asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider political balance when appointing the additional members to the proposed new area health boards.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what consultations he had with representatives of the Conservative and Unionist Party in Scotland about recent appointments to the area health boards; and how many members of the Conservative and Unionist Party in Scotland were appointed.

I do take into account political affiliations, where they exist and are known, but I do not regard this as a major consideration in making these appointments. The political parties were not invited by my Department to suggest names of persons for appointment. There are many members of these boards whose political affiliations, if any, are not known.

I agree with the Secretary of State that political considerations are one of the minor factors of importance in making these appointments, but will he accept that on looking down the list lie gave in a Written Answer on 11 th July I was struck by the fact that, while many members have obvious qualifications to serve, most of those whose qualifications are doubtful turn out to be members of the Conservative Party? This raises queries in the minds of certain hon. Members. Leaving aside political considerations, does the right hon. Gentle. man accept that in making further appointments it would be good practice to consult local Members of Parliament, irrespective of party, with regard to the merits of the individuals he is considering for appointment?

I do not accept that anyone looking at the list published in HANSARD on 11th July could come to the conclusion reached by the hon.

Is the Secretary of State aware that of the 179 lay appointments that he has made to the boards, 29 are identifiable as members of the Labour Party, either as local councillors or taking part in other activities, while slightly fewer than 100 are members of the present governing party in this House but not in Scotland? I am not able to give the precise figures, but the disproportion is about three to one. Is not that a disgrace? Is not it high time that the Secretary of State realised, if he is to keep his reputation for fairness in making the appointments—which is slightly in jeopardy at present—that he will have to make a much better selection than he has done so far?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman has put forward. The list includes a number of well-known supporters of the Labour Party, some of whom are particularly prominent members of that party, and some who have been appointed as chairmen of the boards. The list includes some known supporters of the Consevative Party and many who have no political affiliation, or whose political affiliation is not known. I do not accept that there is anything like the disproportion that the hon. Gentleman suggests. As far as I can see, there is a reasonable balance.

Apart from political affiliations, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind geographical considerations and, in filling the remaining appointments, will he see that adequate representation is given to North Ayrshire, about which I have written to him?

Yes, I shall certainly bear in mind geographical considerations. On the Ayrshire and Arran board, out of the four local government members three are Labour supporters.

Does the Secretary of State recollect that I wrote to him some time ago putting forward a suggestion on the lines of that contained in the supplementary question of the hon. Member for Bute and North Ayrshire (Sir F. Maclean)? Will the Secretary of State tell the House—because he did not tell me in reply to my letter—what organisations or individuals he consulted in various areas?

I shall be answering this matter, in a manner which I am sure will be satisfactory to the hon. Gentleman, in reply to a later Question.

I take it that the Secretary of State is sincere in what he says, but in view of the remarks by hon. Members on this subject will he reconsider the matter and check whether there is an overbalance on one side or the other and seek to put it right in remaining appointments?

As I indicated in my original answer, this will be one of the considerations in mind, but the main consideration must be the personal qualifications and the value of the contribution which an individual can make. But there are other points relating to geography, and also the question of political balance.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will define the criteria governing the eligibility for service on area health boards of those persons who receive payment from the area health board.

Persons whose employment brings them into a line management relationship with the chief officers of a board, for example, administrative and nursing staffs, are not regarded as eligible for membership.

Do not the consultants and general practitioners have a contractual relationship with the boards? Do they not advise the boards in relation to the allocation of resources? Does not the chief medical adviser often have to discuss with his board the plans of the consultants? At present these people are making the appointments of chief medical officers. Is not this a wrong concept entirely?

I cannot accept what the hon. Gentleman says. There is a very special contractual relationship between consultants, general practitioners and the future area health boards which is very different from that of the line management of the nursing profession.

In the interests of open government, will the Scottish Office consider publishing a White Paper on the methods of appointment to all public boards covering, for instance, whether paid people are eligible, who keeps the list, who is consulted, how far political affiliations are taken into account, and what priority is given to retired civil servants?

I think that all the appointments made by my right hon. Friend have been excellent, but he has heard the right hon. Gentleman's views and I have no doubt that he will give them consideration.

May I raise with the hon. Gentleman the question of the relationship of consultants with the health boards? Do not consultants have a pecuniary interest in policy decisions of boards about full-time or part-time appointments? Ought they not to declare an interest and take no part in the proceedings when boards decide on appointments?

These matters must be considered in the light of the fact that consultants and general practitioners have a great weight of experience to give to the boards in relation to the National Health Service. It is that experience that we wish to have.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will appoint the remainder of the members of area health boards before they next meet.

No, Sir.

That is a very unsatisfactory answer. Will the Under-Secretary inform the House which faceless mandarin at St. Andrew's House thought up this undemocratic method of appointing only part of the membership of the area health boards? Surely it could not be a politician like the hon. Gentleman.

The hon. Gentleman is having one of his brighter sessions today. More than 200 organisations put forward nominations, so there was no question of my right hon. Friend and me drawing them out of a hat. The position was carefully considered. My right hon. Friend has made it plain that political affiliation is only a small part of the consideration.

When the hon. Gentleman consulted the nurses before the reorganisation Bill went through the House did he tell them that the right of appointment which they then had would be done away with? Secondly, will he address himself to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Central Ayrshire (Mr. Lambie)? Is it right that two-thirds of the eventual board membership should make all the decisions about the number of districts, appointments, allocations, and so on? Surely the hon. Gentleman must do something about that.

Nurses have seen the Powell Report, about which the hon. Gentleman knows, dealing with nurses in the integrated health service and explaining the position of line management. As I have said, the other appointments will be made later this year, in plenty of time to make a valuable contribution to area health boards.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what control is exercised in the day-to-day operation of shipping activities by the Scottish Transport Group over Caledonian MacBrayne Limited; and if he will make a statement.

These are management matters, which are the group's own responsibility.

I am sorry that the Minister has not given the assurance that was implied in the Question. During the recent trouble with the ferry from Ullapool to Stornoway it was believed that the shipping company had acted promptly to overcome the lack of a vessel and was overborne by the Scottish Transport—

Order. The hon. Member must put his remarks in the form of a question.

Is the Minister aware that in future the shipping company should have a say in the day-to-day running of the ferry services? May I again thank the Minister for his attendance and assistance at the meeting held in Stornoway?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that comment. I enjoyed my visit to Stornoway and was glad to be present at the inauguration of the service. I met the town council and we had a useful meeting. I expressed the regrets of all concerned at the inconvenience suffered by some passengers in the early days of the service. We must bear in mind, however, that this is now a far better service than Stornoway has ever had before, with a service twice a day instead of once a day, and a service that is quicker, with better carrying capacity and a better turn-round. I asked the council whether it would give the new service a fair trial, and it agreed to do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the extent to which medical information and other personal details about psychiatric patients entering hospital are computerised; where such records are kept; and to whom they are available.

My right hon. Friend's reply of 4th July to the hon. Gentleman covered psychiatric in-patients and, as stated then, all personal details are confidential. Information about psychiatric cases is held under conditions of strict security on the Scottish Office computer and access to it is restricted in all cases to named medical officers of the Scottish Home and Health Department.—[Vol. 859, c. 155.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the guarantee given about confidentiality of information has been challenged and breached in the case of the national census? In that instance a guarantee was given to everybody in the country and it was breached in a number of instances. What guarantee is there that this information will not be available to anybody without the consent of the patient himself? Does he not agree that it is not sufficient to have the consent of the clinician or the doctor concerned? There must also be the consent of the patient, because there is growing concern about the continued invasion of personal privacy.

I note what the hon. Gentleman says about patients and I give him an absolute undertaking in regard to consultants. I know that the hon. Gentleman was in the Chamber last Friday for the debate on this subject, and I am sure he took note of the fact that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department said that there would be a White Paper later this year covering the health service.

Will the hon. Gentleman say whether data entered in the computer include details of outpatients as well as in-patients?

I cannot answer that question in detail without notice. My impression, and, indeed, my information, is that it applies to in-patients only, because it happens on discharge from the hospital.

I wish to ask two questions. First, what other records are entered in the computer? Secondly, what kind of computer is used, how many terminals exist, and to whom are they open?

I think I shall have to write to the hon. Gentleman about both parts of his question. This involves information relating to the reasons why a patient is in hospital and the treatment which he or she receives, but it is absolutely confidential. This matter is being examined by the Home Secretary in relation to the White Paper that is to be published later this year.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many consultants, general practitioners, nurses, trade unionists and members of local authorities have been appointed to Lanarkshire Health Board.

The 14 members so far appointed to the board include two consultants, one general practitioner, five members of local authorities and two trade unionists, one of whom is also a member of a local authority. No nurses have been appointed to membership, nurses in the employment of a health board not being eligible for membership.

Is the Minister aware that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction in Lanarkshire because four of the people appointed are out with the Lanarkshire area? Is he further aware that, understandably, the nursing profession is up in arms because it is not represented on these boards? Does the Minister appreciate that there is disquiet in Lanarkshire at the appointment of the chairman, who, so far as we can ascertain, has no experience of hospital boards?

All those who have been appointed to the health board either live in or are involved in Lanarkshire in business or in one way or another. Secondly, on the question of nurses, on which there is a later Question on the Order Paper, there is a single structure of line management under the new area health board system, up to chief nursing officer. It would be inappropriate for nurses serving under her to be members of the area board. As my right hon. Friend has said, members of boards are appointed for their skill and knowledge of what they can add to the health board in general, and the Chairman of the Lanarkshire Health Board is a particularly experienced person.

Since teachers can be co-opted to serve on education committees, would it not be possible to deal with the nursing profession in the same way in regard to health boards?

There will be a nursing advisory committee on every area health board, so that there is no question of the nursing profession's views not being heard and considered by the boards.

Is the Minister saying that, because general practitioners and consultants are on the boards, there will not be consultative machinery to give other advice?

There is consultative machinery, as the hon. Gentleman knows. He also knows that there is a different contractual set-up for consultants and general practitioners, compared with nurses.

Is my hon. Friend aware that participation is one of the great new cries at present, and does he not agree that there is much to commend the suggestion put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Galloway (Mr. Brewis)?

As I have explained, nurses will have a particular say through their own advisory committee. This will be an important means by which they can put forward anything which they feel will be of help to the area health boards.

Since it appears that nurses are being treated unfairly vis-à-vis doctors, if the line management business is causing trouble why cannot the Minister change it and stop the disaffection among the nursing profession before these boards have even got off the ground?

If the whole system of line management were to be changed, it would be a major operation, involving the future of area health boards. I am not prepared to contemplate such a change at this moment. Nurses are eligible to be appointed to area health boards if they are not employed by the National Health Service.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to reduce the potential overcrowding at Craig Dunain Mental Hospital.

Steps have already been taken to deal with the potential overcrowding at Craig Dunain Hospital. In 1969 the bed complement was 1,030 and the occupancy rate was 100^.8 per cent. It is now 950 and the occupancy rate is 95 per cent. Also, provision has been made in Band V of the current major building programme for improvements at this hospital to relieve overcrowding.

The Minister has admitted to me already that there is pressure on the space in the hospital. What immediate steps can he take to reduce it? Can he, for example, arrange for the transfer of those who can be suitably accommodated in geriatric homes? When will work begin on the extension in Band V to which he referred?

As the hon. Gentleman knows from the letter that I sent him a week or two ago, improvements costing £200,000 are in hand. The extensions will improve conditions in the hospital.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland on how many occasions in the past year young people have been remanded in custody by sheriff courts prior to sentence; what was the average period of such remands; and on what grounds such remands were made.

In 1972, 9,645 persons under 21 years of age were committed on remand to penal establishments. This figure covers both remands awaiting trial and remands for the purpose of considering sentence. The substantial majority are remands by sheriff courts. The average period for persons of all ages remanded in penal establishments was 13 days: separate figures for persons under 21 are not available.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that within recent months two cases have come to my attention of young constituents of mine who have been remanded in custody for no discoverable reason other than the intention of the sheriff to teach them a lesson, in addition to the sentences subsequently imposed? Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that this is possibly an abuse of authority and a matter that ought definitely to be looked into by someone or some body with the ability to act over the heads of these courts?

I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's concern. In relation to the allegation that he makes, I do not think that there is any evidence that this is taking place. If it were taking place it would not be a very good practice. However, the decision is one for the courts. It is not an administrative decision. Each case has to be decided on its merits.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the growing concern in circles interested in these matters? Is he satisfied that the Crown Office exercises sufficient vigilance in cases under the Social Work Act? The point is that at procurator fiscal level there is discretion on the question whether cases go to court at all. Will the hon. Gentleman consider whether there is not too much reliance on traditional methods and a reluctance to implement the proposals in the Social Work Act?

With respect to the hon. Gentleman, he is raising a wider question, about the procedure before a person appears in court, whereas the matter raised by the hon. Member for Motherwell (Mr. Lawson) is one strictly for the courts and not one in which I can intervene.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the shortage of schoolteachers in Glasgow and the West of Scotland; what proposals he has for increasing the supply of teachers; and if he will make a statement.

In secondary schools the serious shortages are now largely confined to Lanarkshire and to Roman Catholic schools in Glasgow and Renfrewshire. The supply of teachers should improve rapidly from session 1974–75 onwards.

I am unhappy about the complacency emanating from the Scottish Office over the shortage of teachers in this area. The Minister will know that there is a parlous shortage of teachers in Glasgow and, projecting ahead to the new region, we see a combination of areas which have experienced a continuing shortage of teachers. Will the hon. Gentleman consider finding a new home for the training of primary teachers, and also consider making Jordan Hill a graduate college for secondary school teachers?

There is no complacency about the shortage of teachers. I made that clear in our recent debate on the Estimates and I have done so at any time that I have discussed the matter of teachers, especially in relation to Glasgow and Lanarkshire. But the primary pupil-teacher ratio has fallen in the West of Scotland from 31.0:1 to 28·0: 1 and the secondary from 175:1 to 16·2:1 over the past two years. The situation is improving. But I do not seek to hide the fact that we are short of teachers in these areas.

The hon. Gentleman says that there will be an improvement in the year 1974–75, but this is 1973. Will he consider the immediate situation with a view to working as flexibly as possible the scheme for designated schools with additional allowances?

That is exactly what I am doing at the moment. I am having discussions with the Scottish Teachers Salaries Committee to see whether we can increase the number of designated posts in the West area.

In the White Paper the Government talk about restricting the number of primary and secondary schoolteachers going through colleges. Are they content to look for an overall sufficiency throughout Scotland, or will they consider giving additional inducements to teachers in the West of Scotland to improve the imbalance there? Can anything be done to help in the transferred schools, where the shortage is extremely acute?

Apart from the issue that I am looking at now, of what posts are available for transfer, the designated scheme is due for review next year. As for limiting the entrance of teachers to colleges of education, the immediate problem in 1973 is that we are dealing with teachers who are leaving colleges of education this term and not with those who are entering. As the hon. Gentleman knows from the debate on the Estimates, by 1976–77 we shall have an adequate teaching force for the whole of Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he is taking to seek to ensure that the proposed European Trade Mark Centre is located in Scotland.

The hon. Gentleman will have seen from the reply given by my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs to my hon. Friend the Member for Bedford (Mr. Skeet) on 12th July that the Government have decided to propose that the European Trade Mark Office should be sited in London.—[Vol. 859, c. 432.]

What fight have Scottish Office Ministers shown, both in our own Cabinet and in the corridors of power in Brussels, to get something that, in terms of both employment and effect on industry, is probably more important than the European Patent Office, which has been committed to Munich?

The siting of the European Trade Mark Centre will be a European decision. It has become clear that if it is to come to Britain at all London is the only starter. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] In competing with other countries it is clear that in this instance it is London or nothing.

Is there any prospect of any of the major agencies of the Common Market coming to Scotland to provide jobs? Would it not be extremely unfortunate if the coming of the trade mark centre to Britain simply added to the congestion that already exists in London? Would it not be more satisfactory to have some of these jobs going to Scotland? If some of these bodies come to Scotland, will my right hon. Friend make sure that we do not have site prices forced up by land speculation in Dundee and elsewhere?

I shall certainly ensure that in every case of a European office or centre coming to the United Kingdom the suitability of Scotland and its chances of getting the site will be examined and pressed. It is clear that this centre, which will provide only a small number of jobs, would not come to Britain at all unless it were to London. But by transferring suitable headquarters, such as the Forestry Commission and the White Fish Authority, we can get many suitable jobs for Scotland. I believe that is the way to do it.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that when European centres are being considered the fact that London is the only starter, as he put it, is a reflection on the lack of adequate communications with Scotland? Will he consider that matter in relation to the need for a central Scottish airport? What fight is he putting up against the development at Maplin, which will merely accelerate the myth of London as the only centre?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman has unintentionally misrepresented what I said. It is simply that in this case London is the only starter——[Hon. Members: "Why?"]— for a number of reasons. Communications with Scotland are not the main reason. As the hon. Gentleman knows, communications with Scotland are good. Therefore, Scotland is suitable for the setting up and establishment of offices and centres. There are other reasons in different cases which make it essential that a European centre should be in London or not in Britain at all.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Isle of Bute would be an ideal site for the European Trade Mark Centre?

I am very much aware of that, because this is the second time within three days that my hon. Friend has pointed it out to me.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the reasons for excluding Scotland as a location for this office?

It is not a question of excluding Scotland. I could not give all the reasons in reply to a supplementary question, but I shall write to the hon. Gentleman giving him the information.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Secretary of State's position in the Cabinet and the feckless nature of his reply, I beg to ask leave—

Order. The hon. Gentleman must state his notice in the usual form if it is to have any effect.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many local authority tenants, other than those receiving supplementary benefit, are paying no rent because of the provisions of the Housing (Financial Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1972.

I understand that in the four cities alone there are several thousands of tenants whose total rent is met by rebate. This is in addition to those whose rent is paid by supplementary benefit.

Do not these impressive facts show the extent to which this wise Act helps families with low incomes—a protection that was totally denied them by the Labour Government?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. Whereas rents have been covered for those on supplementary benefit, both under the old legislation and in equivalent form in the new legislation, the Labour Government made no provision whatever for those who were not on supplementary benefit but could not afford to pay their rents. This Government have done so, and there are thousands of people in Scotland who, as a result, pay a nil rent.

Will the Government come clean on this point? Among the many thousands mentioned by the Minister, how many are widows, how many are receiving disability benefit, how many are wage-stop cases and how many are unemployed and not receiving supplementary benefit? That will expose once and for all the bogus point being made by hon. Gentlemen opposite that many employed people pay no rent.

It would greatly help the argument if we could get the facts straight. I should make it clear to the hon. Gentleman that none of these people is on supplementary benefit. They are already completely covered. I should also point out that the numbers of these people are known unofficially from inquiries made in some of the cities. It is difficult to get the figures over the whole of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman will know that about a month ago we were informed that there were 3,300 in Glasgow, about 3,000 in Edinburgh, about 1,600 in Dundee, and 1,460 in Aberdeen. These are all in addition to the people on supplementary benefit. It is clearly time that the Scottish Labour Party faced the fact that this is a more generous scheme than anything it ever dreamt of.

Just how low must a person's income be before he or she can have what is called a nil rent—in other words, pay no rent at all?

That depends on the size of his family, and his circumstances. These matters have to be taken together. However, tables are published in the rent rebate scheme pamphlets. It is easy to obtain this information. If the hon. Gentleman has any difficulty, I will give it to him.

Will my hon. Friend ask his right hon. Friend the Leader of the House to adjust the rules of the House of Commons to make provision for the hon. Member for Glasgow, Gorbals (Mr. McElhone) to make an apology to this House and the people of Glasgow for blatantly misleading them?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will note what my hon. Friend has said. I consider that the first step in this difficult matter is to try to get the facts explained satisfactorily to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Gorbals (Mr. McElhone). Once he has understood the situation, perhaps he will then pass it on to his constituents.

As there are about 1 million council tenants involved in Scotland, would it not be a good idea if we got the figures? Will the hon. Gentleman tell us how many people who were and are still in receipt of rent rebates are now paying higher rents?

All those facts could be investigated. It will be difficult and require a lot of work to get figures over all Scotland. But it would certainly be a good thing if we could get the maximum information, because it would demonstrate that there are thousands of people whom the Labour Government did not help but whom we have helped greatly.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many police forces are operating in Scotland; how many have enlisted the aid of the regional crime squad in murder, etc., investigations; and if he is satisfied with the present degree of co-operation.

The number of forces is 20, and all regularly enlist the aid of the Scottish Crime Squad. I am satisfied with the present degree of cooperation.

is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is gratifying to learn that all chief constables are inviting the aid of the regional crime squad? Does not the hon. Gentlemen agree that cooperation between police authorities and the crime squad is essential, as the criminal today knows no boundaries, has no scruples and shows no humanity? Will the hon. Gentleman convey to the chief constables my appreciation of the cooperation that leads to the using of this pool of professional expertise to detect crimes that have been committed and to prevent many other serious crimes from taking place?

I endorse everything said by the hon. Gentleman, and I am grateful for the support that he gives not only to the Scottish Crime Squad but also to police forces generally in Scotland. I am sure that not only the two chief constables but individual police authorities in Scotland are convinced of the value of this crime squad in the modern situation, and the more power and success that it has the worse it is for criminals.

Will the hon. Gentleman take this opportunity of saying what the celebrated Scottish Council on Crime is doing? Last time we asked about it the hon. Gentleman said that it had identified subjects for further consideration. It is a long time since the council was appointed. What has it done since then?

The Question relates to the crime squad. The hon. Gentleman has raised a totally different matter, and if he waits a little longer he will see what the council is achieving.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent representations he has had requesting reconsideration of the question of a bypass road at Hillend in Fife and if he will make a statement.

I have received one recent representation, from the hon. Member himself. In view of the proposals for construction of the East Fife regional road I would not feel justified in providing a bypass of Hillend on A92.

I agree that the construction of a bypass at Hillend should not go ahead while the construction of the East Fife regional road is in prospect in the near future, but is the hon. Gentleman aware that the villages of Hillend and Aberdour are suffering from the effects of an ever-increasing volume of heavy traffic? If the regional road is not to materialise soon, should not some consideration be given to the people in that part of Fife in order to relieve them of this ever-growing burden of noise and discomfort? Will the hon. Gentleman tell the House when the regional road is likely to be commenced?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising this matter with me on many occasions. I very much sympathise with those who live in the village of Hillend, because of the traffic problems from which they are suffering. In consultation with Fife County Council we are making satisfactory progress in the preliminary proceedings for deciding the line for the East Fife regional road. I am hopeful that if the consultations, which are nearly complete, continue satisfactorily we shall soon be able to make a firm placing for it in the programme. That being the case, I feel that we should concentrate on the East Fife regional road in order to secure some relief for the people affected.

Will my hon. Friend request the road authorities in East Scotland in general to take particular care that they do not become the victims of land gazumping in and around the city of Dundee?

I deplore action by anyone which unnecessarily increases the price of land and houses, and it would be particularly regrettable if that were done by people in local government, but I note what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will commission a study of the multiplier effect of the location of Civil Service jobs in Scotland since 1964.

A retrospective study of this magnitude would be disproportionately expensive in cost and manpower. I am, however, considering with my colleagues the feasibility of a study related to the multiplier effects of selected office dispersals as they occur in the future.

I accept some of the economic difficulties mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, but does he not admit that what the Hardman Report is dealing with is not the dispersal of 30,000 jobs but the creation of 50,000 jobs, and therefore the contribution that Hardman envisages for Scotland is niggardly indeed? Will the right hon. Gentleman examine this carefully and put up a strong fight in the Cabinet to get the Hardman figures substantially increased?

The House should know by now that the report contains the recommendations and views of Sir Henry Hardman and not those of the Government. The Government are considering the multiplier effects that were discussed in the report, together with all the other matters in it, before making their views known.

Whatever the exact results of this inquiry, the fact is that the multiplier effect is widely recognised. Does not that make it totally unacceptable that the Government have written off Scotland as a European trade centre? Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise, as others throughout the rest of the country and Europe do, that Edinburgh is a great capital city, of European standing, and that it would be highly suitable for this purpose? If the right hon. Gentleman accepts that, will he say why he has written it off as a non-starter?

The hon. Gentleman has misrepresented what I said earlier. I said that the siting of the trade mark centre was a European decision and that it had become clear that it was either London or nothing. That does not mean that Edinburgh, which is a capital city and which has shown that it can offer the facilities required for headquarters and conferences, should not be suitable for other kinds of European offices and centres, and that fact will be pressed by me on every occasion.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will raise the matter of the Hardman Committee's Report at the next meeting of the Scottish Economic Council.

The council gave preliminary consideration to the report at its meeting on 22nd June.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say at what conclusion it arrived? Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that everybody in Scotland—both sides of industry and Scottish Members—will join in the battle to persuade the Government to give more Civil Service jobs to Scotland? Does the right hon. Gentleman further understand that in order to make it effective he has to lead the campaign to change Government policy? What does the right hon. Gentleman propose to do to make sure that this stupid report is reversed?

The hon. Gentleman was not a Member of the House at the time, but those who were will recall that I was a member of the Government and in a key position concerned with the question when the decision was taken by the previous Conservative Government, nearly 10 years ago now, that the Post Office Savings Bank should be moved to Glasgow. Beneficial results have flowed from that, including the provision of about 6,000 new jobs in the Glasgow area. This is something about which I am vitally concerned, and I hope to have the support of Scottish Members on both sides of the House in making sure that all that Scotland can offer is considered and taken fully into account before decisions are taken.

Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the Scottish Economic Planning Council considers the possibility of advising the Government of the benefits of dispersing the headquarters of nationalised industries based in London? There is a case for dispersing Civil Service jobs to Scotland, but is not there an even greater case for dispersing some of the headquarters of nationalised industries which are many miles away from the industries they control?

My hon. Friend has raised a separate matter, but one that has similar considerations. It certainly ought to be borne in mind.

May we take it, then, that the Secretary of State was not party to the Government's decision that the rest of Scotland, apart from Glasgow, was a non-starter in relation to dispersal?

I welcome the right hon. Gentleman's remarks. I am glad to think that he will be supporting me in doing things for the benefit of Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman was incorrect in his first statement; the Glasgow area was indicated as a suitable location but not to the exclusion of other Scottish locations. He will recall, as will many hon. Members, that there was a campaign—which I welcomed—by the Glasgow area, before the Hardman Report was published, and that I was then making it clear that this must not be to the exclusion of other parts of Scotland, including the new towns.

As the Secretary of State has rightly said, Edinburgh is suitable as the headquarters for certain European institutions, and so on. What are the institutions and headquarters—either British or European—that the Government are pressing should go to Edinburgh?

These subjects arise from time to time. When suggestions are made for headquarters, or the moving or setting up of headquarters, we shall make sure that not only Edinburgh but any other suitable part of Scotland is considered.

Has the Secretary of State read the Government's statement in the preface to the Hardman Report? Paragraph 6 says that the Government endorse

"Sir Henry Hardman's view that few rather than many locations should be selected."

The right hon. Gentleman did not listen to what I said. This is a report by Sir Henry Hardman. The Glasgow area was indicated as a suitable location because of its capacity and on regional policy grounds, but not to the exclusion of other areas of Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now seek additional powers to control onshore industrial development associated with North Sea oil.

Local planning authorities have comprehensive powers to control developments and the Secretary of State has powers to call in for decision any planning application where he considers it necessary or appropriate to do so.

Does not the Secretary of State agree that there is now an overwhelming case for planning and controlling North Sea oil developments on an all-Scotland basis and that, while local consultation is important, the present arrangement of local planning inquiries and the calling in of applications by the Secretary of State is quite unsatisfactory? Is the right hon. Gentleman reviewing the present position?

First, as I indicated, the powers are now on an all-Scotland basis, because the Secretary of State can call in, in any particular cases where he deems it appropriate. But if there is to be local democracy and if promoters and objectors are to be given the chance to state their views, the procedures that Parliament has laid down in order to protect them in the planning Acts have to be followed.

Will my right hon. Friend examine the technical possibility of building oil rigs in sections in the existing industrial areas, which could easily accommodate them, and in that way reducing the damage to the countryside? If that were done he might not have so many of these cases to call in and examine. This is a technological problem. Will my right hon. Friend consider it?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This is something that we are aiming to do. Some of these platforms are built in sections and put together later. But even in industrial areas, as has been the case recently in Fife, for example, some people may consider that a site is suitable, but none the less objections are raised, which have to be considered.

Will the Secretary of State try, wherever possible, to bring the manufacturers together to discuss the technical problems involved in construction? The major item is access to deep water. That is necessary in the final stages of construction, but not in the initial stages. Will the right hon. Gentle. man examine the technical feasibility of this and of using sites that are already used for industrial development?

Yes. This is being achieved through the recent establishment of the Oil Development Council for Scotland, on which there are not only representatives of those concerned with the oil industry but persons who are well qualified to speak about the environment and its protection.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will seek to ensure independent Scottish representation on the proposed EEC Committee for Regional Development.

The Commission has yet to publish its proposals for membership of the Regional Development Committee. My intention will be to ensure that the interests of Scotland are taken into account in the work of the committee in the most effective way.

That really is no answer. Is it the view of the Secretary of State that Scotland should have direct representation on such a committee? Will he accept, also, the view that regional economic weakness is often directly related to a lack of effective political projection?

We have to await the Commission's proposals, which have not yet been put forward. My main concern is that Scottish interests should be pressed. How best that can be done we shall have to wait and see.

In this connection, has not the Commission told the British Government that we must not pay grants of 4 per cent. to the Marathon Company at Clydebank, as has been extensively reported? If that is so, how does that square with the assurance that we have been given that the regional grants set out in the Industry Act and the White Paper could continue to be paid until 1977?

I understand that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has now received a communication of the kind that has been reported in the Press, and is now considering a response to it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many prosecutions have been instituted under the Litter Acts; how many were convicted; and how many have been fined the maximum of £100 over the last two years.

Five hundred and twenty-five and 537 persons were proceeded against for contravention of the Litter Acts in 1971 and 1972 respectively, and 515 persons were convicted in each of these years. No person was fined the maximum of £100 during this period.

Is it not a sad state of affairs that it costs the community in the United Kingdom roughly £25 million a year to combat the litter louts when this law is being breached by the authorities by not imposing maximum fines upon people who despoil our countryside? Will the Minister see that notices are sent to police authorities, magistrates, and so on, stating that the maximum penalty should be imposed?

Basically, the matter is for the police authority and local authorities in the areas involved. The question of the penalty that is imposed is entirely a matter for the courts to decide, and not one in which the executive can interfere. But I have no doubt that the views that the hon. Gentleman has expressed today will be taken notice of outside the House.

Who is responsible for clearing litter from the land involved in the recent land profiteering scandal in the city of Dundee?

The Dundee Corporation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what were the figures for the most recent cattle census for Scotland.

The provisional results of the 1973 June census indicate that there are 2,580,000 cattle, 1,920,000 in the beef herd and 660,000 in the dairy herd, representing increases of 8, 10 and 3 per cent. respectively compared with June 1972.

Are not these most encouraging figures? Does my hon. Friend agree that the industry is indeed working in the interests of the consumer of beef in Scotland?

I am grateful for what my hon. Friend has said. The expansion of the beef herd in Scotland in the last 12 months is the biggest annual increase ever recorded. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that increased self-sufficiency of this nature helps to protect the British housewife and consumer from the full effects of world shortages.

When will the Government stop this nonsense of pretending that one of the arguments for British agricultural expansion is that it will reduce food prices? That was never true. In the Common Market it is doubly untrue. Of course we are in favour of expansion, but that does not mean lower food prices, so the Government should stop kidding the public.

The implication of that supplementary question is that the hon. Gentleman and his party do not want a greater degree of self-sufficiency for Britain. That will be noted by farmers and housewives, whose interests an expanded British agriculture can help, in respect of prices.