asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a further statement about the progress which has been made on the conversion of the Royal High School in Edinburgh for the proposed Scottish Assembly; what is the total expenditure incurred so far; and what further expenditure will be incurred before the work is completed.

Work is proceeding to bring the buildings to the state described in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy (Mr. Gourlay) on 7th April. The expenditure incurred to mid-October, including cost of purchase, was £17;31 million. The outstanding expenditure on these works is £690,000.

Do not these figures show a substantial escalation in the cost of this building? What plans do the Government have for dealing with this ghastly exercise in nonsense if we do not have a Scottish Assembly?

The figures do not show a substantial escalation in the cost. If, in the event, the Royal High School is not required for the Assembly, this will be a matter for the Property Services Agency to consider at that time. The Government are committed to devolution, and we are confident of getting the necessary Bills on to the statute book.

Is it not true that the fact that the Bill might just squeak through the House does not necessarily mean that the Assembly will be set up? Would it not suit the Government if the Bill were stymied in another place or by a General Election? Or is it the intention of the Government to keep going until the Assembly is duly established?

The hon. Member is looking for ghosts which clearly do not exist. We are confident that the House will approve the Bill. The people of Scotland —because we are committed to a referendum—will themselves decide whether there will be a Scottish Assembly.

What precedent is there for expenditure of this kind on what is, after all, merely Government expectation?

The expenditure was approved by the House by the passing of the Appropriation Act following an announcement by the Lord President on 14th April 1976. The approval of the House of Commons is as good a precedent as any for a constitutional and democratic country.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next intends to visit the building formerly occupied by the Royal High School.

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

If the Secretary of State changes his plans, might it not be an idea for him to take along the Tory spokesman on devolution? In view of the remarks made by that hon. Gentleman about the Scottish scene during the summer, he could do with visiting any school in Scotland. Might that not also help the Conservatives to make up their minds about their policy on devolution?

I do not know to which Conservative spokesman the hon. Gentleman was referring. If he meant the hon. Member for Edinburgh, North (Mr. Fletcher), I must say that I was extremely interested in the pronouncement made by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, North in North-East Scotland when he pleaded that no one could accuse him or the Conservative Party of being constructive about devolution.

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

I am meeting the STUC, together with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, on 28th October.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the STUC and the workers at the Scottish Timber Products factory at Cowie that the Government are still prepared to do everything possible to save the factory? Could we have a decision as soon as possible on this matter in view of the anxiety felt by workers and their families?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance in the terms for which he asks. A number of firms have shown an active interest in taking over that establishment, and we hope for a solution to the problem reasonably soon. Of course one can never be absolutely certain, but a lot of interest has been shown and we are working hard to find a solution.

Will the Secretary of State report on the endeavours of the STUC to seek a solution to the problem at Chrysler's? In view of the severe damage that has been done to the cause of attracting industry to the West of Scotland, will he strive to solve this dispute over what appears to be a trivial matter? Will he give an indication that the full resources of the Government are being made available to find a solution to this damaging dispute?

I am taking a close interest in what is happening there. Certain discussions were held yesterday and today, and it would not help the House or the situation for me to go into the matter in any detail. I very much hope that some solution will be found to enable work to be continued at Linwood.

When the Secretary of State last met the STUC, did he discuss the future of the Scottish steel industry and especially the danger of the BSC's policy to the steelworks at Glengarnock in my constituency? Will he tell me what action he has taken on the future of the Glengarnock steelworks following representations from the STUC?

The Minister of State has met the STUC in the last fortnight, and he discussed the steel industry generally in Scotland. It is known that there are very serious problems affecting the steel industry, not just in Scotland but in the United Kingdom generally, and the Government are actively discussing a number of these matters with the Corporation.

Is the Minister aware that the House welcomes his interest in the difficult problems facing Chrysler, if only because he has special responsibilities since Chrysler is the only company which has concluded a planning agreement with the Government? Does that factor change the Government's status in regard to this company as opposed to the situation in other industrial disputes?

In all industrial disputes, Ministers take the view that the best solution is one arrived at between the trade unions and the industry concerned without ministerial intervention. At the same time, in a case such as this Ministers are interested in doing anything that can be done to help. The Government will do whatever they think is possible. One should not, even in this difficult situation, be tempted to make hasty interventions, because at the end of the day what happens at Linwood will have to be determined by management and men there. When the dispute is settled, they will have to settle down to work amicably together. That is what I hope will happen.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that those of us who are involved in the Chrysler situation are pleased at the close attention he is giving to the matter, but will he study carefully the proposals put forward in the discussions by the STUC which seemed to some of us to create the groundwork for a successful return to work?

My hon. Friend knows the close involvement of Mr. Milne, General Secretary of the STUC, in this matter in the last few days, and we have had informal contacts with him as well. We are well apprised of the present situation, and I very much hope that the number of initiatives now taking place will bring the desired result.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make an up-to-date statement on the Government's policy to encourage centres of excellence in Scotland; and what colleges of education he and the Scottish Office Ministers have visited during the Summer Adjournment.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member on 25th July. Neither my right hon. Friend nor the Under-Secretary of State has visited any colleges of education during the Summer Adjournment.

Is the Minister aware that 84 qualified applicants had to be turned away by Dunfermline College of Physical Education because it was over-subscribed for the year? Are we right in assuming that 15th December will be the day when the Government make their final decision on teacher training colleges in Scotland?

The hon. Gentleman, who has gone over this ground, as others have done, on previous occasions in the last few months, is well aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has said that he will be making a statement on this matter in the next few months.

Will the Minister give attention to the phrase "centres of excellence" in the Question and devote his mind to courses which are technical in character, since such courses are required for providing better craftsmen in Scotland?

I appreciate the point made by my hon. Friend. There is a great need for additional skills in Scottish industry, and this point has been made by my right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Does the Minister appreciate that his present policies are scaring young people away from a career in education? What figures can he give showing the number of teachers now in training? What effect is to be expected in Scottish education in three or four years' time? Has not the Minister achieved the worst of both worlds from the point of view of young unemployed teachers, and is he not creating an acute teacher training shortage for two or three years hence?

The hon. Gentleman must have heard, as I did, the arguments on this subject in the Scottish Grand Committee and the projections that were made based on population figures. It is not true to say that young people are being scared away from the prospect of becoming teachers. Indeed, there are a number of young people who have a strong vocation in this respect.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great disappointment that no Minister has visited Aberdeen College of Education recently, and is he also aware that there have been five times as many applicants for places as were allowed for in the college? Is he further aware that this college feels that it has been given less than its due share, and that the population in the North of Scotland is increasing while the number of places allowed for in the college is reducing? Will he take an early opportunity to visit Aberdeen and discuss these difficult problems in detail?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State have received deputations from staff and students in the past few months. Indeed, I cannot think of a subject on which we have had more representations and more advice than on this one. In reply to the specific point made by my hon. Friend, I believe that the college has been given a fair allocation of places.

Why is the Secretary of State for Scotland dragging his feet on the request made in July by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) and myself for a meeting at which to discuss colleges of education? Is he aware that there has been almost 12 months' delay and dither in trying to resolve this matter and that this is causing great uncertainty and is sapping the morale of students and staff in the colleges of education?

I do not believe there has been any dithering at all. We have had the utmost consultation on an issue as important as this one.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish a Green Paper on education in Scotland.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. White) on 21st July. The reports of the Munn, Dunning and Pack Committees have now been published and my right hon. Friend has invited comments on their recommendations. I have no doubt that there will be a wide-ranging public discussion on the important questions considered by these Committees.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that those rather academic reports are no substitute for Government views and policy? Does he not have any proposals to relax the rigidities of the school zoning system and the catchment areas to bring in some flexibility and to give parents freedom of choice for their children's education?

I do not think that the reports are of only academic interest. The people who prepared them are closely involved with Scottish education. The chairman of one of the committees was the headmaster of my children's school, and I know, therefore, that he is closely involved in day-to-day education.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the consultation processes are overloaded with the Pack Committee on truancy, the Munn Committee on the curriculum and the Dunning Committee on assessment? These are hardly minor academic subjects. But the most urgent problem for education is the setting up of the salaries negotiating machinery which was recommended in 1974 by my noble Friend Lord Houghton in his report. Will my right hon Friend make a statement on the current situation concerning these matters?

As my hon. Friend may recall, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary indicated in an Adjournment debate on 4th May this year that it was a matter of great regret that parliamentary pressures had prevented us from bringing forward the necessary legislation to deal with the last point of his question. I cannot say yet when the opportunity will arise to do so, but we regard this subject as a matter of considerable importance and urgency.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, North (Mr. Fletcher) indicates why the newspaper reports have called the Conservative education committee in Scotland "nuts and bolts"? On a more fundamental matter, will the Minister indicate that he will reconsider yet again the previous decision not to renegotiate the number of pupils per class? This is a matter of vital importance to our schools, particularly in these days of composite classes.

On the first point, I do not always think only of the Conservative Party as nuts. There are a few other candidates on the Opposition side of the House for that title. The latter point has been borne in mind by my right hon. Friend in the negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next plans to meet representatives of the fishing industry.

I met representatives of the fishing industry on Tuesday 18th October to discuss their views on the common fisheries policy. I also had several discussions with representatives of the industry yesterday in Luxembourg during the meeting of the Council of Ministers.

When the Secretary of State met the fishermen yesterday, did he say that there was no way in which the present EEC proposals were acceptable? Does he agree that it is totally unfair to expect the United Kingdom to contribute 60 per cent. to the EEC's pond and to get out of it only 21 per cent., as the rest of the EEC proposes? What contingency plans or proposals do the Government have for taking legal unilateral action in regard to conservation within the 50-mile limit?

This is a Sproat to catch a mackerel.

On the first point, I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that the industry is well aware of our view that the present Commission proposals are highly unsatisfactory. We have not only made that clear to the industry but we have also made it clear to the Council of Ministers and the Commission. In regard to unilateral national conservation measures, I believe that we have taken such measures where needs have demanded them, and the Commission understands that we shall continue to take national conservation measures wherever we consider them to be necessary in the absence of effective action in the Community.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food had a stormy passage in his meeting with fellow EEC Ministers last Monday and that he was so thwarted that at one stage he spoke of the United Kingdom going it alone? Will my right hon. Friend convey to him that in that event he will have the full support of every party in the House?

Yes, I shall convey that view to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Those who have seen the details of what my right hon. Friend said on Monday when discussing the internal régime will be able to confirm that it was a robust defence of United Kingdom interests.

Is the Minister aware of what has been taking place on the West Coast throughout the summer? Does he appreciate that Danish and Faroese boats have been catching herring before they get within the 12-mile limit, with the result that there has been a disastrous herring season on the West Coast? Will the Government take conservation action by banning all industrial fishing within 50 miles until the EEC sorts out its policy?

I have already dealt with conservation measures. On the subject of West Coast herring, we have had a Community decision on allocations which has been extremely favourable to the United Kingdom since rather more than 70 per cent. of the allocation will come to us, and that means to Scottish fishermen.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the lack of progress towards the adoption of a sensible fishing régime is causing tremendous con- cern, but will he appreciate that we in no way hold him responsible for any lack of progress? Since information on proposals and counter-proposals by the Commission so often comes to us secondhand, and sometimes in a garbled fashion, will he publish in full the detailed Government proposals and various responses from the Commission so that what the Government are frying to do can be widely understood?

On the first point, the industry has told me quite firmly that we should not be tempted, because of frustration at the delays caused, into agreeing an internal régime that is not satisfactory to United Kingdom interests. That is my view too. I want to reach a settlement on this matter as soon as we can do so because I want to end the uncertainty in the United Kingdom industry. But I am not willing to agree to a settlement simply for the sake of speed unless that settlement meets our essential interests. We have made this clear to the Community, and the industry supports us.

Does the Secretary of State accept that he has the full support of the Opposition in the robust stand he took in the recent negotiations? Can he say what further plans he has for limitations on industrial fishing and when the next meeting will take place?

Certain aspects of the matters we discussed yesterday will come up in a fortnight's time at the meeting of Agriculture Ministers. The next full meeting to discuss fishery matters will be on 5th and 6th December. Industrial fishing is not a matter that can be dealt with in isolation. There are other problems relating to conservation. We have made absolutely clear, however, that where there is a conflict, as there very often is, between industrial fishing and fishing for human consumption, fishing for human consumption must have priority. I think that that is well understood within the Community and is becoming increasingly accepted.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the effectiveness of measures to reduce unemployment in Scotland.

About 52,000 persons are currently benefiting from the various employment protection and creation measures introduced by the Government in Scotland. For the longer term, our policies to reduce inflation and to create a favourable climate for increased investment and industrial expansion are the key to the reduction of unemployment, which, despite the decrease announced yesterday, is still far too high.

Does the Secretary of State recall that he answered a Question from me on this very subject almost exactly a year ago, when he said that he was satisfied that the Government's policies would strengthen employment prospects in Scotland? Is he aware that since then unemployment has risen by 25,000? Are we going to wait another year and then find that unemployment has risen by another 25,000?

I believed then and I believe now that the policies of the Government are the right ones to produce a long-term reduction in unemployment, which we all want to see.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the most immediate and effective method of making some impact on unemployment in Scotland is to build more houses to provide employment for people in the construction industry who have been unemployed for such a long time?

There has been a falling off in the number of housing applications coming from local authorities, partly because in a number of areas local authorities feel that the general demand for houses is a good deal less than it was two or three years ago. This is another area in which reductions in population and in the birth rate eventually work their way through into demand for housing. There has been a good deal of increase also in matters such as local authority rehabilitation. I agree that there are particularly serious problems facing the construction industry, and I am meeting representatives from the industry, employers and trade unions, at a joint meeting on Friday this week.

Is the Secretary of State aware that if every small business in Scotland took on one more employee the unemployment problem would be largely solved? In view of that, will he now take action to remove from the backs of small businesses some of the extra cost impositions that his Government have placed on them?

I agree that small firms are very important in this area of unemployment, which is why this Government introduced the small firms subsidy.

Does my tight hon. Friend agree that the Opposition do not seem to accept the community industry scheme, the job creation scheme, the "swap a job" scheme and the youth scheme that the Government have instituted? These schemes have had a tremendous effect in Scotland, to the extent that the unemployment figures are down. Will my right hon. Friend continue those schemes and initiate further schemes, with extra money to help to reduce unemployment in Scotland?

We are always willing to look at ideas for improving these job creation and employment protection schemes. They have had a considerable impact so far, but, of course. I would not exclude further development if we felt that this was necessary and if there were effective ways of creating jobs. I believe that it would be a great mistake to undervalue the tremendous impact that these schemes have already had.

Has the Scottish Office made any estimate of the implications of emigration and the return to school on unemployment and youth unemployment respectively? If the Chancellor of the Exchequer this afternoon does not come up with a guarantee that Scottish oil revenues will be apportioned to the Scottish Development Agency for job creation, will the Secretary of State give a guarantee that he will resign?

There might be circumstances in which I would give a guarantee on that, but as far as I am aware they have not arisen so far. On the first part of the question, the latest figures we have on migration in Scotland have been very favourable. At least in this particular economic crisis we have not been suffering the very high rates of migration that we suffered in earlier economic crises.

If the Chancellor of the Exchequer makes additional funds available to local authorities for their building programmes to help employment in the construction industry, will my right hon. Friend continue to see that extra priority goes to areas of need, in particular to the Strathclyde Region?

In what we have been doing in recent years in local authority programmes and in other ways, we have had special regard to the particular needs of urban areas, particularly the deprived areas. The most spectacular example of that has been the Glasgow East End project, but it is deliberate Government policy in urban aid and in other ways to direct resources to areas with the most need, which certainly includes many areas in west-central Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now publish a White Paper on the Scottish economy.

I have no plans to do so.

Does not the Secretary of State feel that such a paper is required, since Scotland's unemployment position in the United Kingdom has been getting worse whereas up to the end of 1975 it was improving? Is he not concerned that in spite of what he said about unemployment figures, the figure for Scotland, seasonally adjusted, has shown an increase, against the national trend? Is he aware of the publication today by the Fraser of Allender Institute indicating that unemployment in Scotland will rise to over 200,000 in the new year? Is he not greatly concerned about Scotland's worsening relative position?

I do not accept that there is a worsening of the relative position. The position on relative unemployment has been fairly constant in the current year and is immeasurably better than it was when we took over in February 1974. If we were showing the kind of figures that the hon. Gentleman's Government showed, we would certainly have well passed the 200,000 figure that he mentioned in his question.

Does the Secretary of State accept that an effective and quick way of assisting the Scottish economy would be to abolish the levy on the self-employed imposed by the Tory Government in 1973? Does he have any plans to do so?

I do not think I can comment on that.

Remembering the famous National Plan for Scotland, may I ask whether the Secretary of State is saying that we will never see its like again?

No, I would not necessarily say that. Who can tell?

Does not the Secretary of State accept that Scotland's relative position has in fact worsened in comparison with the position under the last Government? Will he remind the House of what unemployment was when he took over as Secretary of State?

The unemployment relative is 132 now. In the fourth quarter of 1973, when the hon. Gentleman's Government were in power, it was 166.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the current level of industrial investment in Scotland in the light of current levels of interest rates.

Interest rates have reduced dramatically during the last year from 15 per cent. to 5 per cent. and this will give an important boost to investment in Scotland. There are now signs that Government policies to promote a recovery in investment are succeeding, and the latest surveys suggest that there will be an increase in Scottish investment over the remainder of this year and in 1978.

Will the Minister give us a categorical assurance in respect of the Scottish steel industry—one of the most important industries in Scotland—that the capital investment programme proposed in the Beswick Report will be carried out on schedule? If he cannot give that assurance, will he give some hope to steelworkers in Lanarkshire and Ayrshire by resigning?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was invited to resign a few moments ago. I can only give the same reply as he gave, which is that the more the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends ask my right hon. Friend and myself to resign, the happier and more secure we feel in our jobs. My right hon. Friend dealt with the question of the steel industry a few moments ago. We are concerned about the position in Lanarkshire, as in all parts of the country, and we are discussing it with the BSC.

Investment in the steel industry has gone ahead and is going according to plan. Is my right hon. Friend aware that all new investment in Ravenscraig is working to design outputs? Is he further aware that to achieve the full advantage of the investment which has been made further investment will be needed, and that the proposals for that are coming forward? May I ask him and his right hon. Friend to give them sympathetic attention?

The question of investment is one for the BSC in conjunction with my right hon. Friend in the Department of Industry. We for our part will indicate to those concerned with this decision-making process our attitude to and interest in Scotland's steel.

Many badly-needed jobs could be obtained if the Scottish Development Agency were able to invest in the service industry side. Is the Minister aware that it is unable to do that at the moment under the terms of the legislation? Is he further aware that the SDA is charging fairly high rates of interest, in some cases up to 14½ per cent.? Since the Bank Rate has declined, should not the SDA rates of interest also come down?

The present mood of confidence is, I believe, very encouraging. In recent months there have been announcements of substantial investment from concerns such as Nairn Floors, Ferranti and Cummins Engines, and this is all of considerable importance. The SDA has made dramatic and large investments in some companies, and these have been of considerable importance to small companies based in the North of Scotland.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that we have seen a remarkable ideological conversion this afternoon on the part of the SNP? Did he note that two supplementary questions from SNP Members have looked to the Government—in one case through the British Steel Corporation and in the other through the SDA—as the instrument to solve Scotland's economic difficulties? Will my right hon. Friend ask the SNP whether it does not therefore feel ashamed at having opposed nationalisation and opposed the setting up of the SDA?

I do not go as far as my hon. Friend in suggesting that there has been a remarkable conversion today. What we have heard today has been said by only a couple of SNP Members. What we shall hear next week from someone else in that party will be a different story altogether. It is clear that the SNP Members do not speak with one voice at all times.

In his travels around Scotland, has the right hon. Gentleman found any industrialist or trade union leader who takes the view that industrial investment in Scotland would improve if the SNP policy of separatism were implemented? Does he not think that fears of separatism might have contributed over the last 18 months to a worsening in Scotland's relative employment position from a level of 119 to the current 132, according to the Government's own figures, in spite of what the Secretary of State said a few moments ago?

The hon. Gentleman cannot get away from the facts which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State gave him a few minutes ago. These are that unemployment relatively now and current wage levels in Scotland are a great deal better than when he and his colleagues were in office a few years ago. Perhaps I may answer the hon. Gentleman's first point. I have met the CBI, the STUC, the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) and, with my right hon. Friend, probably more industrialists in Scotland than anyone else, and I cannot find anyone who thinks that separatism would be to the advantage of Scottish owners of industry or Scottish workers in it. When my right hon. Friend and I visited America recently, we found that potential inward investors surveyed the prospect of separatism with a great deal of gloom.

Order. Perhaps now that we have finished with that Question we can have shorter questions and answers.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received concerning the Green Paper "Scottish Housing, a Consultative Document", Command Paper No. 6852; and if he will make a statement.

So far, 22 organisations and two individuals have submitted comments on the Green Paper on Scottish housing (Cmnd. 6852), and several other organisations which were unable to meet the target date of 1st October are expected to comment within the next few weeks. In addition, I have had discussions with representatives of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and of the Scottish Trades Union Congress; and I shall shortly be taking part in a number of housing conferences at which the Green Paper will be discussed.

In case the preservation of desirable tenement houses in multi-ownership may not have been included in submissions, will my hon. Friend take positive steps to ensure that such houses as are in the Dennistoun part of my constituency and are adjacent to city centres are not allowed to deteriorate and decay?

Yes. This is one of the fundamental aspects of the Green Paper, and it is certainly one to which we attach importance in Dennistoun. Dennistoun is in two parts, although I had better not describe them in more detail. However, there are four housing action areas in the southern part. The streets that my hon. Friend and I know so well should be a matter for local initiative for rehabilitation and environmental improvement. I am satisfied that the money and resources are there. All we need is the effort.

Do the Government still have a target date for all houses in Scotland reaching a tolerable standard? If I am right in suspecting that the programme of house improvement has slowed down, will the Government give it a stimulus during the current year, both for its own sake and to reduce unemployment in the construction industry?

I entirely agree. It is a matter for concern that there are still too many sub-tolerable houses in Scotland. The main problems are in the two major cities, but the authorities in Edinburgh and Glasgow are making substantial and considerable efforts. Sad to say, it is the country authorities that are lagging behind because of peculiar difficulties. I have had discussions with them, and we may be able to improve matters in any legislation that might be forthcoming from the Green Paper.

Is the Minister aware that, because of the division of responsibilities between regional and district authorities, there have been obstructions and delays involving two essential projects? Is he further aware that Strathclyde Regional Council and Clydebank District Council may be in conflict over the provision of new housing stock? Will he inquire into this?

I am concerned about any delays arising out of difficulties between regional and district authorities, but I am not aware of any specific problem affecting Clydebank. Strathclyde Regional Council has been most helpful with its regional plan, but if there is any particular problems I shall be delighted to look into them.

Which political parties—in addition to the Scottish National Party—have made official representations about the Green Paper? What timetable exists for turning the Green Paper into a White Paper so that action may be taken?

The Scottish National Party has submitted representations, but they are not very inspiring. However, I am not surprised about that. There have been representations from various bodies, including the Saltcoats Labour Party, various housing associations and local authorities. All the representations will be considered and we have extended the deadline to the end of next month. I repeat that the Scottish National Party did not strike me as having submitted anything imaginative.

As a number of district housing authorities have submitted their own housing plans to the Minister, will the Government stop shilly-shallying and give permission for the sale of council houses to tenants who wish to buy?

I watched the Tory Party Conference on television and noted the commitment given by the Tory Party about the sale of council houses. However, I am surprised that the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Younger) has raised this matter. He knows better than anyone else on his side that the sale of council houses is not a priority in solving Scotland's housing problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proposals he has to increase the provision of geriatric beds in Scotland.

The programme of major hospital building projects announced by my right hon. Friend on 2nd May 1977 will provide for approximately 450 additional geriatric beds in Scotland. The major programme also makes provision for some 1,000 geriatric beds to replace existing facilities. Health boards finance from their own capital resources smaller schemes which will also provide new and replacement beds.

Since financial circumstances are stretched, would it not be a good thing for the Secretary of State to encourage local authorities to expand home help services as a means of alleviating pressure on homes and geriatric provision, given that the Strathclyde survey last year showed that one could provide six home helps for two hours a day, seven days a week, for the cost of one geriatric bed?

In Scotland the pattern has traditionally been that we care for our old people in hospitals. That is why we have 15 hospital beds per thousand of the population in Scotland compared with 10 per thousand in England and Wales. This is a matter of balance between community back-up facilities and hospital facilities. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are constantly considering the matter.

Will the Minister ask for a report on the situation at Mearnskirk Hospital, where good temporary accommodation is about to be affected? Is the Minister aware that if that accommodation were left standing it could, since staff are available, be immediately translated into geriatric accommodation?

In Scotland there are 147·7 hospital beds per thousand population. We are extremely near the target level, and in some areas, once the new capital building programme has been completed, we shall be in excess of that target. However, I take note of the right hon. Lady's proposition and I shall look at it, but I cannot hold out any great hopes or firm commitment.

If the Minister accepts the proposals to increase the provision of geriatric beds in Scotland, will he give priority to the ailing members and policies of the Liberal Party?

I take note of that.

How much do the Government plan to spend on day care facilities for geriatric patients?

We have asked area health boards—and we are getting a good response from them—to switch resources from the acute side of medicine, without necessarily running it down, and to give greater priority to long-stay geriatric and psycho-geriatric patients and mental deficiency hospitals. Those are top priority, and we have asked area health boards to take account of that policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what surveys he has carried out to assess the effects of withdrawal of regional employment premium on employment in Scotland.

It is not practicable to isolate precisely the effects of the withdrawal of REP, but the Government are confident that the employment-creating measures now in operation will have a greater effect in relieving the present high level of unemployment. Obviously, we keep the general employment situation in Scotland constantly under review.

Is the Minister aware that the Government must have been playing blind man's bluff with the Scottish economy? Does he realise that the figures have been isolated by the Scottish CBI, which estimates a loss of 10,000 jobs, and that the Cambridge Institute of Applied Economics estimates a loss of about 14,000 jobs? Considering that the figures are fairly close, was it not disastrous that the regional employment premium was removed? Will the Minister ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to restore it forthwith?

We have all seen many estimates about this, but many of them are "guesstimates". We took the decision that we should employ this money in better ways on the temporary employment subsidy, the job creation programme and the sectoral schemes for industry. Scotland in now benefiting considerably from that.

Does the Minister know to what extent the temporary employment subsidy has been used by firms to offset the loss of regional employment premium? As for the number of unemployed young people, now that the Scottish Office has taken over special responsibilities for the Manpower Services Commission will the Government have urgent talks with those involved with apprenticeship schemes with a view to trying to prevent the decline in apprenticeship opportunities in the Clyde-side area?

We have taken over responsibility for the Manpower Services Commission in Scotland. I met the Careers Advisory Council on Monday and the matter was discussed then. The temporary employment subsidy is a matter for the Secretary of State for Employ- ment, but there certainly have been cases in Scotland, when appropriate, in which this has been taken up.

Have the Government learnt the lesson that the most objectionable thing about the withdrawal of REP was the lack of notice given to industry? Have they learnt that no business can run in that way, and will they see that it does not happen again?

The hon. Gentleman has a terrible nerve to ask questions about REP from his side of the House. If the Conservatives had had their way, there would have been no REP at all.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will bring forward proposals to change the law to enable sentences of community service to be imposed by Scottish courts.

As I said in my reply to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pent-lands (Mr. Rifkind) on 27th April 1977, an experiment in community service as a condition of a probation order is going ahead in four regions of Scotland without the need for legislative changes. I am now looking at the possibility of introducing community service in Scotland as a disposal in its own right.

I welcome that answer. I am aware of the experiment, but does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is unfortunate that in Scotland, unlike in England, there is no statutory power for the courts to make community service part of the punishment in a sentence?

I agree. We are doing what we can without legislative changes, but I look forward to the opportunity of putting the law on this matter beyond any possible doubt.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further consultations he has had with industrial bodies in Scotland regarding the Government's new plans for Scottish devolution.

Industrial interests in Scotland have been fully consulted in the course of preparation of the Government's devolution proposals. No requests for further consultation have been received recently.

Did any Government Minister consult the Scottish CBI during the Summer Recess for its views on Scottish devolution? If my understanding that no Government Minister did so is correct, are the Government so blinded and prejudiced by preconceived ideas that they are not ready to seek the advice of any Scottish experts who are opposed to their views?

The hon. Gentleman has been totally misinformed. I met the Scottish CBI not many weeks ago. I am conscious that some of its members do not go all the way with us on devolution, but there are many industrialists in Scotland, including the members of the Scottish Council (Development and Industry), who are fully seized of the opportunities that devolution will bring.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that it is not so important to discuss devolution proposals with Scottish industrialists, who in the main have been found lacking as regards investing in Scottish industry, but that it is very important to discuss the problems of devolution with the Scottish people?

We have been doing exactly that. We have talked to the Scottish Trades Union Congress and many other people in Scotland. As has been indicated by Ministers who are concerned with this problem, we shall present the matter to the Scottish people.

May I suggest that the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton) should consult the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) and ask him whether he consulted industrialists in Scotland before he wrote his October 1974 election address, in which he said that he wished for a Scottish Assembly with economic powers?

I do not know whose responsibility it is, but it is not mine.

asked the Lord Advocate when he next expects to make an official visit to a Scottish court.

During the Summer Recess I visited the sheriff courts at Glasgow, Linlithgow, Perth and Elgin. I have plans for further official visits in the near future.

Before his next court visit, will my right hon. and learned Friend consider amending the existing court procedure which allows a Crown Counsel and a policeman to make unfounded allegations about an innocent witness without giving him the opportunity of defending himself or clearing his name? Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that this anomaly in Scots law has caused considerable distress to my constituent Mr. Edward Topalian?

My hon. Friend has made some criticisms of present procedures which have to be taken in the context that it would be quite wrong to allow any artificial doctrines to interfere with the overriding public interest in criminal trials being fairly and properly conducted. If my hon. Friend has in mind the matter about which he wrote to me, I must tell him that this is now the subject of an appeal which has been lodged and is accordingly sub judice. I do not think that I should comment on it.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman visit the Dundee Sheriff Court and particularly the office of the Deputy Crown Agent, who has been there for several months, and indicate what action is likely to be taken on the intensive investigations carried out in Dundee under the supervision of the Deputy Crown Agent?

The Deputy Crown Agent is no longer in Dundee, and the report on the matter to which the hon. Gentleman refers is being considered by Crown Counsel. As the report runs to 18 volumes, its assessment will take some time.

asked the Lord Advocate what progress he has made in easing the congestion in the courts in Glasgow.

On 18th August 1977 I made an official visit to Glasgow and talked with many of those concerned with the administration of the courts there. As a result of this, certain matters are currently being looked at. The staff of the Procurator-Fiscal at Glasgow is now at the full complement presently permitted.

Does the Lord Advocate agree, following his visit, that conditions in the Glasgow Sheriff Court are deplorable and that the staff and the buildings are unable to cope with the increase in crime that has taken place? Can he say whether the conditions in which the staff have to work are consistent with the Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act? Is he not greatly concerned about the six-month delay in dealing with summary cases? Is he satisfied that the conditions for witnesses, both for the defence and for the prosecution, who have to sit together in appalling conditions are conducive to justice?

I should require notice of the hon. Gentleman's first question, though I do not think that it would be proper for him to put it to me. In regard to the general question of accommodation, I agree that this is a most important matter. As regards delays in the administration of justice in the Glasgow Sheriff Court and the district courts, although these are not subject to the same delays, the problem is caused by the shortage of courtroom accommodation. This is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, and he is planning early additions to the accommodation.

Would it not help to ease congestion in the courts in Glasgow if there were less criminality in Cathcart?

If there were a lower rate of crime in the whole of Scotland, it would be to the public advantage.

Is the Lord Advocate aware of the considerable dissatisfaction of many procurators-fiscal in Glasgow with the overload of work that they are given and the inadequate accommodation in the sheriff court? Will he look at this matter in depth and sympathetically?

Yes.

asked the Lord Advocate what consultation he has had regarding the recommendations of the Dunpark Committee.

A wide range of bodies representing the legal profession, police, prisons, courts, universities and civic, social, consumer and commercial interests, as well as those individuals who gave evidence to the Committee, have been invited by the Scottish Home and Health Department on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and myself to submit views on the Committee's recommendations by the end of January 1978.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the Committee's proposals to make the criminal compensate the victim are long overdue in Scotland? Is he aware of the widespread feeling that a disproportionate amount of attention has been paid to the problems of the criminal and not enough to the victim? Can he give an estimated date when the Dunpark Committee's proposals may become operative?

I am unable to give any precise date in reply to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question. In regard to his broader observations, I agree that the recommendations help to strike a better balance between the victim and the convicted criminal. The proposed changes are broadly in line with those operating south of the border.