asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the progress of the Spring-burn Comprehensive Development Plan.

A start has been made to housing and industrial development but much will depend on the new road pattern in the area. Implementation of the plan is for the two local authorities concerned.

Is my hon. Friend aware that his reply will cause some disappointment in the Springburn area? If the Government are serious about revitalising British industry it is absolutely essential that such excellent sites as exist in Springburn for industry and commerce are suitably serviced, and therefore that the infrastructure is started straight away.

I realise my hon. Friend's concern about the development programme, but this is a matter for the Strathclyde Region and Glasgow District Council. Nevertheless, I shall convey my hon. Friend's concern to those two authorities.

Will my hon. Friend use his good offices with the two local authorities concerned? It is perfectly clear, as my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Springburn (Mr. Buchanan) said, that the amount of dereliction in areas such as his and mine is a positive discouragement to industry to come to the area.

I recognise the concern expressed by my hon. Friend. I must be fair to the local authorities, which are going through a difficult time because of the financial stringency that we have imposed upon them. However, they are conscious of the need to attract jobs and to provide proper sites in the Glasgow area. I shall undertake to convey my hon. Friends' remarks to the appropriate authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has had to date with Civil Service unions in Scotland about the likely status of civil servants consequent upon the establishment of the proposed Scottish Assembly.

My right hon. Friend has not yet discussed this question with any of the Civil Service unions, but representatives of the Scottish Office Staff Side discussed the matter with my right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross), when he was Secretary of State, in April 1976 and in October with the Minister of State, Civil Service Department.

When the Minister next meets the Civil Service will he discuss with it the possibility of the stress and divided loyalties that its members might suffer once the Assembly is set up? Will he reconsider the block grant system of finance? Does he agree that whether or not there is constitutional conflict on that, there will be some hard bargaining? In that circumstance, where does the loyalty of Scots civil servants lie—to the Prime Minister in Edinburgh or the Treasury in London? Would it not be better to have, as Kilbrandon recommended, a separate Scottish Civil Service with comparable wage rates and career structure, as happened in Northern Ireland?

The Civil Service unions are opposed to a separate Civil Service. The Government consider that a unified Civil Service is important to the working of the devolution Bill because it will help in the discussions between the Administration in Edinburgh and the Administration in London. There can be no question of civil servants having divided loyalties, because civil servants serving the Scottish Assembly will be serving an integral part of the United Kingdom Government.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that there is no bar to civil servants from Scotland going to work in England, or to civil servants in England going to work in Scotland? Is that not essential if we are to get the best possible service from the Civil Service? Will my hon. Friend make certain that a separate Civil Service is not established, since that might lead to only Scots being promoted and given jobs in the Scottish Civil Service and only the English enjoying the same benefits in England? Would that not work to the great detriment of the people who rely on the work of the Civil Service?

The first part of my hon. Friend's question can be taken as read. The Government and the unions are opposed to a separate Civil Service.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the progress of the plans for converting the Royal High School, Edinburgh, for the proposed Scottish Assembly.

The Royal High School was handed over to the contractor on 10th September, and work is proceeding satisfactorily.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the cost of this conversion is proceeding within the latest published estimate for it? To what use do the Government intend to put this splendid building if the Bill should fall?

The Bill is not going to fall. The cost of reconstruction is within the estimate arrived at before the project began.

What will happen if the first meeting of the Assembly decides that the building is inadequate and that the Assembly should move out to other premises in Edinburgh or elsewhere? Who will then bear the cost of the building, or of any new building?

The hon. Gentleman is posing hypothetical questions, which can only be answered when the Assembly is in being. It is a matter for the Assembly. Perhaps I may use the words of someone much more famous than I, and say that it is better to wait and see.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the cost of conversion can be justified and can be saved if the Government would plump for the independence of Scotland, thus saving expenditure in sending civil servants and hon. Members to this House from Scotland?

Apart from hon. Members belonging to the Scottish National Party and between 18 per cent. and 20 per cent. of the population of Scotland, there is in Scotland no demand for independence or separation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next intends to meet the Association of Scottish Chambers of Commerce.

My right hon. Friend has at present no plans to do so. From time to time, Scottish Office Ministers meet individual chambers and will continue to do so where appropriate.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell the Association of Scottish Chambers of Commerce that the decision of some of its directors to support the "Scotland is British" campaign is totally unrepresentative of many of its members, of which I am one? Will he tell those directors either to withdraw their support from the campaign or to drop the name "Scottish" from the association's title?

I have no intention of indicating in the way the hon. Gentleman suggests. I am prepared to listen to any representations made, but I cannot adopt the tactics suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in spite of what the hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. Crawford) said, the Association of Scottish Chambers of Commerce voted unanimously against the Government's plans for a Scottish Assembly? Is he further aware that it has been joined in its attitude by individual chambers of commerce, bankers, accountants, farmers, doctors, nurses and secondary school teachers, as well as the CBI and a growing number of trade unions and trade unionists in Scotland?

I have listened to many representations from industrialists and trade unions about the whole question of devolution. I am certain that whether they be industrialists or trade unionists they will totally reject the idea of separatism, because they believe that it would be nonsense for Scotland.

Has my hon. Friend received representation from the chambers of commerce about the impact on employment opportunities arising from the stupendous increase in rates in the near future and the effect that this could have on retaining existing enterprises, let alone attracting new ones to Scotland?

I have had no such representation from chambers of commerce, but I suggest to my hon. Friend that in view of his concern he should table a Question on the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is satisfied that the fishery protection vessels at present in use will be entirely satisfactory to give adequate protection in the waters round Scotland when fishing limits are extended.

Yes, Sir.

As some of the surveillance has to be done by very fast-flying aircraft, is it not necessary to have at least a number of fast boats to go to incidents which may be reported or given notice of by these aircraft?

Clearly, speed in getting to the scene of any particular problem can be important, but I think that in any society—and this applies to the sea as well—the best protection lies in abiding by the law, and the vast majority of the fishermen of all nations are law-abiding. But we have this matter under consideration. The fishery protection fleet is being extended, and the point made by the hon. Gentleman is one of those we shall keep in mind.

Apart from the necessity for all sorts of new vessels for fishery protection, how many more helicopters are to be provided for this purpose?

Helicopters are part of a service which may be called into use from the Royal Navy, but there is no specific provision, other than the Nimrod aircraft, for air surveillance.

Did I understand my hon. Friend to say that he was satisfied with the number of vessels already in existence for this purpose? If so, can he explain how the big increase in area which will have to be patrolled by these vessels can be covered by the same number as at present?

The Question referred to existing vessels under my Department's control. As I have explained, there are additional vessels from the Ministry of Defence, and an increase is now being provided for. We believe that, in total, the number should be adequate.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm the facts stated to him in a letter from me about the recent incidents off Shetland between French and Scottish vessels, and accept the appreciation of my constituents and those involved for his prompt action in ordering the fishery protection cruiser "Westra" to the the scene? Will he make a statement on any further developments that have taken place in the last 24 hours and give our fishermen a categorical assurance that where protection is needed in such a situation it will be made available?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's compliment, which I think is the first I have ever had from him. I am sure that it was given in good faith. I am happy to be able to confirm that the "Westra" was sent very quickly, and he has rightly given credit for that. Investigations have taken place, and I can say that there has been no incident involving loss of or damage to the gear of Scottish vessels. The "Westra" found one French vessel towing on a course which might have caused damage to Scottish gear, but headed it off and explained the local fishing practices. We are keeping a continuous watch. The incident reported, of which there has been no confirmation, apparently happened some weeks ago, but we are not thinking of making any diplomatic representations to the French Government. War certainly has not broken out.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that such a large increase in fishing limits as seems in prospect will transform the scale of the problem of policing those limits? Our fishermen will have to face tremendously difficult changes in their working pattern, and they expect the Government to stand up for their rights in the new limits and to be vocal in doing so.

I keep reassuring hon. Members on this matter. The pattern of fishing has not been finally determined. These matters are being considered with other member States of the EEC, who may well make some contribution to fishery protection in the Community "pond" as a whole. These detailed matters will be worked out following the review of the common fisheries policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next expects to meet representatives of the STUC.

My right hon. Friend, together with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and other colleagues, met the STUC on 8th and 9th December. There are at present no plans for a further meeting.

Is my hon. Friend aware that when the Scottish TUC representatives met Labour Members last week they made an appeal for an early announcement of extra funds for the Scottish Development Agency, and that that appeal was repeated yesterday by the chairman of the agency when he announced its new factory building programme? In view of the excellent work being done by the agency to provide more jobs in Scotland, will my hon. Friend indicate how soon we may expect an announcement about extra funds, despite whatever statement is to be made this afternoon by my sparring partner, the hatchet man from No. 11 Downing Street?

I cannot accept that comment about the attitude of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Scottish Development Agency figured in our discussion with the Scottish TUC, which paid tribute to it as an excellent means both of regenerating industry and of improving the environment in Scotland. We promised the STUC, as we have promised others, that we would make an announcement about this matter as soon as possible.

When the Minister next meets representatives of the STUC, will he tell them that when they threaten the Prime Minister that they might support the Scottish National Party they should bear in mind that more than half the jobs in Scotland are dependent on business from England, and that their attitude to the SNP should be borne firmly in mind whenever they seek to make this sort of threat to the Prime Minister or anyone else?

It has been made clear by Mr. Milne of the STUC at his Press conference and in subsequent denials on the BBC that he said no such thing to the Prime Minister, to other colleagues, or to anyone else. When he talked to me he was at pains to explain that, while he thought the Tory Party in Scotland was irrelevant, he thought that the SNP's policies would be a complete disaster for the working people of Scotland.

Will the hon. Gentleman remind his hon. Friend the Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan) that in Committee the SNP moved an amendment to increase the sum available to the SDA and that he voted against it?

It is important to bear in mind the comments that were made yesterday by the Chief Executive of the SDA, namely, that at present it has sufficient funds to meet its commitments. I had hoped that the interest of the hon. Gentleman in the affairs of the SDA would prompt him today to stand up and wish the agency a very happy first birthday and wish it well for the future.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that Scotland is facing a desperately serious job situation, especially in the West, which can be seen by the latest news from Marathon and Babcock? Does he agree that it is developing into one of the worst problems in Scotland's history? In view of the difficulty that the Government will have in creating more home demand, is the hon. Gentleman prepared to consider the possibility of getting the Department of Trade to set up a unit in the West to discuss with firms contemplating closure the possibility of solving their problems by getting more Government work?

It is recognised in Scotland, certainly by the CBI and the Scottish Council (Development and Industry), that the facilities offered within the Industrial Development Department in Glasgow often work exceedingly well. The hon. Gentleman referred to Marathon and Babcock. I am astonished by the hon. Gentleman when he makes comments such as these in the House, and especially when he makes them in Scotland, and then votes against the SDA as well as against Leyland and Chrysler.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he will take to persuade local authorities to curtail unnecessary expenditure on administrative and advertising undertakings in the interests of rate control.

I have impressed upon authorities by circular and in the rate support grant discussions the urgent need for them to reduce total expenditure in the present year and in 1977-78, but it is the responsibility of each authority to decide whether any particular item of expenditure is necessary.

Although I appreciate the Secretary of State's efforts to date, does he not realise that the constant pinpricks of regional newspapers, the circulation of minutes and widespread circulation of statistics only bring to the notice of ratepayers who have not the money to pay the rates the continuing extravagances and unreality of the new regional councils?

Basically, these are matters for the regional and district councils themselves. However, if there is any particular question of alleged extravagance, I am always willing to look into it. I take the view that it is not for me to be constantly intervening on these day-to-day matters that are the concern of the local authorities. Members can always take up these matters direct with their own local authorities.

Although the right hon. Gentleman will be urging administrative savings to be made in consequence of the cuts that are to be made, will he seek to introduce some humanity and even sanity in the essential cuts that have to take place? Is he aware, for example, that the Tayside Regional Council has stopped paying the 50p pocket money to mentally handicapped persons and has cut back on essential home help services? Will he introduce some humanity into the cuts?

I am reluctant to comment on every individual item of expenditure that is the responsibility of an individual local authority. Some of the examples that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned have already been quite exhaustively dealt with at local level.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next proposes to visit the Shetland Islands.

My right hon. Friend has, at present, no plans to do so.

Are Ministers frightened to go to the Shetlands these days? Based on the estimate that £2¼ billion from tax and royalties may come to the Exchequer as a result of oil flowing through the Shetlands, to what extent will the Government be influenced by the view of the Shetland Islands Council that it sees no advantage in the Scottish Assembly and that unless its position is safeguarded it may seek to exclude Shetland from the devolution Bill?

Ministers are not frightened to go to the Shetlands. My right hon. Friend, in his capacity as Minister of State, was there in April of this year. I was there in June to discuss devolution with the Shetland Islands Council. We regard Shetland as part of Scotland and as part of the United Kingdom, and it will be covered by the Scotland and Wales Bill.

Will the Minister ask his right hon. Friend to reconsider that answer? Would it not be valuable to go to Shetland and to take the Leader of the SNP with him so that he can explain to the Shetland Council how he squares the SNP's policy, which is to grant up to full autonomy to Shetland while at the same time claiming its oil as Scotland's? Is this not a case of offering independence on the one hand and keeping cheap oil resources on the other, which to me equals imperialism?

My right hon. Friend is extremely busy and no doubt he will make his own arrangements about when to visit various parts of the country. As for the position of the Leader of the SNP, I get the feeling that the SNP might be invited to Shetland. I have a copy of the minutes of the council meeting of 29th October when it was suggested that the SNP should be approached to promote a Private Member's Bill to protect Shetland from devolution.

Will the right hon. Gentleman investigate the apparent link between the BBC and the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) now that both his Labour and nationalist opponents at the General Election have had to resign their candidatures and have been appointed BBC spokesmen in Orkney and Shetland?

I am not quite sure of the implications of the question. If it means that the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) has such a close relationship with the BBC that he should resign, I was not aware of that relationship.

I assure the Government that I have had to get rid only of my SNP opponent. My Labour opponent has resigned of his own accord. No doubt in disgust with the Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the rate support grant negotiations.

The Government's proposals represent a fair settlement having regard to the difficult economic situation. The House will have an opportunity to discuss them in the forthcoming debate on the Rate Support Grant (Scotland) Order 1976, which was laid before the House on 6th December for approval.

Has my right hon. Friend reflected on the Early-Day Motion that has been signed by a clear majority of his Scottish Back Benchers that invites him to reconsider the Order? Has he considered the information given to me in answers last week—namely, that although there is a considerable surplus among local authorities in England, Scottish local authorities are already in deficit? In the light of that, is it realistic to expect them to achieve the same 4 per cent. saving?

It is not actually the same 4 per cent. saving. It is 4½ per cent. in England and Wales as compared with 4 per cent. in Scotland. I have considered the motion, but all these matters will be debatable when the Rate Support Grant Order comes before the House. As well as meeting COSLA about the matter, I met representatives of Strathclyde Regional Council only this morning.

Was the right hon. Gentleman able to satisfy the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on the points raised by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Central (Mr. Cook)—namely, the difference in treatment between local authorities in England and Wales and those in Scotland? Will he bear in mind the Written Answers that he and his colleague the Secretary of State for Wales gave me on direct financial comparisons between Powys in Wales and the Border Region of Scotland, which are areas similar in character? Will he note the marked difference of treatment that the two areas are receiving at the hands of the Government?

I do not think that it is possible to make such comparisons between one local authority area and another. It is necessary to look at the whole picture. The settlement for Scotland is fair in relation to England as well as being fair generally. I shall be willing to answer these points during the forthcoming debate.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the need for major future developments in transport in the area, following the publication by the Highlands and Islands Development Board for the Moray Firth Access Transport Study.

Major developments since the study was published early in 1974 include improvements on the Perth-Inverness railway, work on A9 from Perth to Invergordon and the strengthening of the runway at Inverness Airport.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Tayside Regional Council does not regard work on the A9 north of Perth as of first priority except for the Pitlochry Bypass? Could not the £675,000 that could be saved be used to improve the railway? It is wrong to build up a road and destroy a railway.

I am not aware of the Tayside Region's attitude towards the A9. I thought that this road was very valuable for the oil industry. Last July work was started on restoring the double track from Blair Atholl to Dalwhinnie, a length of 23 miles, costing £3.7 million. There has been a commitment in this area by British Rail to cater for the needs of rail as well as road passengers.

Is the Minister aware, in the light of the Highlands and Islands Development Board's reports, that there is an urgent need for the Scottish Office to do something about the repair of the road to the Isles? If this is done, it will be the first time the Government have given a fair chance to the Islands off the Scottish coast. These areas need this link desperately, because commitments given at the time of the withdrawal of the cargo services have not been kept up.

I am sure that the hon. Member is aware that my right hon. Friend has often dealt with that matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is yet in a position to make a statement on the future of Scottish colleges of education.

My right hon. Friend hopes to issue a consultative document on this matter very soon.

Is the Minister aware that that statement will be greeted with derision in Scottish colleges of education, where there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the Government's handling of teacher recruitment and morale is extremely low? Many people in the colleges do not know whether they will be employed in the next two years.

I am not aware of any derision from the colleges on this document. It is a very complex matter, which involves many factors and needs full discussion. I am aware of the need to publish the document as soon as possible, and I am hoping to bring it out in the next few weeks.

Will my hon. Friend assure us that there will be maximum consultation with teachers' unions, lecturers' unions and students' unions, because the very existence of some of the smaller colleges such as Callendar Park could be at stake? What is even more important is that we must make the most of the chance to use additional teachers to increase the educational opportunities of many schoolchildren in Scotland.

I give my hon. Friend the assurance that we shall consult not only those bodies that he mentioned but local authorities and all other bodies with an interest in this matter.

How can the Minister control public expenditure on education, or anything else, when the latest information on teachers employed in Scotland is for September 1975? What is the Watch on Manpower Committee—a body with a pompous title—doing about this? Teachers are paid on a monthly basis, so why is it not possible to find out how many of them are employed on a month-by-month basis?

I am considering the problem of bringing in more up-to-date information as soon as possible. In Edinburgh we published the figures for 1976 for pupils and teachers in Scottish schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many persons were murdered in Scotland in each of the last three years; and how many persons were murdered in Scotland in each of the three years prior to the abolition of capital punishment.

In 1973, 1974 and 1975 the recorded numbers of persons murdered were 39, 34 and 41, respectively. In 1962, 1963 and 1964 the numbers were 25, 15 and 27, respectively. All the figures have been corrected in the light of judicial determination.

Is there not a clear indication from these figures that capital punishment does have a deterrent effect and, therefore, should be considered seriously once more by the Government?

No, I do not agree. The statistics indicate that the incidence of murder in Scotland, like that of many other crimes, has increased over the last decade. It is not realistic to base any conclusion about the effectiveness or otherwise of capital punishment as a deterrent on the figures for one country over a short period of time. However, we are very concerned about the preservation of law and order and we are giving a great deal of attention to it.

Can the Minister tell us what proportion is represented by serious assaults which result in deaths?

No. If the hon. and learned Member wants such detailed information he should table a Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what measures he intends to take to offset the economic consequences for the Buckhaven and Methil community of the 1,000 impending redundancies at RDL (North Sea) Methil, and the closure of No. 3 Dock in Methil.

Buckhaven and Methil already have special development area status, and my officials will continue to encourage developers and industrialists who show interest in the area.

Is my hon. Friend aware that more than £20 million of capital has been invested in this site and that it would he a travesty of justice to see the platform site turned into a derelict area? Will he press the British Steel Corporation to do everything possible to retain the skilled labour force in employment in Buckhaven and Methil? We appreciate what the SDA is trying to do here, but will the Minister take steps to press it further with the British Steel Corporation?

We have made it very clear to hon. Members who have raised questions about platform orders that hardly any such orders have been placed in Europe in recent times. I hope that my hon. Friend will accept from me that the Minister of State, Department of Energy and I have been pursuing this as vigorously as possible. We have hopes for 1977 and 1978 in terms of future orders. I know that my hon. Friend will appreciate the statement that was made yesterday by the SDA in relation to advance factories and the purchase of land in the area. This should prove very helpful to employment prospects.

Could the Methil docks be used in connection with the proposed development at Moss Morran?

I shall consider that point.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make an up-to-date statement on the extent of unemployment in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what consultations he has had with industry in Scotland regarding the high level of unemployment.

In October, the latest figures available, total unemployment in Scotland fell by 3,400, compared to September, to 158,000.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the unemployment figures in Scotland are nearly double what they were under the previous Conservative Government? Will he now recognise that there is a case for reducing interest rates in order to encourage much more employment in Scotland?

I recognise that the unemployment figures are far too high, and it is part of the Government's policy that interest rates should be reduced as soon as the economy allows it.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Government have failed miserably to live up to their election promises of October 1974? Now that unemployment is running at exceptionally high levels, will he assure us that the Chancellor of the Exchequer understands that profits in industry are essential if industry is to expand and offer more employment?

The Government have taken a number of steps recently. In particular, the latest revision of the Price Code should have important implications for profitability, especially when followed by increased investment.

Does the Minister intend to introduce any further measures soon to deal with this situation, or does he think that the Government have done all they can?

We have taken a considerable number of measures. The various employment protection and job creation schemes which we have introduced have provided about 38,000 jobs already in Scotland, and this has provided some amelioration for the situation. We are always ready to consider such further measures as are necessary.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the unemployment situation in Scotland would have been even worse if we had had the emasculated version of the Scottish Development Agency such as that proposed by the hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. Crawford), supported by the Tories, instead of the public enterprise version of the SDA proposed by the Labour Government?

I agree with my hon. Friend. I noted that the Conservative Party recently suggested that the industrial role of that agency should be removed. The suggestion was greeted with considerable criticism not only from the STUC but from the CBI in Scotland.

How can the right hon. Gentleman maintain that he will do all he can to reduce the unemployment level when the Labour Government are introducing a payroll tax of 2 per cent. on national insurance contributions, which is sure to throw thousands more people out of work?

I have in mind the fact that the many billions in public expenditure cuts favoured by the Opposition would have a disastrous effect on employment. The subject of the National Insurance Surcharge has been considered in the House in recent weeks at some length.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next intends to hold meetings with representatives of the fishing industry.

My right hon. Friend and I have met the industry on a number of issues in recent months, and will continue to do so whenever the need arises.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when he next meets the fishing industry its representatives will tell him that they have no faith in any quota system that may be brought forward by the EEC, because quota schemes have always resulted in British fishermen getting a raw deal? Will he give a guarantee that any interim arrangements brought in by the EEC in the next four weeks will not become permanent arrangements?

The interim agreement is, as it implies, an interim arrangement. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman should wait to see whether we need an interim regime in the first place. As for any assurance, there will need to be a longer-term policy to give some degree of stability and hope to the industry as a whole.

When the Minister meets the fishermen, will he ask them whether they are in favour of any boats that are required being built in British shipyards?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman was in the Chamber when I replied in detail to a question on that topic. Certain Scottish shipyards will be considered if further orders are required to be placed for protection vessels.

Will the Minister meet the industry before the end of the year, and will he be able to spell out the new arrangements that will operate from 1st January?

If there is any need to meet the industry, I shall be available. I appreciate that there is not much time to undertake detailed discussions, but my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary made clear at a recent meeting of the Council of Ministers that we cannot expect to agree to interim arrangements that do not take our requirements into account or protect the interests of our fishermen. If some arrangement is proposed requiring consultation with the industry, that can be arranged.

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

My right hon. Friend has, at present, no plans to do so.

Does the Minister appreciate, especially in view of what is likely to happen in the near future, that the Government should be thinking in terms of seeking to protect the Scottish whisky industry, of which the Isle of Islay is an important part?

Matters concerning the taxation of whisky would be more properly directed at my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the drop in the percentage of children now being immunised against disease and illness as a protection for their future.

I am disappointed by the drop in vaccination and immunisation rates during the last two or three years. My Department recognises that immunisation is one of the main weapons in the fight against diphtheria, polio, measles and whooping cough, and in co-operation with the health boards has started a campaign to stimulate interest in the benefits of having children immunised.

In the light of that reply, will my hon. Friend give me the figures of those children who are not protected by means of immunisation?

Yes, Sir. Perhaps it is convenient to point out that the situation with which we are faced applies to 73,000 children born in Scotland in 1973. By the end of 1975, 20,000 had not been immunised against diphtheria, 21,000 had not been immunised against polio, 34,000 had not been immunised against measles, and 24,000 had not been immunised against whooping cough.

Does the Minister agree that there has been some bad publicity about the side effects of some injections when given to children?

Yes, Sir. I agree that there was some bad publicity about the side effects of various vaccines, but the advice I give to parents is that if they are in doubt they should seek the advice of their family doctor.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on his proposals to combat the substantial increase in serious crime in Scotland over the last 10 years.

I have nothing at present to add to the answer that I gave to the hon. and learned Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Mr. Fairbairn) on 10th November.

Does the Minister realise that Scotland now imprisons a far higher proportion of population than is the case anywhere else in Western Europe? Does this not inhibit the prison authorities in dealing with hardened criminals? What does he intend to do about the situation?

I appreciate the fact that we imprison a higher percentage of the male population than does any other country in Western Europe, but, on the other hand, we imprison the lowest percentage of female population. The Government are worried about the numbers in Scottish prisons. We are examining ways and means by which we can deal with the situation. When we have proposals to make, they will be made known.

Will the Minister say whether the campaign to combat vandalism has been successful?

It is too early to give an answer. The campaign started only five or six weeks ago, and we await the results with interest.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when funds will be available for the construction of the hospital and old folk's home in the island of Barra.

It is not possible to say at present when funds will become available, but a start has been made to the joint planning of the project by the Western Isles Health Board and the Western Isles Island Council.

I thank the Minister for that reply and express my appreciation to him for his knowledge and concern. Will he bear in mind the urgent need for this facility and the fears felt by the people of Barra that the scheme will be kept indefinitely in cold storage.

Yes, Sir. The hon. Gentleman has approached me on other occasions on this topic, and I shall keep the matter in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he proposes to review the operation and administration of the legal aid scheme in view of apparent anomalies; and if he will make a statement.

The legal aid, advice and assistance schemes are kept under review as a matter of course, but I am always willing to look into any anomalies which may be brought to my attention.

Is my hon. Friend aware that included in a number of letters on this subject which I have recently received I have one from a constituent who has take-home pay of £34 and who pays alimony and lodging expenses, yet was turned down for legal aid? Does that case not contrast with the case of the official in the regional council of Strathclyde who has an income of nearly £15,000 and owns his own home but who has been granted legal aid? Is it not time that this anomaly was overcome and that the whole system was democratised and handed over to the elected district councils, with full-time legal services to advise them, so that we might make progress?

I am not aware of the first case to which my hon. Friend referred. If he will send details to me, I shall examine the matter. On the second case to which he referred, my hon. Friend the Member for Bothwell (Mr. Hamilton) took up the matter with me as soon as it was made public. I have written to my hon. Friend explaining the reasons for the decision in that case.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will now seek powers to introduce a ceiling for rate increases.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the Government cuts in rate support grant will not be effective in public expenditure terms if the burden is merely transferred to the shoulders of ratepayers? Why does he think that there should be restraint on rent increases but no restraint on rate increases, which many ratepayers find it difficult to meet?

I do not think that there is any practical way of having a ceiling without introducing legislation on rate increases. The legislation would be complex and would involve a rate of unemployment far greater than anything experienced in the past.

Is the Minister aware that hundreds of ratepayers on Tayside are being taken to court because of £3 million rate arrears? Is he aware that all the indications are that rates will soon soar higher because of Government decisions? Is he aware that, without action of the type suggested by my hon. Friend in his Question, there might be a massive loss of jobs in Scotland because of rate increases?

The hon. Gentleman is dealing with a number of matters, all of which will be relevant to the debate next week.

asked the Lord Advocate what representations he has made to the Royal Commission on Legal Services in Scotland.

So far I have made no representations to the Royal Commission on Legal Services in Scotland. My Department has, however, received from the Royal Commission an invitation to submit evidence, and this is at present being considered.

Will the Lord Advocate encourage the Royal Commission to look at the whole question of jurisdiction, because if there is a case for divorce going to the sheriff's court there may be an overwhelming argument for other cases above a certain sum of money going to the Court of Session to give Scotland the best possible legal service?

The Royal Commission's main point of reference is to determine what changes, if any, are in the public interest. That is correctly the overriding concern.

What use is the Lord Advocate making of existing legal services in Scotland when dealing with the case concerning Sir Hugh Fraser which, according to the Under-Secretary of State for Trade last week, is being referred to the Lord Advocate? What is happening about that?

I have the matter under consideration, but I am not in a position to make any public statement.

asked the Lord Advocate if he is satisfied with current legal practice pertaining to intent to defraud.

No general problems relating to current legal practice in this area have been drawn to my attention.

Is the Lord Advocate satisfied with a legal system that allows consumers and garage owners no legal redress when wrong octane deliveries are made to garages? Is he satisfied with a system that leads to such confusion and in which there is no opening for prosecution by either the garage owner or the car owner?

I do not accept the hon. Lady's general proposition. I have already written to her about a particular case, and there was no evidence of intent to defraud or of any other offence. The details of the case were consistent with a genuine mistake having been made.

Is the Lord Advocate in a position yet to say whether there is any evidence of fraud or any other offence in the Stock Exchange inquiry report or the information forwarded to the Department of Trade about Sir Hugh Fraser's company, Scottish and Universal Investments? Will he bear in mind the public concern about this unacceptable face of Scottish capitalism and its connection with the unacceptable face of Scottish nationalism?

I appreciate that there is public concern, but I cannot add to the comments that I have already made.

Leaving aside the unacceptable face of Scottish Socialism in West Stirlingshire, does the Lord Advocate consider that the pledge in the Conservative manifesto for an elected Assembly in Scotland could come within the definition of intent to defraud?

I have no comment to make.

asked the Lord Advocate what is the average time taken in : (a) the stipendiary courts in Glasgow district, (b) the sheriff courts in Lanarkshire, and (c) the High Court in Glasgow to bring a prisoner to trial after he has been charged.

The average time taken in all of these courts depends on whether the person is in custody. In the stipendiary courts in Glasgow the average time taken in custody cases is 21 days and in non-custody cases 19 weeks. In the sheriff courts in Lanarkshire there is another variable, namely, whether the proceedings are solemn or summary. In solemn proceedings the average time taken in custody cases is 88 days and in non-custody cases 28 weeks. The time taken in summary cases is 20 days and 22 weeks respectively. In the High Court in Glasgow the average time taken in custody cases is 88 days while in non-custody cases it is 20 weeks.

Is the Lord Advocate aware that, as the course of justice pursues its leisurely way, considerable strain is placed upon those people involved in such trials? Will he take action to speed up the course of justice?

I do not accept the hon. Member's implied criticism. The times taken in the stipendiary courts and sheriff courts are closely comparable, and both are within the Thomson Committee recommendation that non-custody summary cases should be dealt with within 26 weeks and custody cases within 40 days.

If it is correct that the average time taken in the High Court is 88 days, why is it that the Department has been unable to prosecute for 110 days, and thus miscarry justice?

The hon. and learned Gentleman should be aware that the period he has quoted is well within the 110 days. He should be more careful about uttering his extravagant, headline-catching criticisms of the Crown. On at least two occasions recently the hon. and learned Gentleman has made allegations about the competency of the Crown Office, and he has called for my resignation. On the last occasion, he took me to task for the Crown's interpretation of the 110-day rule. That matter was due to be considered by the judiciary the following Friday. As the House may know, and the hon. and learned Gentleman should know, the High Court of Justiciary upheld the Crown's interpretation of that rule. The hon. and learned Gentleman might at least have the generosity to make an occasional public confession of his error.

asked the Lord Advocate what new instructions he has issued to procurators fiscal regarding prosecutions of football hooligans.

On 18th November 1976 I directed that all persons reported to procurators fiscal following arrest on charges relating to football hooliganism should be brought before the sheriff court if the evidence was sufficient to merit prosecution.

I accept the Lord Advocate's reply, but does he accept that only severe penalties will bring to order those hooligans who disrupt football matches? Does he not agree with the Secretary of State about the collection of fines and further custodial sentences?

The latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question is part of a long-term project, which is already under way. I am happy to accept his first point.

asked the Lord Advocate what steps he now proposes to take to exonerate the name of James Griffiths and to bring a prosecution for the fabrication of the evidence which resulted in the wrongful conviction of Patrick Connelly Meehan.

James Griffiths was shot dead shortly after the murder of Mrs. Ross in Ayr in July 1969. Accordingly he was not brought to trial, nor was he convicted of any criminal charge in connection with that case. There is no conviction against him which would require to be set aside to exonerate his name.

In connection with the Lord Advocate's previous reply, is he aware that I am more than happy to apologise when I am wrong, provided that he is willing to resign when he is wrong, which he is?

A sense of fairness is not indicated by an apology being equated to resignation. It is not disputed that James Griffiths was in Meehan's company that night. In so far as Meehan's conviction implicated James Griffiths, the pardon granted to Meehan could be held to absolve James Griffiths. It would have been easier to determine these matters if Griffiths had not chosen to shoot it out with the police, killing an innocent bystander in the process.

asked the Lord Advocate how many Crown prosecutions he has personally undertaken in the High Court, Edinburgh, during the six months to the end of November 1976.

I have undertaken one such prosecution during that period.

Is the Lord Advocate prepared to give more information about the promise by his right hon. Friend to set up a committee of inquiry into the last case that the Lord Advocate prosecuted.

No, Sir.

Does the Lord Advocate recall that in his memorable charge to the jury, Lord Robertson criticised not merely the Secretary of State for Scotland but also the behaviour of the Crown Office? We have had a statement in reply from the Lord Advocate's right hon. Friend; when may we expect a statement from him?

I am not in a position to answer that question.