asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the progress towards a Scottish Assembly.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker—

Order. Would the right hon. Member be kind enough to raise his point of order at the end of Questions so as to save Question time?

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

The Government's plans and programme were set out in paragraph 6 of last November's White Paper. A large number of organisations and individuals have submitted comments on the proposals. Others have still to comment. We are considering these comments carefully.

I offer the Secretary of State my personal congratulations upon his appointment. However, does he realise that it would be completely wrong to make any provision for a Scottish Assembly unless and until Parliament has decided that there should be such an Assembly?

Obviously the Assembly will not come into operation unless Parliament so decides. I believe that Parliament will so decide. We have already had a long debate about this and no doubt we shall have other debates.

l should like to extend to the right hon. Gentleman congratulations from the SNP Bench, and our best wishes to him in his new task.

l thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind opening remarks. There has been and will be no delay on the devolution commitment. I have already made clear that the Bill will be introduced at the start of the next Session and it will go through the House during the Session.

Will my right hon. Friend have another look at the idea of a referendum among the Scottish people to ascertain whether they want complete separation, as advocated by the SNP, or a measure of devolution, as advocated by the Government?

I do not think that we need a referendum on separation, as it is already clear that the overwhelming majority of the people of Scotland do not want it.

I should like to continue the happy note on which Question Time today has been started by offering my felicitations and those of my right hon. and hon. Friends to the right hon. Gentleman in his new tasks. As long as he continues them in the interests of Scotland, we shall certainly do what we can to support him.

I thank the hon. Gentleman very sincerely for his kind words.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will pay an official visit to Rosyth Dockyard to discuss with the workers there the implications of separatism for their job prospects.

As the Government have no plans to separate Scotland from the rest of the United Kingdom and are confident this will not happen, my right hon. Friend would be wasting the workers' time to discuss this particular issue with them.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it is the official policy of the SNP to have a separate Scottish navy? Does he think that three men in a boat could keep Rosyth Dockyard going? Will he read very carefully the official pronouncement from the SNP in the recent defence debate? It is an extremely important statement.

As I understand the SNP. far from being three men in a boat, it consists of nine men and two women in a boat. On policy they are certainly all at sea. I agree that this is a very serious issue indeed for the workers at Rosyth Dockyard. From my knowledge of these workers—some of my family are at Rosyth Dockyard—I can say that they are very much aware that if the SNP ever got its way—and that certainly will not happen—they would all be out of a job. That mesage is coming home more and more.

Does not the hon. Gentleman appreciate that the Question is a disreputable subterfuge designed to mislead the people of Rosyth into believing that what the hon. Gentleman has said would happen? Does he not agree that the strategic situation is almost certain to force the Labour Government to close Rosyth Dockyard?

The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that, because of the statement in the defence debate, he and many of his colleagues at the next election will be sunk without trace.

Is the Minister aware that this whole exchange is based on the erroneous assumption that an SNP Government will be Socialist, and therefore rational in its approach to defence? Would he care to re-assess his answers on the much more accurate supposition that an SNP Government dominated by the philosophy of the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. Henderson) might be a good bit to the Right even of the Conservative Party, leading to a bigger army, navy and airforce?

I am glad that my hon. Friend appreciates that the SNP is on the extreme Right of Right-wing politics in this country. I agree that there is no possibility of the SNP ever controlling the country. SNP Members should look at their voting record. They have voted more often with the Conservatives than have the Ulster Unionists. I agree with what my hon. Friend said, that on defence strategy there is no doubt what would happen if the SNP were ever to control Scotland. SNP Members quote Norway. Time and again we have the example of Norway thrown at us. There is no doubt that national service would be a feature of the SNP defence policy in Scotland.

Is the Minister aware that the suggestion of a visit to Rosyth is quite inadequate for the purpose which the hon. Gentleman has in mind? Is he not aware that he would have to visit Kinloss, Leuchars, Lossiemouth, Faslane and Kirkcudbright to tell the employees there that they would be out of a job?

The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that from today my right hon. Friend has 10 days at his disposal. I do not know what he wants to do in the next 10 days. It may be that a tour of the defence establishments in Scotland to convey that information is in his mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received for the separation of Scotland.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I have just given to my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, Central (Mr. Hamilton).

Does my hon. Friend agree that the SNP constantly states that it will separate companies, nationalised industries and the Armed Forces? At the same time, the SNP qualifies those statements with talk about independence. Does my hon. Friend agree that perhaps the message is getting through to the Scottish people that separation is really the SNP's policy and that that realisation is reflected in the opinion polls showing Labour in the lead? Does my hon. Friend also agree that the problems of capitalism—which has produced a high level of unemployment—will never be solved by splitting the working class?

We are all aware that the problems of the workers on Merseyside and in Birmingham, Glasgow and Dundee are exactly the same and that a concerted effort is required by all on a United Kingdom basis to solve the workers' problems. A divided working class has always been a defeated working class. If the SNP succeeds in dividing the working class, it will be acting in the interests of the capitalist class which finances its policies. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) should contain himself. He is always on about crime, and he is in danger of being charged with a breach of the peace if he does not behave himself. I agree with my hon. Friend that what he said is reflected in the improved position revealed in the System Three opinion poll in the Glasgow Herald on Monday morning.

Will the hon. Gentleman join me in welcoming the increasing interest of both sides of the House in devolution and note that there is hostility to the idea not only from Scottish Members but from English Members and Scotsmen sitting for English constituencies? If the Government insist on trying to push through the House legislation that puts at risk the unity of the United Kingdom, they will meet implacable hostility. What they are now witnessing is the beginning of the British backlash to plans that would lead to separation.

That is the view that the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Sproat) has held consistently, and I pay him credit for that. The other side of the story is that there is a great deal of support from English Members representing English constituencies for the views held by the Government and for the legislation which we shall put through the House. The right hon. Member for Sidcup (Mr. Heath) and the former Prime Minister are good examples of that support.

The hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) appears to be unaware that the SNP won yet another election last night. Given that a recent parliamentary answer shows that only 4·1 per cent. of parliamentary time on the Floor of the House is devoted to Scottish matters, does not the Minister accept that the invasion by English Members of Scottish business is intolerable?

The SNP should be eternally grateful for the 4·1 per cent. of the time on the Floor of the House which is devoted to Scottish matters, because, judging by the speeches which members of the SNP make in that time, they are fortunate that they do not have to speak for any longer. The people of Scotland are becoming more aware of the separatist views of the SNP. That is why the percentage of people in Scotland who want separation has dropped from 26 to 15. As for what the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson) described as the invasion by English Members of Scottish Question Time, the English Members' intrusion, especially from the Government Benches, has considerably increased the standard.

Order. Hon. Members more and more are debating matters instead of seeking knowledge.

Does my hon. Friend recall the magnificent display of solidarity between the workers of Scotland and the workers of England in the fight over Chrysler? Does he also recall that the main contribution of the SNP on that issue was, first, to try to split the workers of both countries by saying that Coventry should go to the wall, and, secondly, a week later, in an agricultural debate, to say that all the money should be used to plant trees instead of helping both sets of workers?

In addition to what happened during the debates on Chrysler, it is worth recording that the SNP still hopes—and I understand that the hon. Member for Banff (Mr. Watt) is on record as saying this—that Chrysler, Linwood will fail, because plainly, for the SNP to succeed, the Scottish economy and industry in Scotland must collapse. Therefore, I understand that the SNP still lives in hope that Chrysler will fail.

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

I have at present no plans to do so.

I offer my congratulations to the right hon. Gentleman.

I hope that under this Administration all parts of Scotland will have equal cause to feel grateful for the Government's treatment of them. I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that the subject of this particular road was raised in an Adjournment debate to which I replied some time ago. The regional council is looking at the question of the new line for the trunk road at present. Until it has completed its study, I do not think that we can make further progress.

If the Minister goes to Wigtownshire, will he make a point of visiting the RAF Station at West Freugh and pointing out to the RAF and civilian personnel there that were there to be separation and a Scottish Government, as advocated by the SNP, they would all be out of a job?

Yes, I shall make that visit and make that point. That is only one of numerous examples of unemployment that an SNP Government—an unlikely event—would cause for Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will review the present system of public inquiries in Scotland.

Following an extensive review of inquiry procedures, a memorandum of guidance was issued in February last year. I am sending the hon. Gentleman a copy. I am considering whether further improvements are practicable.

I add my best wishes to those that have been extended to the right hon. Gentleman. Will he make a real name for himself at the start by agreeing with me that the whole system of public inquiry in Scotland has lost the confidence of the public? Because of the actions of successive Secretaries of State in overruling reporters' reports, is there not a need for a completely new system in which awards of costs can be made more easily available to those who lodge objections?

I think public opinion depends upon what the eventual result of an inquiry is. If a member of the public thinks the result is favourable, he thinks that the system is also favourable. If the result is unfavourable, he does not care for it.

Will my right hon. Friend give serious consideration to the request he has received to hold a public inquiry into the administration of the cheap home loans scheme for the officials of the Central Regional Council, bearing in mind the public anxiety about this matter and the admission of what I claimed all along, that a local inquiry would be possible under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973?

Whether a local inquiry is possible is a different question from whether it is necessary or desirable. I know my hon. Friend's strong feelings about this, but I do not think that there is a case for an inquiry into facts which are already established and well known.

May I add my good wishes to the Secretary of State upon his appointment?

I know that some of these inquiries are very expensive in lawyers' fees and that sort of thing. One reason why we are trying to get a simpler system is to cut out some of the expense. It is very difficult indeed to accept the principle of allowing costs because, without saying anything detrimental about the merits of cases which objectors put forward, it would add tremendously to the burden at inquiries and would make them much more lengthy and time consuming than they now are.

May I offer my commiserations to the Secretary of State?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman was the first to strike the right note in his opening remarks.

In wishing the right hon. Gentleman well in his new appointment, may I ask him to consider putting a limit on costs for both the public authority concerned and for the objector if he is a private individual? Is it not practicable to introduce some limit on both sides?

The trouble is that inquiries vary so much in their importance and complexity. What might be a suitable rule for one kind of inquiry might not be suitable for another.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will take steps to improve public transport in Scotland.

Possible developments in public transport are dealt with in the consultation document "Transport Policy", the publication of which was announced yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. A statement will be made when consultations have taken place.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the opposition in Scotland from trade unions and public transport users to the proposal in the transport policy document to phase out transport subsidies, thereby leading to a possible trebling of fares by 1981? Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the harmful effect this would have, particularly on pensioners, other low-income groups and those who live in rural and socially-deprived areas of Scotland?

My hon. Friend cannot have read the document carefully if he believes that it contains proposals for phasing out transport subsidies. He is concerned about bus fares and bus services in his own constituency, and one of the Government's main purposes in the document is to look after the interests of people without individual car transport. We are maintaining the subsidies for bus services in Scotland, and last year the Government provided more for bus subsidies in the rate support grant than was actually spent by local authorities.

Is not the Minister aware that there was a near-unanimous voice of protest in Scotland yesterday after the publication of the consultative document? Did he agree to the proposals and the alternatives set out in the document? What plans has he to meet transport operators and trade unions to discuss its implications?

I shall consider the question of meetings. Those who are in favour of the development of the railways against the road system have one point of view, but there are others who put the contrary view. Before the document was published, many wild allegations appeared in the newspapers saying that it would advocate a slashing of the railway services in Scotland. We said that that was not intended, and it is not included in the document. I do not attach overwhelming importance to initial reactions. As people read the document in detail, they will understand the complexities of the problem and the general purposes which the Government have in mind, which are directed towards improving the public transport system in Scotland, on which a large number of our people depend.

Is the Secretary of State in favour of any extension of the rail network in Scotland? Does he see a need to improve communications? Will he consider carefully the proposals put forward by ASLEF for a commuter service in the Aberdeen area?

I have seen various proposals. We have recently announced an improvement to the Perth-Inverness railway line because we felt it was justified by additional traffic. Where similar cases can be presented elsewhere, we shall certainly consider them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, because of its geography, Scotland has most to gain from adherence to the policies laid down in successive Labour manifestos for the co-ordination and integration of transport?

I agree with my hon. Friend. He will see interesting proposals towards that end in the document we have just published.

Does the Secretary of State appreciate that, arising from the statement made yesterday by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, there could be a conflict between the railway lines that the Government consider could be closed and those that British Rail wants to close? That statement has done nothing to allay the fears of railway men in Scotland. Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that there will be no railway cuts north of the border?

Whatever the fears at the moment, they are nothing like the fears which arose under the previous Conservative Government about the Beeching cuts.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the most recent assessment by his Department of current economic trends within Scotland; and when it will be published.

The edition of the "Scottish Economic Bulletin" recently published by my Department contains an assessment of current trends.

Does the Secretary of State realise that that answer will cause tremendous disappointment in Scotland in view of the CBI report published at the end of March on short-term trends? Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is need for positive freedom of economic expansion in Scotland and that it is necessary for the Government to do something towards that end rather than floating out on each economic tide like a jellyfish?

I know that any factual answer disappoints the SNP, because factual accuracy is the last thing in which the SNP is interested. I was interested to see Lord Clydesmuir's statement yesterday expressing considerable optimism about the long-term future of the Scottish economy. There are certain short-term actions that have to be taken and certain negative aspects that have to be avoided, such as SNP policy on oil development, which would immediately lead to the loss of about 25,000 jobs.

Does the Secretary of State think that this time next year there will be fewer than 100,000 unemployed in Scotland?

I never make forecasts of that kind. My hon. Friend knows that it is the absolute purpose of the Government through their Budget proposals and in other ways to reduce unemployment as rapidly as possible.

How long does the Secretary of State think that it will take him to get Scotland's output and employment up to the highest levels achieved during the previous Conservative Administration?

I do not accept that as an accurate statement of the situation. Output is expanding very satisfactorily at the moment. From the figures published yesterday, the hon. Gentleman will know that the average level of industrial wages in Scotland is now higher than the average in England.

Given that unemployment in Scotland is at an unprecedentedly high level, will the right hon. Gentleman say precisely on what his optimistic statements of last week are based?

The progress of the Scottish economy over the last year compared with that in the rest of the United Kingdom shows that there are considerable grounds for optimism. I have always made clear—and make clear now—that the level of unemployment in Scotland is unacceptable and that we must get it down as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement on the prospects of the Scottish economy during 1976.

The outlook for the Scottish economy is strongly influenced by the prospects for the United Kingdom and world economies, and evidence that recovery has begun both at home and abroad is now accumulating. In addition, the performance of the Scottish economy relative to the United Kingdom during the past year has been encouraging.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for repeating so well the words of his predecessor when he answered Questions of this kind. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is cosiderable disquiet about work being taken out of Scotland? In particular, is he aware that the Scottish Transport Group has placed an order for re-engineering the "Glen Sannox" in Norway while a company capable of producing the engine, British Polar Engines Limited, in Glasgow, has declared several redundancies? Has the right hon. Gentleman power to intervene?

No. The question which the hon. Gentleman has in mind is strictly within the responsibility of the Scottish Transport Group, and there was no question of its asking for my approval for the order. However, I have already made clear to all nationalised industries that I expect them to give the maximum amount of orders to this country, and particularly to Scotland. I very much regret any order going abroad. I am aware of the problems at British Polar Engines Limited and I have discussed them with both management and men.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he intends to take to alleviate the present problems facing the paper-making industry in West Aberdeenshire.

The paper-making industry in Scotland, together with other manufacturing industries, is eligible for the full range of assistance under the Government's regional policies.

Does the Minister appreciate that the paper mills in my constituency and in other parts of the United Kingdom would be greatly helped if the Government ceased granting Scandinavian countries import facilities to which they would be entitled only if they were members of the Common Market, which patently they are not?

Some of these questions are for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade. However, on the question of duty-free quotas, for example, there was a very small increase in the current year and that was basically in grades of paper which we are not producing. The hon. Gentleman knows that I am well aware of the problems in his constituency and that if there is anything I can do to help I am anxious to do it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the basic raw material in paper-making has been put at considerable risk by the catastrophic fall this year in plantings? Will he use his considerable influence to decrease the disincentive to planting in the present fiscal system?

I do not accept what my hon. Friend has said, but a vigorous forestry policy in this country, with the Forestry Commission taking the lead, is very much part of Government policy.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that there will soon be a need for a pulp mill in North-East Scotland? Will his Department do a feasibility study on it?

It is suggested that it might pulp the SNP speeches, but we are not interested in low-quality output.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the present state of the fishing industry.

This question was fully debated on 5th April, and I have nothing to add to what my hon. Friend and I said in opening and replying to the debate.

It was not fully debated; it was very badly debated. As the March catch rate for the trawling fleet has declined by 10 per cent. compared with the February rate, are the Government still as optimistic about the financial viability of the Scottish fleet as they were? Will the hon. Gentleman say "Yes" or "No" to the question whether we are allowed under the EEC regulations to continue the fishing subsidy? If we are not, why are the French continuing to subsidise fishing fuel oil by 14 million francs this year?

The hon. Gentleman has asked about three questions. In the first 10 weeks of this year—that is, up to the middle of March—earnings for white fish trawlers over 80 feet were 50 per cent. higher than they were in the same period last year. The hon. Gentleman now recognises that we were perhaps nearer the mark than the exaggerated claims that he was making some weeks ago.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that part of the problem of the fishing industry is that a large amount of fish is being dumped in this country by such countries as Poland, which is bringing in fish at one-third the market price? Is there anything that the Government can do about it?

I am not aware of dumping by Polish vessels. Apparently that was a problem last year, but my information is that it is not a problem now. The main criticism was against Norwegian imports, and steps have been taken for Norwegian import prices to be increased.

Will the Secretary of State be continuing the role in the Common Market negotiations on the CFP that his predecessor played in recent weeks?

Yes. I am happy to be able to assure the hon. Gentleman—and to recognise the service given, particularly in recent months, by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross). I have already had discussions with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, and that interest will continue. I am not sure whether mine will.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that the herring quotas allocated to the British fleet in the north-east Atlantic are totally inadequate? Will he seek a better deal for the British fisherman?

As the hon. Member knows, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission is meeting next week to discuss this matter. There is a particular Scottish interest in herring. However, there must be greater recognition by all countries of the need for sound conservation measures. We are taking the initiative in that respect.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will implement the provision of the EEC Directive on Mountain and Hill Farming, which allows for investment grants for non-agricultural activities such as tourism and craft industries in hill areas.

I have no immediate plans to implement Article 10.2 of the Less Favoured Areas Directive, but the possibility is being kept under review.

That was a very unsatisfactory answer. Is not the reason why the hon. Gentleman is not implementing the article basically bureaucratic, because it is felt that the Department of Agriculture should administer it and it has not the officials to deal with the tourist and craft industries? Is it not foolish to turn down the possibility of financial help when the financial reins on the Highlands and Islands Development Board and the Scottish Tourist Board inevitably will be tightened?

In view of the crucial state of the Government, and of my crucial state, it is not encouraging to hear hon. Members say that a reply is unsatisfactory. The hon. Gentleman is most unfair; it is not like him.

Is the Minister aware of the widespread dismay in the Highlands on the part of hill farmers about the delays in the payment of the present allowances which should be available?

I think that, as usual, the hon. Member is confused. I am not sure to which allowances he is referring, but, if he is talking about the payments which are due, a reply was given to his hon. Friend the Member for Banff (Mr. Watt) on that point. We are certainly speeding up the payments now due to the hill farmers.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement on the rundown of the textile industry in Clackmannanshire.

I am very concerned about recent closures of textile factories in Clackmannanshire and will keep in touch with the situation.

Does the new Secretary of State for Scotland remember that, when Donbros of Alloa closed, specific guarantees were given in writing by Coats Paton that a new synthetic yarn plant would open at Lornshill, and that the company has now gone back on its word and opened the plant in England? What does the Secretary of State feel about them morality of such a sell-out, and what will he do about it?

The hon. Gentleman will know that that particular move involved moving work from England to Scotland—a rather different thing from what he is normally complaining about. As it happens, there was a certain amount of English opposition to that move, but the situation has now changed. Coats Paton, which is a Scottish company, has given an undertaking that some other suitable work will be moved to Alloa, and I am anxious to see that that undertaking is discharged. The initial undertaking, as the hon. Gentleman will know, came after I met the management of the company, and I very much want to see the factory at Lornshill being used.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement on the Government's policy towards denominational schools in Scotland.

I agree with the view which has been held by successive Governments that no action should be taken to change the basic statutory provisions relating to denominational education unless there is a wide measure of agreement between the religious and educational bodies concerned, and the general public, that changes are desirable. There would appear to be no such general agreement at present.

Is the Minister aware that substantial alarm has been caused by the recent demands of the Scottish Labour Party conference at Troon that the Government should end the system of denominational schools? Although the House will be pleased to have heard the words of the Minister, will he give a categorical assurance that the Government will not contemplate ending denominational schools against the wishes of the parents involved? Will he undertake that the Government will not make any change in that policy unless there is a demand for it from the parents concerned, and not simply on the basis of general agreement?

That is a typical misunderstanding of the Scottish Council of the Labour Party conference at Troon. I am only sorry that the hon. Gentleman was not present during the relevant discussions. But this is a very important issue and I make it clear that there is no change at all planned by this Government to the 1918 Act. There will be no change without the consent of the Roman Catholic population in Scotland. I want to make that perfectly clear.

Will my hon. Friend please not allow the spokesman of the Tory Front Bench to get away with an absolute untruth? This was not the decision that was reached at the Scottish Labour Party conference. On the contrary, the Scottish Labour Party conference made it perfectly clear—as my hon. Friend did in his closing remarks—that there should be encouragement towards co-operation and integration, that there was no question of a move in this direction by Government diktat, and that it would depend on a change of climate towards this issue in Scotland. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdrawn his total misinterpretation of what happened at the conference.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that statement. It is a correct interpretation of what happened at the conference at Troon.

Has the Minister read the recent McKechin Report, which presents certain strictures on Roman Catholic schools in Strathclyde? Does the Minister agree with it? What steps is he taking to improve the number of teachers in Catholic schools in the West of Scotland?

I do not necessarily agree with that Report. Although I have taken note of the Press comments, the Report has not been submitted to me for approval or consideration. The hon. Gentle man will not be unaware that Strathclyde education authority has budgeted, with the rate support grant that we have allocated to it, for 800 extra teachers. With the number of Roman Catholic secondary teachers coming out of college this year, I am confident—as I understand the Director of Education for Strathclyde is confident—that we shall see an end to part-time education in the West of Scotland for the first time for 25 or 30 years.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received concerning the future provision of hospital facilities in Argyll.

Two.

I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he appreciate the great depth of feeling on this subject, not only in Argyll but all over rural Scotland? Does he further appreciate that he could greatly alleviate the feelings of people in the rural areas by assuring them that there will be no undue centralisation of hospital facilities?

I am in touch with the position in Argyll and Clyde. It is in the first place for the board to submit recommendations in the light of the local com-sultations which are taking place. Any proposals by the board for a change in hospital services must have the approval of my right hon. Friend.

Will the Minister say whether his policy is a centralist or decentralist one? Will he do his utmost where possible to bring hospital services to the people rather than vice versa? Will he bear in mind especially the situation at Arbroath Infirmary?

Hospital services are not a matter of dogma, and the hon. Gentleman is pre-empting his later Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what consultation he has had with the staff of teacher-training colleges following his announced cutback in recruitment of student teachers.

I sent copies of my proposals to the two associations representing the academic staff of the colleges and invited their comments. Representatives of the Association of Lecturers in Colleges of Education in Scotland met officials of my Department on 29th March and I had a further meeting with them on 8th April.

When the Minister is reconsidering the decision about recruitment to training colleges, will he bear in mind the widespread antagonism in Scotland towards the secondary school staffing circular of 1973, commonly known as the "red book", which is regarded by teachers as totally inadequate for assessing the needs in schools? As reduced class size is educationally desirable, will he say what consideration was given to class size in his decision on the new contract offered to Scottish teachers?

The teachers' contract is one for which many English teachers would give their right arm. Account was taken of the hon. Lady's point when the consultations on the contract took place in June 1975 between the Scottish Education Department and the local authorities. We now have the best pupil-teacher ratio that we have ever had in Scotland. In spite of difficulties, we are allocating rate support grant for 800 extra teachers in Strathclyde. We also have taken into account the substantial drop in the birth rate. Between 1975–76 and 1980–81 there will be 100,000 fewer pupils in our Scottish primary schools. Regard must be paid to this fact. I am not at this moment influencing this trend—I do not know whether anyone else is—but it is a factor which has to be taken into account.

Instead of using the projected population decrease, or cut in the birth rate, as an excuse to cut teacher recruitment, would it not be better to maintain recruitment levels and thereby reduce class size, especially for children receiving remedial education, and also in subjects where there is still a shortage of teachers?

I know my hon. Friend's concern, as a former teacher, about this matter. As I have already pointed out to the House, we now have the best pupil-teacher ratio we have ever had in Scotland. At 15:1 it is much better than England and Wales, with 17:1 on average. I am fully aware that, given a perfect world with no financial constraints, we should wish to improve our teaching standards and pupil-teacher ratios even more. We are aiming at this, but let us be fair. Even with the difficulties under which we are working, we hope to see the end of part-time education, and I repeat that we have the best pupil-teacher ratio that we have ever had in Scotland.