, am well aware of the imperfections of the rating system, but no one yet in the discussions—and I invite anyone to do so now—has put forward an alternative practical constructive proposal.

Will the Secretary of State postpone the proposed reorganisation of local government in Scotland until he has taken on board the arguments put forward in Sutherland that his decision to stand his own proposals on their head with regard to the Burgh of Tain and exclude it from Sutherland is deliberately intended to deprive Sutherland of the benefits and developments of the Inner Moray Firth area? If he will not do that, will he accede to the request I have made time and again to authorise the crossing of the Dornoch Firth?

As I was on the outskirts of Tain only last Thursday, I am well aware that there are contrary views.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the reasons for the delay in starting the building of the new health centre in Burntisland.

I understand that Fife County Council still intends to start building Burntisland health centre before the end of 1972, as planned.

Is the Minister aware that the impression is abroad in Burntisland that bureaucratic red tape in his Department is causing the delay? Will he sharpen his scissors and see that the building is started soon? There is a belief that the height of the handles on the doors is one reason why his Department will not approve the plans.

There has been no delay in my Department over the plans. There naturally has had to be consultation, and the building will go ahead this year as was decided some time ago.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to announce his decision on the town maps and comprehensive develop- ment proposals for Bellshill and Uddingston.

By the end of this week.

I am pleased to receive that reply. It is the quickest time I have had from the Government since they came to office.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if the proposed increased expenditure upon road construction which was recently announced will provide for further or earlier improvement of the A57, particularly in the Rother Valley area.

The east-west link road scheme, Mosborough, which my hon. Friend has included in the preparation list, connects with the proposed expressway. Consideration is being given to an extension of the link road to the M1.

I am grateful for that information about the M1 link with the Mosborough expressway. Will the right hon. Gentleman give comfort to my constituency by saying when he expects the work to be completed? Does he agree that the easing of the problems which he expects to result from the provision of a link road will not mean that the A57 becomes less of a problem in the Rother Valley? Will he further agree—

Order. The hon. Member has already asked two supplementary questions.

Much as I should like to give some comfort to the hon. Gentleman's constituents, I can say no more than that I promise to write to the hon. Gentleman as soon as a decision is made.

Does the Minister's appearance at the Box to deal with Questions concerning roads mean that he has now taken over departmental responsibility for road matters? If so, will he now announce the long delayed decision about the Sheffield-Manchester motorway?

No, Sir, it means nothing of the kind. It simply means that I am obliging my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will establish a committee of inquiry into ways of ensuring that cars are insured.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the temptation to evade insurance has greatly increased with the rapidly rising cost of premiums? Will he take all steps to ensure that evasion does not arise?

Yes. This is primarily a matter for the police. I believe we have the best means possible of ensuring that people comply with the law. I personally have the gravest doubts whether a proliferation of committees of inquiry would help with this or other problems.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what reply he has given to the letter from the London Council of Social Service calling upon the Government to acknowledge London's housing shortage as an emergency and, in particular, suggesting a regional housing authority with executive powers.

The terms of my right hon. Friend's reply are contained in a letter which he has sent to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on this matter and which is being published in the Official Report today in a Written Answer to the hon. Member.

Since I do not know the terms of the letter, it is difficult to pursue the matter—

Order. As I have said before, a supplementary question is not compulsory.

Without feeling in any way compelled, may I nevertheless ask the Minister whether that letter accepts the request for a regional housing authority to be set up with executive powers? Will the Government stop dodging this issue and act in the interest of many thousands of people on housing waiting lists in Islington and other inner London areas?

No, Sir, the answer does not contain the undertaking for which the hon. Gentleman has asked. I would ask him to study my right hon. Friend's reply.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what discussions he is having with the First Division Association and other Civil Service unions about legal protection for civil servants.

None, Sir.

We congratulate the hon. Gentleman on assuming office, but will he reflect on whether certain civil servants should be pilloried in public? While we await a debate on the Vehicle and General affair, will he address himself to the issue how civil servants are to be expected to defend themselves when evidence of their supposed shortcomings is not presented? Does he not agree that these are grave issues?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his words of welcome. The matter he raises is important for civil servants and is of some concern to my Department. The National Staff Side has made representations on the specific points which have been referred to and they have been noted by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

We congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his appointment and we wish him well. Will he go further into this matter? There are some civil servants who are now under considerable suspicion for the part they played in the Vehicle and General affair, and until a debate takes place in this House they will find themselves in a difficult position since there are no charges for them to answer and nobody to put their point of view. Will the hon. Gentleman press upon his right hon. Friend the Leader of the House the need for a debate so that these civil servants may have an opportunity of having their case made?

I will do that. I would remind the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House said on 9th March that there would be a debate in Government time. I am sure that it will take place shortly and I assure the hon. Member that the matter he raised concerning the three civil servants will be specifically dealt with in that debate.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service how many civil servants fewer were employed on 1st April, 1972, compared with 1st July. 1970.

Information about the actual number of civil servants on 1st April, 1972, will be available early next month. Provision has been made in the 1972–73 Estimates for 694,632 staff on 1st April, 1972, on the basis described in the answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Dorking (Sir G. Sinclair) on 9th November, 1971. The number on 1st July, 1970, was 701,790

May I be the first on this side of the House to congratulate my hon. Friend on his elevation to the Treasury Bench to answer for the bureaucracy? Will he try to do better than his predecessor, who during the last 20 months has presided over a miniscule contraction of the bureaucracy? Will he not try to give it a shove in accordance with Tory policy in the last election—which was to bring about a dramatic reduction in the size of the public service?

I thank my hon. Friend for his words of welcome, and I appreciate that they were deftly placed between my shoulder blades. I assure him that it is of concern to my Department and to other Government Departments that there should be constant pressure to ensure that the number of staff is no more than is needed.

Has the Minister given any thought to resigning from the Government because of the failure to implement a Tory pledge? If there are to be extra civil servants, will he see that some of them are directed to the regions in the greatest possible numbers in the shortest possible time?

It is a little early in the day for me to consider the course of action indicated by the hon. Member, but I assure him that one of the ongoing studies being carried out by my Department relates to the dispersal of civil servants. It will be well known to hon. Members opposite that a small delegation will visit the National Savings Bank in Glasgow on Friday.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the need for an urgent decision on the matter of dispersal of staff since this question bedevils the whole subject of the future of Parliament Square and Whitehall and, indeed, the whole environment of this part of London?

Yes, I assure my hon. Friend that the study on dispersal is going ahead. I hope that it will be completed by the end of this year.

Has any estimate been made of a decrease in the number of civil servants as a result of the provisions of the Housing Finance Bill which will lead to an inevitable increase in the number of local government servants?

Estimates have been made of the whole size of the public service, but I would point out that, in view of many of the programmes for the benefit of the people which we have introduced, additional civil servants will be required. If hon. Members opposite wish to criticise the Government on this matter, they must say whether they wish to see the attendance allowance and the family income supplement paid.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service to what extent he estimates that all Government Departments will be able to reduce the number of non-industrial civil servants by 5 per cent. within the next two years and in the first two years of Great Britain's entry into the European Economic Community.

The staff in Departments depends on the amount of work they are required to carry out.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Tories knew all these things when they made their election pledges, one of which was that in spite of any so-called improvements they would seek to reduce the number of civil servants? When do they intend to implement that policy?

I do not know whether the hon. Member was present when I answered my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro).

Yes, I was.

Then he would have heard me say that there has been a modest reduction. The increased programmes of the present Government in terms of welfare, Home Office and Government training matters require some increase in those Departments.

Although there can be no doubt that there may be a need for more civil servants to operate and administer the value-added tax when it comes into being, will my hon. Friend also confirm that when the Government's full fiscal reforms are implemented, in terms of tax credits and combined income tax and surtax, there will be a dramatic decrease in the number of civil servants?

Further Questions have been tabled on this matter, but my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made clear that there would be an increase in staff for V.A.T. but a substantial saving in staff through positive tax credits, if that scheme meets the approval of the House.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that there will be a reduction in the numbers of non-industrial civil servants?

Like my predecessor I am reluctant to make estimates, but I can assure the hon. Member—who has great knowledge of and an interest in these matters—that there is constant vigilance in my Department, and among all Ministers, about the size of staffs they need to fulfil their programmes.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service when he expects negotiations to be completed on the pay claim of the Ministry of Agriculture's veterinary surgeons, outstanding since January, 1971.

Agreement could not be reached by negotiation, and the claim of the Institution of Professional Civil Servants was therefore referred to the Civil Service Arbitration Tribunal. The tribunal has asked for further evidence, which will be submitted shortly; the tribunal's award will no doubt follow soon afterwards.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what changes in accommodation he contemplates, giving the numbers and future employment, for scientific grades of the Civil Service at the Royal Radar Establishment at Malvern, Worcestershire.

No changes are planned at present.

Will my noble Friend bear in mind that in Malvern we have the greatest concentration of scientific civil servants in Britain, that 233 houses are owned by the Ministry of Defence and that the great majority of those civil servant tenants wish to buy their own houses from the Government? Since it is Government policy to sell council houses, should it not also be Government policy to sell houses to sitting tenants, especially when they are senior civil servants?

We will certainly look at this matter. But it is not strictly the Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many additional civil servants he estimates will be required in order to administer the value-added tax as now proposed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will give the net savings in the number of civil servants who will be required on the ending of purchase and selective employment tax and the introduction of the value-added tax.

The number of extra civil servants who will be required on the ending of purchase and selective employment tax and the introduction of the value-added tax will, as I indicated in the Budget debate, be about 6,000. The exact number will be determined by the number of registered taxpayers.

Is this another way of implementing the Prime Minister's promise that he would reduce the number of civil servants when he came to power? Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the way to do this would be by operating a simple purchase tax instead of the value-added tax which will add so greatly to the existing number of civil servants? Will he consider this again?

My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Civil Service Department answered the first part of that question just now. The change to V.A.T. is an important element in the Government's programme of tax reform, and we believe that the increase in the number of civil servants is justified by the elimination of the discriminations and inequities inherent in the tax system that V.A.T. will replace. Other elements in the Government's programme for the radical reform of taxation are expected to effect substantial economies.

Is the figure of 6,000 the minimum or the maximum estimate, and can the hon. Gentleman say what is the actual or estimated cost per annum or per week of the 6,000 additional bureaucrats, to adopt the expression used by the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro)?

If the hon. Gentleman had listened to my original reply he would have appreciated that I said it would depend on the number of registered taxpayers. We are not at the moment in a position to give a precise estimate. The hon. Gentleman's other point is a separate question. I have no doubt that if he feels it necessary the hon. Gentleman will table a specific Question on the matter.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that as long as the additional civil servants enable this Government to improve the economic and social condition of the country I do not mind how many there are, because they are doing a better job than they were under the present ridiculous Opposition?

I have no doubt that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Civil Service Department will have noted what my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) has said.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, with the aid of a number of unemployed constituents of mine, I am willing to come to his rescue?

There has been a certain amount of schizophrenia opposite, especially on the regional aspects of this question. We have taken account of that in our overall point of view. But we shall administer the tax in the most efficient way possible, and the overall way in which V.A.T. has been designed has been influenced by considerations of efficiency in collecting the tax.

Looking back into recent history, is not it a fact that the Leader of the Opposition himself frankly admitted to the House that V.A.T. would be an inseparable part of joining the Common Market? Therefore may we be told what convolutions have taken place, apart from those of the Leader of the Opposition, that make a further additional number of civil servants necessary other than those who would have been recruited anyway had the Leader of the Opposition stuck to his policy?

I am glad to say that I am not responsible for the Leader of the Opposition.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that there is nothing which compels us to have a value added tax in 1973 as opposed to 1978? If it is the case that the number of civil servants will depend upon the extent of the registrations, will the hon. Gentleman consider increasing the exemption from £5,000 to £10,000, thereby reducing the number of additional civil servants that will be necessary?

That is a matter which can be debated when we consider the Finance Bill. The Government have made it clear that we believe that V.A.T. is an important element in our overall reform of taxation and that the case for it is overwhelming.