asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has for reducing youth unemployment in the next two years.

The Government will continue to pursue policies aimed at reducing unemployment for both adults and young people in Scotland, through regional incentives and measures to stimulate growth in the United Kingdom economy.

What kind of gobbledegook is that? Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that this is probably the most squalid part of the increased unemployment problem in Scotland since the present Government came to power and that they have done precisely nothing about it? What new steps do the Government intend to take in the next 18 months? I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not tell us that the figures have improved since last year. We know that, because they were a damned sight worse last year than they were three years ago.

If the hon. Gentleman reads HANSARD tomorrow he will see that my answer was clear and straightforward. The hon. Gentleman will know, but he tries to escape the fact, that the trend is downwards. I am not trying to dodge the issue that unemployment among young people is serious. We have brought forward regional policies to help this very matter. In the short term we have brought forward the award scheme with which we have encouraged training boards to proceed, and we have also brought forward the Government's Vocational Training Scheme which has been extended to include young people in limited skill courses. We have grant-aided the experimental scheme by the National Association of Youth Clubs—more commonly known as the Community Industry Scheme—which is helping and working quite well.

As regards the Community Industry Scheme, while recognising that this is not a cure for unemployment may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman is consulted by his right hon. Friend on the need to develop this idea in Scotland where there are only two centres? Will he use his influence to extend what is an excellent scheme, bearing in mind that many of us recognise that there are problems in what one does with these young people at the end of the training period? We want to be reasonable about this.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that. We in the Scottish Office are in close touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment who will shortly be making an announcement.

I hope that the Minister will not seek to give an answer which reeks of complacency. He will appreciate that in January of this year, taking the whole educational session, there will be a reduction in the number of children leaving school of more than 40,000. As they did not come on to the labour market in January it should have been very much easier for those who were already unemployed to get a job. It must be very disappointing for the Secretary of State that we have the highest proportion of school leavers unemployed for any area in the country and that overall the unemployment figure is the second highest in the post-war period, amounting to nearly 130,000.

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that I said this was a serious situation. I shall not try to dodge the issue, but I ask the right hon. Gentleman to take the point that unemployment is 22 per cent. down on what it was a year ago and that the trend is encouraging.

The figure is bound to be lower as children are not leaving school and going on to the labour market.

Answer that.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on his latest discussions with Edinburgh Corporation on the financial arrangements for the new Opera House.

I have written to Edinburgh Corporation outlining the circumstances in which I would be prepared to make a formal offer of grant towards the capital cost of a project on the lines of that described in the revised summary brief which it sent me.

How is it proposed to set about choosing a design team for the new Opera House?

That is a matter for Edinburgh Corporation. As regards the letter that I have written to the corporation outlining the Government's latest position, because the reports in the Press today were necessarily abbreviated and could be misleading on some of the points I am arranging for the full text of the Department's letter to be made available in the Library.

I welcome this move, but what time scale has the right hon. Gentleman in mind? Is there a limit or any period during which the grant must be or may be payable?

My main concern is that the work should start as soon as possible, consistent with good design.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what latest assessment he has made of the effect on the Scottish economy of the discovery of oil in the North Sea; and if he will make a statement.

North Sea oil activities have already given rise to some 3,000 jobs in Scotland, and projects announced so far have potential for a further 7,000 jobs over the next three to four years. Scotland will also benefit substantially from the supporting infrastructure investment being provided. The measures announced on 16th January, including the establishment of a Scottish Petroleum Office, will provide an effective base for stimulating industrial development in Scotland related to the new discoveries of oil.

That is encouraging progress, but does my right hon. Friend agree that current estimates and comment are based too much on prospects until 1980 and too little on what may be large untapped reserves still to be explored to the north and west of these islands?

Yes, Sir. The Government have made no attempt to estimate beyond 1980, seven years ahead, because beyond that there are too many unpredictable factors. But there could be a great deal more oil flowing in the years beyond 1980, because there are large areas still to be explored around the north and west as well as in the North Sea.

Has the right hon. Gentleman made any geographical estimates, for instance, of how many jobs there might be in Shetland? As it is the Government's policy to get offices out of London and to increase employment in Scotland, why is not the whole of the new office concerned with petroleum in Scotland?

If the oil companies move their headquarters out of London to Scotland—and I would do anything to encourage them—the headquarters of the new petroleum body could be moved north, but to meet the present situation we have set up a Scottish Petroleum Office in Glasgow. We should not under- estimate the effectiveness of that office in the future.

Is the Secretary of State aware that by 1980 275 supply vessels will be needed for the North Sea oil companies? Will he treat that need in the same way as the Government treat advance factories and authorise the building of advance supply ships for the area, keeping in mind that in my area and other areas on the East Coast there are likely to be large-scale redundancies within the next week or two?

I am very much aware of the growing market in the oil rig servicing sector, including new vessels. It was for that reason that we acted so quickly last summer to enable the harbour of refuge at Peterhead to become a servicing harbour for the purpose. I am doing everything I can to encourage Scottish shipbuilders as well as other industry to tender for that kind of work where appropriate. The hon. Gentleman's point is one for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, and I shall make sure that note is taken of it.

Has my right hon. Friend studied the IMEG report, particularly its proposal for licensing agreements and partnership arrangements between British firms, and, in particular, American companies to gain experience of the new technologies required in the North Sea? Will he tell us more about that?

I and my right hon. Friends who are responsible are considering the recommendations in the IMEG report. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has already made an initial announcement about our reactions to it.

Why did the Government dodge the main recommendation of the IMEG report about the establishment of the petroleum service industries? Why did not the right hon. Gentleman go further and set up a State holding company to deal with services and provisions for the industry?

The hon. Gentleman has already had the matter explained to him in a statement by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. But one more reason is that it would have required legislation, which would have competed with other legislation passing through the House.

We will give the Government time.

We were told that the small Bill concerning Peterhead would go through quickly but we had considerable difficulty in this House. I can assure the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Robert Hughes) that there are many different views, even on the Opposition benches, about what kind of agency there should be, the kind of powers it should have, and what kind of money it should have to spend. Any idea that that kind of Bill could be found an early place in the legislative programme, or go through quickly, surprises me. We have acted quickly, without the need for new legislation.

The whole House, certainly those Scots who are interested, will agree with the point of view expressed by the hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. MacArthur) that the potential of North Sea oil is tremendous. It is essential that our policies at this stage should be right, otherwise we may find ourselves compromised later. Will the right hon. Gentleman think again about setting up an agency of the kind my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Robert Hughes) mentioned? The Secretary of State will have little or no trouble over legislation which is beneficial to the people of Scotland.

I must ask the right hon. Gentleman to read again what my right hon. Friend has said about the matter. He has already explained how the Government immediately translated the recommendations into the setting up of a body and a Scottish Petroleum Office. Many suggestions have come to us for boards and agencies covering the oil industry, and possibly covering many other industries as well, and what sort of powers they should have. Naturally these are still for consideration. We wanted to be able to act quickly and set up a new system as soon as possible, and we have done it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many children suffering from the effects of the drug thalidomide are now living in Scotland; what is their average age; and if he will make a statement.

The most recent survey undertaken by the Lady Hoare Trust indicates that there are upwards of 88 children affected and living in Scotland. Their average age is 11.

Is any extra expenditure involved in providing education facilities for the children? If so, do the Government help?

The vast majority of the children, I am glad to say, go to normal schools. The directors of education and the headmasters and headmistresses concerned watch these children very closely, and we are in touch with the education authorities about all disabled children.

Has the hon. Gentleman any idea how many of the 88 children are not likely to be eligible for compensation because they have not been officially medically certified as being deformed because of thalidomide? There are a number.

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's point but I cannot give him figures. While negotiations between the Distillers Company and those involved are continuing, it would be unwise for me to say anything about the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland by what date he proposes to have constructed a health centre at Peebles.

I cannot make a forecast at this stage.

Is the Minister aware that the matter has been discussed for many years and that his answer will come as a great disappointment? Is he aware that both the War Memorial Hospital and the County Hospital in the town are severely out-of-date buildings?

I understand the hon. Gentleman's point, and I think he will appreciate that we want to replace the two old hospitals he mentioned by a new one, but that is not yet in the building programme. Next month my officials will be meeting the regional hospital board to consider the situation. If the hospital is still to be a long way away, perhaps we could consider a method of advancing the health centre by itself.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the progress made in implementing the Housing Finance Act 1972.

The Act is now being implemented almost everywhere in Scotland. I expect to receive local inquiry reports in the next few days in relation to six small burghs. In addition there is the large burgh of Clydebank. In that case the Court of Session yesterday made an order requiring the town council within seven days to instruct its officials to prepare a rebate scheme and proposals for rent increases in accordance with the Act.

Can my right hon. Friend assure me that those tenants who are entitled to rent rebates or allowances and have not received them because of delay in operating the Act will have those rebates and allowances backdated by the authorities concerned?

I cannot make a forecast for the future, but I can tell my hon. Friend that the lower-paid and the unemployed in Clydebank will benefit from the new scheme, which will make them better off and have to pay less rent than under the present scheme being operated by Clydebank town council.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one part of the Act has caused a great deal of misery among old-age pensioners, namely, the provision which has the consequence that the social security office stops paying rent allowances? The Government did not bother to inform old-age pensioners, so that rent allowances have now stopped yet rent demands are coming from, for example, the SSHA, which was not geared for the change. Will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that much unnecessary hardship and misery was caused to old-age pensioners through lack of information from the Government?

There was no lack of information provided by the Government, but there was a certain amount of misinformation put round by others. I shall look into the point, but I believe that in Glasgow it may have been connected with the late implementation of the Act in respect of Glasgow. Again, however, I must point out as regards Clydebank, which is the one large burgh which has not yet started implementing the Act, that those on small household incomes will do better under the new rent and rebate scheme than under the present scheme being operated by Clydebank.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that, if and when it becomes necessary, he will use to the full his statutory powers in order to demonstrate to local authorities and everyone else that no one in Britain can flout the law with impunity?

I have already carried out the procedures under the 1947 Act, which apply when local authorities fail to implement Acts passed by the House, as fast as those procedures allow, and firmly. I intend to continue carrying out properly the legislation—in particular the 1947 Act—which governs the situation.

What qualifications, if any, will be applied to the operation of the Act by the Prime Minister's statement at Lancaster House earlier this month and the proposals made to try to alleviate the difficulties arising from inflation?

The proposal is to raise the needs allowance by £3·50. This is an adjustment of the rent rebates scheme. The making of such adjustments from time to time, as required, was envisaged; this one is to be made in the near future.

How does the Secretary of State square in his conscience what he is now doing with two other facts—the promise to grant freedom to local authorities, and his encouragement in the past to the city of Edinburgh to flout the law in relation to fee-paying schools?

I have repudiated that second point several times in the House, and I challenge the hon. Gentleman to find any occasion when I have done as he suggests. As regards the first point, the whole question of the Act was debated fully by the House of Commons before it was passed, and the granting of freedom to local authorities has never extended to allowing them to defy Acts of Parliament.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the sums of money shown in the housing accounts attributable to capital repayments for the year 1971–72 for (a) large burghs, (b) small burghs, (c) counties, and (d) the cities of Aberdeen, Dundee, Glasgow and Edinburgh, respectively.

This information is not yet available for 1971–72, except for the four cities. I am publishing the figures for the cities in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that informative reply. Will he confirm that the amount paid out in capital repayments is only one-fifth of the amount paid out in interest payments? In view of this disgraceful imposition on the people who pay rent and rates to the local authorities, will the hon. Gentleman introduce a scheme of free loans for local authority house building?

I think that the figure of one-fifth is not far out, though I cannot be exact about it without checking.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the implications for long-term industrial development in Scotland of the Government's decisions on the future of the steel industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the consequences for long-term industrial development in Scotland of the Government's decision concerning the steel industry.

The plans for the steel industry in Scotland represent an expansion of 25 per cent. in 10 years of steel-making capacity. This expansion will provide a range of finished steel products for steel-using industries and thus assist industrial development in Scotland.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the current steel plan could sabotage prospects for industrial expansion in Scotland? Does he recognise that an expanding and diversified steel industry is fundamental to the development of the engineering industry in general and the offshore industry of Scotland in particular, especially in view of the basing point pricing system of the Common Market? What will the right hon. Gentleman do in face of the fact that the current steel plans are unacceptable to the Scottish TUC, the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) and the people of Scotland as a whole?

I do not agree with what the hon. Gentleman says. By advancing the steel-making capacity by 1 million tons—that is, 25 per cent.—the programme for the next 10 years meets the requirements of the steel-using industries as well as of the Scottish steel industry itself. Some of us hoped that there might be the possibility of something quite new and different in Scotland, but I must point out that this expansion compares extremely favourably with the increase of only 200,000 tons in steel-making capacity during the nearly six years of the Labour Government.

Have the new investment plans been approved by the ECSC? Second, when may we have an indication of the effect of the new Common Market pricing system on steel prices throughout Scotland? For example, shall we find that steel in Dundee and Aberdeen and places far away from steel-producing areas will cost considerably more than it does at present?

On the first point, I do not think that approval was required for this programme. Second, the basing point system, which has been arranged so that there are a number of basing points in Scotland, should cover the matters about which my hon. Friend is worried.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us where the money will be spent in Scotland out of the £400 million programme which the British Steel Corporation has submitted to the Government? Second, recalling that the Government have told us that they will bring other jobs to replace those which are being lost in the steel industry, will the right hon. Gentleman say where those jobs are to come from, since we have redundancies now which the Minister does not yet know about and, what is more, the jobs we are getting are not even offsetting the redundancies?

The way in which the investment of £400 million will go over Scotland in the next 10 years would call for a catalogue which I could not produce now, but I shall ask the British Steel Corporation to provide the hon. Gentleman with the details as it has worked them out. We have been concerned with the main projects, the expansion of Ravenscraig, the iron ore terminal and other major investments, and the details of all the investments in little bits of the plan would require a catalogue. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman can have those details, and I shall pass his request on.

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the plan of which he speaks is at present in large measure a statement of intention. Will he ensure that the intention is realised in fact, and will he bear in mind that we require a substantial steel foundry to remain in Scotland, at the very least, and a substantial section of the special steels industry? Will he see to it that Scotland is not deprived of those sections of this important industry?

This is a statement of an investment programme agreed with the British Steel Corporation by the Government, and there was considerable pressure from all sides, I think, for such a statement to be made as soon as possible. I take note of the other points which the hon. Gentleman makes. I have made clear that my concern is to have a steel industry in Scotland which can provide the wide range of products which the steel-using industries need. Apart from the problem of redundancies and loss of jobs in the steel industry itself, there is the effect on many other industries in which jobs can positively be created or lost, and I am very much aware of the matters which the hon. Gentleman has raised.

Is the Minister aware that the allocation to Scotland in the BSC investment programme is totally insufficient to guarantee an expanding economy for Scotland, and is he further aware that the basing point policy for rod steel will mean throwing hundreds of jobs to the wolves in Scotland? Have we not now arrived at the point where we should be thinking in terms of a Scottish steel corporation of our own in orler to protect the industry in Scotland?

If an expansion of 25 per cent. over 10 years is to have such dire effects, I can only conclude that the expansion under the Labour Government of 200,000 tons must have been disastrous. During that time the Labour Government nationalised the steel industry and they had every opportunity then to produce a Scottish steel corporation had they wanted to do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will seek powers to extend the grants under the Farm Improvement Scheme to fish farmers.

I do not consider that agricultural grants schemes are appropriate for this purpose, but I shall keep under review the needs of fish farming.

In view of the disappointing reply, will my hon. Friend say whether discretionary payments for such a purpose can be made under any other legislation, such as the Industry Act?

Yes. I can reassure my hon. Friend on that point because fish farming can be considered for selective assistance under Part II of the Industry Act.

Is the Minister aware that there is a great deal of concern in Scotland about the suggestion that head-age payments will be replaced by grants related to the improvement of marginal or hill farms? Will he confirm that such plans do not exist?

I am not aware of fish farming being eligible at the moment for headage payments.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will pay an official visit to Hunterston.

I have at present no plans to do so. I have examined the peninsula from the air and my hon. Friends the Under-Secretary of State for Development, Scottish Office, and the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry are visiting the power station on 9th February 1973.

May I thank the Secretary of State for that reply? I hope that he will take the opportunity of accomping his hon. Friends when they visit the power station. Will he confirm that his attitude to the Chevron Oil Company's application has changed following its announcement this week that it is still interested in oil and petro-chemical developments in the Hunterston area?

I was at the opening of the Hunterston A power station and I have always taken an interest in it. But I believe that in his supplementary the hon. Member was referring to the rest of the peninsula and possible development there, and that is something which is best examined closely from the air, which I have done. At present the main industry there is farming and the area consists mostly of fields. As planning Minister for Scotland I cannot, of course, comment upon the merit of any particular project. I can confirm, however, that I have just been informed that the Chevron Company wishes consideration to be given to a modified application, although I have no details of it yet.

On his next visit to Hunterston, where he is always most welcome, will my right hon. Friend land his helicopter, or whatever he comes in, and make a point of listening carefully to the views of the local inhabitants?

I can assure my hon. Friend that in so far as my responsibilities as planning Minister allow me under the Acts, I take into account the views of all those concerned.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, while we might welcome an oil refinery development at Hunterston, we are extremely perturbed about the attitude of BP at Grangemouth where the anticipated expansion of an additional 9 million tons capacity is being consistently held up? Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to have an urgent meeting with BP officials to ensure that the expansion is in train before the development of the Forties field in 1975?

I am aware that when BP revealed its pipeline proposals for the Forties field it said that it was considering expansion of its Grangemouth refinery. No doubt the company is also bearing in mind the possibility of refineries by other companies in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now publish the report of the Hunterston Development Corporation.

The question of publication is essentially for the company itself and its consultants.

Surely this report was paid for out of public funds. Is not my right hon. Friend aware that both the hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Lambie) and I are most disappointed at the delay in publication, because we both feel that we are proved to have been right all along?

My hon. Friend appears to be anticipating the report. The Government for their part have assumed that the report will be published when it has been completed.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the report has been delayed because of the recent announcement by the BSC, which is a big factor in the matter of the positioning of future industry which the report was commissioned to evaluate? Can he say how many planning applications are before him in relation to the area covered by the Hunterston Development Corporation remit?

I cannot give reasons why the report is not yet completed, but what the hon. Gentleman has said could well be one of them. On the second point, two applications are before me, one for the ore terminal and one for a refinery and associated industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now make a statement regarding his decision on future developments at Edinburgh Airport linked with the report of the public inquiry that was submitted to him.

My decision to grant outline planning permission to the British Airports Authority for its proposed new runway and terminal complex was announced in a letter of 26th January to the authority. I have placed in the Library copies of the letter and of the inquiry report.

May I congratulate the Secretary of State on reaching what was, contrary to what many people thought, not an easy decision? Nevertheless he has reached the right decision because it means so much for employment prospects in Midlothian, Edinburgh and South-East Scotland generally. Will the right hon. Gentleman now tell us the time scale for the expedition of the development of the runway and terminal buildings?

I am grateful to the hon. Member for his comments. It was an exceedingly difficult decision to take and those who were critical about the time factor will recognise when they see the reporter's report that it was a matter which had to be dealt with carefully and fully. The reporter found objection to both the alignment proposals, including the Cramond Association's proposals, and his alternative suggestions had to be looked into fully and urgently. There is now a right of appeal to the Court of Session against my decision on certain limited grounds and the time limit there is six weeks.

Bearing in mind all the factors involved, I believe that the Secretary of State is due our congratulations for a courageous decision and one which will be to the benefit of the entire city of Edinburgh.

I am extremely grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, particularly because when the subject was raised in the House before Christmas I was unable to say anything about what was in the report.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further representations he has had regarding Fife County becoming a region of local government.

My right hon. Friend is continuing to receive representations about local government reform in Fife, mainly from individuals in the county. No fresh evidence on the matter has been brought to light.

Has the Minister taken note of the recently conducted poll in Kirkcaldy where 97·3 per cent. of those who voted rejected the splitting of Fife? Regardless of whether it was right or wrong to conduct the poll, 2,723 people out of 2,798 wanted Fife as a region. Does that not impress him? Will he not agree that the people of Scotland have not had a proper opportunity of exercising their democratic rights regarding the far-reaching decisions on local government reform?

On the first point, I shall of course pay the closest attention to all representations made on the subject. It is hotly controversial for various interests in Scotland generally, and in Fife. I cannot agree with the hon. Member on the second point when he says that there has been an inadequate opportunity for the people of Scotland to express their views on the subject. We have been discussing it for about 10 years and I think that everyone feels that it is now time to get on with the job.

What proportion of the letters which have been received by the Secretary of State were in favour of the splitting of Fife?

I cannot give my hon. Friend the figures for that but we have had representations from both sides on the subject.

Would not the Minister condemn the action of the Fife County Council in holding this referendum in the town of Kirkcaldy, thereby interfering with the rights of the elected representatives of the area? Will he bear in mind that out of 5,000 postcards delivered, only 2,800 were returned, with the expected answer to the loaded question on the postcard?

I note very carefully what the hon. Gentleman said. It is not for me to condemn or otherwise to comment upon the activities of particular individuals, but I am glad that everyone concerned on both sides in this issue has the opportunity to express a view fully and freely.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details of the number of children who have been placed by Scottish local authorities in local authority children's homes in England and Wales.

Detailed information about such placements is not collected, but the percentage is estimated to be very small.

Does not the Under-Secretary agree that it is unfortunate that we do not have this information, because if children from Scottish homes have to be sent to local authority places in England and Wales considerable inconvenience may be caused? Will the hon. Gentleman ascertain the reasons for these children having been placed south of the border.

There must be a special reason, because at the moment rather less than 1 per cent. of these children go to England and Wales and this is normally only done when it is to the advantage of the children to be near relatives.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many new houses were constructed in Scotland in 1972.

The figure is 31,990.

Does that reply mean a fall of over 12,000 as against the last full year of the Labour Government and the calendar year 1970, which included some months of Labour Government, and represents a fall of 9,000 as against 1971? Since the alibi of time has now been removed from Ministers, does the Under-Secretary agree that all our warnings of a collapse in the housing programme have, alas, proved to be terribly true and that the whole volume of the programme has gone down by over one-fifth without very much sign of its going up? Will the hon. Gentleman tell us what the figure is likely to be this year?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman's interpretation of the figures. Completions for this year are a direct reflection of approvals given in the last years of his own Government, and he might like to explain himself why the Labour Government allowed the approval figures to go down from 27,000 in 1968 to 26,000 in 1969 and only 17,000 in 1970. He might also bear in mind that one of the strange things about houses in Scotland is that they have to be started before they can be finished.

We can fully understand the points made by my hon. Friend, and he is quite right to avoid specific targets. Does he think that we will have more houses or fewer houses built in 1973 than in 1972?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I do not believe that it is a significant and important factor in the housing programme to set future targets which cannot be carried out, just as they were not carried out by the party opposite. But my hon. Friend will be glad to hear that the number of approvals we are now putting through represents a very considerable improvement. As a result of the encouragement we have given to local authorities, 28,567 public sector houses were approved in 1972, which is 5,000 more than in 1971 and over 7,500 more than in 1970.

As many local authorities are now getting to the fulfilment of their housing programmes and it is now more important than ever that the design and general appearance of houses should be brought into keeping with good taste, will the Under-Secretary see that more care is exercised by his Department to ensure that such things as the design and amenity of houses are given serious consideration?

I very much agree with the hon. Gentleman. There are two main priorities which are increasing in importance: first, what he describes as the importance of providing better homes for everyone in Scotland and, secondly, any increase in improvement activity. I am sure that he will be as glad as I am that in 1972 we had the improvement, with the aid of grant, of nearly 49,000 houses, compared with 15,000 in 1969.

Does not the Minister agree that one reason for the poor figures he has announced is the abolition of the Land Commission and that another is the high price of land as a result of the inflationary policies of the Government?

I am afraid that, not for the first time, I could not disagree more with the hon. Member. The very last thing that would help the building of houses in Scotland would be any resurrection of that unlamented body the Land Commission. In the second place, there does not appear to be any significant increase in the land factor in relation to the price of houses in Scotland.

We have a serious drop from the 1970 figure of 44,000 to 31,000 bearing in mind housing conditions in Scotland. How many houses does the Minister hope to complete in the current year?

I do not think it is of advantage to set targets, as the previous Government found with the targets they set without the slightest hope of achieving them. The right hon. Gentleman will also acknowledge that the initiation of local authority programmes is in the hands of local authorities, and we have given local authorities every possible encouragement, to build as many as they can. The right hon. Gentleman will also no doubt notice that the building under our control through the Scottish Special Housing Association and the new town corporations has been showing an encouraging trend, and private house completions are at a record level.

The Minister has no alibi for these figures, and certainly no alibi for this year. Why does he not tell us, on the basis of houses under construction, when they were started and how many will be completed this year? That should not be a guess.

The right hon. Gentleman is correct in saying that there is a relationship between the number of houses under construction and the number likely to be completed, but I am content to leave it that from the high level of houses under construction at the moment I expect to see a very significant improvement this year in the number of completions, and local authorities will get every encouragement from me. We hope to see record levels in private house completions as well.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment. "These guilty men."

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he received the Bellshill town map; what proposals he has made; and what financial assistance will be given to implement it.

The town map for Bells-hill was submitted by Lanark County Council in May 1969. A public inquiry into objections was held in April 1971; my right hon. Friend received the report on it in January 1972; and in April he issued his decision generally approving the land uses proposed. An application for planning grants has just been received and is being examined.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply, but as he has stated to us that the plan has been there since 1969 it means in essence four years lost in implementing it. Is he aware that not only in Bellshill but in other parts of my constituency and beyond it the local authority is very much concerned that this town map should be implemented as soon as possible? Will he tell the local authorities that he is prepared to give them every possible assistance in expediting implementation?

I am grateful to the hon. Member for what he says. I know that he has a very close interest in the subject. He will know, I think, that when the Bellshill town map was submitted, several town maps were submitted to the Lanarkshire County Council which was, naturally, not able to service more than one major inquiry at a time. This meant that inquiries had to take place in sequence. There was a further delay at Bellshill due to a misunderstanding by objectors about the date of the inquiry. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we will give every possible attention as soon as possible to the applications we now receive.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the work of the Scottish Council on Crime.

In consultation with my right hon. Friend and my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate the council has carried out an initial review, mainly of measures for the prevention of crime. This review has identified subjects for more detailed study.

Is not the hon. Gentleman telling us that so far there have been no practical results from the setting up of the Scottish Council on Crime? Is he aware that the only way in which he will dispel the widespread scepticism that this was a piece of Tory Party window-dressing is for people to see practical results in the near future which can be said to emanate from the council?

First, the hon. Gentleman misunderstands the purpose of the council. Second, he is very unjust to those eminent people who are members of it. The purpose of the council is to carry out this review. It has identified certain subjects which it will go into in depth. I believe that it is going about its job in the right way and that it will achieve success.

When did the council first meet, and how many meetings has it had?

It first met in April last year, only nine months ago. It has had five meetings since then.

Is one of the aspects being considered by the council the admitted relationship of the excess consumption of alcohol with the commission of crimes of violence?

I pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman's interest in this subject. It is one of those being studied in a number of research projects in Scotland. It is not a specific topic which has been identified by the council for further study. But one of the topics being studied is the prevention of acts of violence.

How shall we be able to measure the achievement of the council? Will it ever produce a report? If so, when? The Minister used the phrase "only nine months", suggesting that that was a short time. In my view it is a rather long time. When shall we know whether the council has achieved anything?

One of the main purposes of the council is to co-ordinate the efforts and work of people in the different services in Scotland involved in the prevention of and the fight against crime. The present stage of reviewing the whole subject is not one which is appropriate for a report. However, the second stage, on the studies undertaken by the council, is a matter which the council might consider as the subject for a report.

What are the subjects which have been identified as being worthy of further study?

I have referred already to the prevention of acts of violence. Then there is the reduction of the opportunity for acquisitive crime. The third relates to the enforcement of fines.

Will the hon. Gentleman look at the current edition of the Government's publication "Social Trends" which throws grave doubts on the validity of many of the figures relating to crime, especially as regards their meaningfulness and the possibility of comparing like with like? Is not the hon. Gentleman greatly dissatisfied with the crime statistics that we have at the moment?

The council has been looking at the statistics. In general they are not unsatisfactory. But if the hon. Gentleman cares to draw my attention to a specific aspect of them, I shall be pleased to hear from him.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what complaints he has received in the last three months concerning the need to reform the divorce law in order to bring it more into harmony with that of England; and what was the nature of his reply.

Since 1st November 1972 my right hon. Friend has received one letter from a Member of Parliament and four letters from members of the public on this subject. The writers have been told that divorce law reform raises moral and social issues on which opinion is still sharply divided and which, in the Government's view, are more appropriate to a Private Member's Bill than to Government-sponsored legislation.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise how very unsatisfactory that answer is? Is not it the case that the Scottish Law Commission, the Church of Scotland, the Law Society, vast numbers of people and hon. Members on both sides of the House, as well as the Scottish Office itself, want to bring the law in Scotland into line with that in England? It is deplorable that the Scottish Office should offer me help to draft a Private Member's Bill at the same time as another member of the same Cabinet refuses to guarantee time for a Bill to be debated on a free vote of the House. It is absurd.

I accept what the hon. Gentleman says about the feelings which are strongly held in certain quarters. But he ignores the very strong feelings held by certain individual Members of this House, as previous attempts to introduce legislation of this kind have shown. As for the attitude of the Government, there is nothing unusual in what we are doing. It compares with what the Labour Government did in relation to legislation of this nature.

I agree that there are precedents for the Government's action, but are there not also precedents for the Government making time available for a measure of this kind? I can remember other Bills which aroused tremendous passions on both sides and which involved great questions of moral decision, but the Government found time to debate them.

With respect to the right hon. Gentleman, questions of time are matters for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. What the Government have done so far is in no way inconsistent with what has been done before.

Is this the kind of subject which the Scottish Council on Crime might be asked to consider?

I must confess that I fail to see the direct connection. Perhaps my hon. Friend will explain it to me after Questions.

How long will the Government go on evading their responsibility in this matter? Are we to understand that as long as the present Government remain in office they will ignore the opinion of the Law Commission, the Law Society, the Church of Scotland and other bodies? If views are strongly held by some hon. Members, why not make it subject to a free vote in this House?

The vehicle of Private Member's legislation is the correct way. The hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) has received the leave of the House to introduce a Bill.

How long will the Government evade their responsibilities to thousands of families and children in Scotland who are suffering personal misery because the law is so different? Will not the hon. Gentleman recognise that it is wrong for him to try to escape this responsibility by blaming the procedures of this House for the delay?

There are difficulties, and the Scottish Law Commission has drawn attention to them. However, the hon. Gentleman is grossly exaggerating the problems arising from this matter. I ask him for more evidence on the way in which this difference in law causes difficulties. I appeal to him to respect the deeply held views of certain individual Members of this House as shown by previous debates on this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many emergency planning officers are now employed by local authorities in Scotland.

Eleven Scottish civil defence authorities have indicated that they are employing or have engaged an emergencies planning officer: 15 authorities at present employ civil defence planning officers on a part-time basis and the remaining seven authorities have vacancies.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that after the reorganisation of local government the provisions for the use of these officers will continue?

Yes. Indeed, the authorities which will form the parts of that new region for home defence purposes are being encouraged to consult together and, where appropriate, to make joint appointments of emergency planning officers. We attach considerable importance to them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the applications he is considering for planning permission to construct oil refineries in Scotland.

Two.

What information has the Secretary of State about whether BP is to proceed with the proposed extension of its oil refinery at Grangemouth? Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm or deny that BP has made secret representations to the Department of Trade and Industry to stop ORSI and the Chevron oil companies from building oil refineries at Hunterston in Ayrshire?

There is no question of stopping companies from building refineries. These matters come forward as applications for planning permission but, as the hon. Gentleman knows—as the House has been informed previously—the question of sites is also being looked into, to see which sort of sites in Scotland might be appropriate for oil refineries.

In considering such applications, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the ratio between taxpayer subsidisation for building oil refineries and the number of jobs created is really highly unfavourable?

I know that this is a point which my hon. Friend has raised previously, but none the less, oil refineries in certain circumstances can provide a spin-off of jobs in associated industry, and this is the kind of point which also has to be borne in mind for industrial redevelopment in Scotland.

As there are only two applications, will the Secretary of State say to which sites they relate?

One is at Hunterston and, of course, there has also been the application at Invergordon, where planning permission was granted.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that a British oil refinery or the extension of a British oil refinery at Grangemouth is a far more attractive proposition for Scotland than a foreign oil refinery at Hunterston?

As my hon. Friend knows, I cannot comment on the merits of cases because they come before me as planning Minister for Scotland.

Has not the Secretary of State called in these applications, and is it not also the case that in view of the information from the Chevron Oil Company yesterday he may be obliged to call it in in that case too? What procedure does the right hon. Gentleman intend to follow in view of the very lengthy inquiry, the longest ever in Scotland, involving that same company and the whole peninsula? What does he intend to do now that he has received the applications? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we shall deeply resent a situation arising in any part of Scotland whereby we export crude oil from Scotland instead of refining it at home?

The hon. Gentleman knows that as planning Minister I cannot comment on the merits of applications which are before me. But I also hope that Hunterston will be used for the best possible advantage of Scottish industry. Therefore, I encourage as many applications for suitable industry as possible to be put forward. But as planning Minister I have to consider under the proper procedures whether the application can be approved. On the last point on calling in, under my planning decision of two years ago at Hunterston every individual application will have to go to the Secretary of State—that is, to myself or my successor.