asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will implement the declaration of intent made by both sides of the Scottish Teachers Salaries Committee to restore as quickly as possible the earnings of teachers which have been eroded; and if he will make a statement.

The Scottish Teachers Salaries Committee agreed in April 1978, with my representatives formally dissenting, to set up a working party to look at the structure of teachers' salaries, with particular reference to internal and external relativities. The teachers' side has now submitted a salary claim based in part on the working party's calculations. Any changes in teachers' salaries will, of course, have to be considered in the context of the Government's pay policy.

Is the Secretary of State aware that teachers' salaries are so inadequate that a fully trained primary teacher in the first year earns £51 per week, whereas a first year trainee caretaker earns £53·65 per week? Ordinary and honours graduate teachers earn £65 and £69 per week respectively, whereas police officers earn £81 per week at the age of 21, plus overtime, free uniform and mortgage allowance. Is it the Secretary of State's intention to restore the value of the Houghton award, updating the salaries in an effort to avoid regrettable industrial action which will result in further chaos in Scottish schools?

I shall not negotiate teachers' salaries across the Floor of the House. The negotiating committee meets next Monday.

Order. I allowed the hon. Member for Coatbridge and Airdrie (Mr. Dempsey) to state his argument rather than ask a question, but I hope that other hon. Members will not seek to follow suit.

Will the Secretary of State say when he expects a firm announcement to be made about Scottish teachers' salaries? Is it possible to have a review of the system of negotiations because, invariably, the teachers do not receive the increases in April but have them backdated, usually from August or September?

I can only repeat that there is negotiating machinery and that it is meeting next Monday. It would be improper for me to make announcements about teachers' salaries today.

I accept that my right hon. Friend cannot negotiate teachers' salaries across the Floor of the House, but will he give an indication that an offer will be made at the meeting next Monday? The EIS alleges that no offer will be made. My right hon. Friend knows that there have been difficulties with the negotiations. Therefore, can he give us an assurance that an offer will be made?

I am afraid that my hon. Friend is asking the same question. The management side of the Scottish Teachers Salaries Committee is not the exclusive property of the Secretary of State. I have representatives there, but so do local authorities. We should leave the negotiations to the committee.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the refusal of the management side to make an offer on previous occasions has led to further serious disruption in our schools? That has been particularly damaging to students studying for examinations. Will the Secretary of State do all that he can to make sure that an offer is made at the meeting, so that we can hold out the prospect of an early settlement to the dispute?

I have nothing to add to my previous remarks. There is a meeting on Monday, and if an offer is to be made it will be made there and not here today.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what effect the construction of motorways and other roads for which he is responsible has had on the sporting facilities for young people in Glasgow: and what steps are being taken to replace those that have been built over.

My right hon. Friend is not aware that any roads for which he has responsibility have affected sports facilities in Glasgow. All roads within the former city of Glasgow are the responsibility of Strathclyde regional council. It is for that council and the district council to secure the provision of adequate recreational facilities in the area.

Is the Minister aware that in Govan and the neighbouring constituency represented by the Secretary of State for Scotland we had an area known as"Fifty pitches ", and that those pitches have been removed so that a motorway can be built and been replaced by eight pitches in the neighbouring constituency and four in Govan? Is he aware that the football pitches in Plantation Park in Govan have been removed and that two have been provided in another area, but are not much used? Although kickabout areas have been provided, they include no dressing-room facilities, and there is a waiting list—

Order. The hon. Gentleman is making an Adjournment speech.

rose—

Order. The hon. Gentleman's question has finished. He has asked it.

In answer to the first part of my hon. Friend's question, I know the"Fifty pitches ". Indeed, it may come as a surprise to the House to learn that, when I was several stones lighter, I used to play on those pitches from time to time. I share my hon. Friend's concern about the loss of these valuable amenities, and I hope that the local authorities will do all that they can to make up the losses. I shall certainly pass on to them my hon. Friend's concern about the losses.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement on the outcome of the referendum in Scotland on 1 March

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he intends to take following the referendum on devolution.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement on future arrangements for Scottish devolution.

As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has said, the appropriate order under section 85(2) of the Scotland Act will be laid in due course

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many English Members who, under his devolution proposals, would have been made second-class Members view his obvious discomfiture with relish? Will he undertake that no further proposals for devolution to Scotland will be put forward except on a United Kingdom basis, with electors in England entitled to express their view as well?

I cannot give those assurances. I understand that the official policy of the Conservative Party is to favour devolution in principle. We should like to see their reaction in practice.

As the House has to interpret the referendum result in order to reach a decision, how does the right hon. Gentleman think we can have any confidence that the 31 per cent. voting"No"adequately represents that view, since many people were told that abstention was equivalent to voting"No "?

The most important fact about the referendum in Scotland is that there was a majority of"Yes"votes.

Are not the words of Burns singularly applicable to the Government:

" Wee, sleekit, cow'rin' tim'rous beastile, O what a panic's in thy breastie! "?

The hon. Gentleman will need to do better than that.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that the ludicrous efforts of the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton) are a strong argument, in themselves, for devolution? Does he accept that there is a strong feeling in Scotland that, although there is still an argument to be won there, as the rather disappointing referendum result illustrates, the Labour Party and the Government must continue their commitment to devolution and fight to ensure that a better structure of government is brought forward for Scotland?

Yes. I was glad to be at the Scottish conference of the Labour Party at the weekend. The conference overwhelmingly carried a statement reasserting the commitment of the Labour Party to devolution for Scotland.

Since Scotland voted"Yes"on 1 March, why is the Cabinet dithering?

The SNP, in the House and elsewhere, has a long history of dithering. I have said that the order will be brought before the House in due course.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the referendum result cannot be regarded as a mandate for a major constitutional change, particularly in view of the massive misleading propaganda put out by the"Yes"campaigners, including the SNP, that an abstention would be the same as a"No"vote? Does he also agree that, no matter how we regard the result, it does not serve Scotland's interests to have a long delay before putting the issue to the House so that hon. Members can make their decision?

The hon. Gentleman was a prominent member of the"No"campaign, and he lost.

Will my right hon. Friend remind the Tories that an absolute majority of those who turned out to vote in the referendum voted"Yes"despite the scaremongering tactics of some of the"No"campaigners, including the Laird o' the Binns and the architect of the 40 per cent. rule, who travelled all the way from Islington to Scotland to try to blackmail Scottish workers by telling them that they would lose their jobs unless they voted"No."?

My hon. Friend is basically right. The important aspect of the result is that there was a majority of"Yes"votes.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why he has not yet announced his decision on the Moss Morran petrochemical project; and whether he will state the reasons for the long delay.

It has been necessary for me to give full and thorough consideration to the representations that I invited from parties on the question of radio transmissions. I have just received further advice from the Health and Safety Executive on this question and have circulated it to parties for comment.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the report indicates that the risks arising from the project are minimal, although, of course, they can never be eliminated? Can he also confirm that, despite the fact that the SNP is against the project, all the Labour-controlled local authorities are desperately anxious that, in the interests of Fife and Scotland, this highly technological project should go ahead? Can he give any indication of when he will be coming to a final decision?

My hon. Friend will realise that I am not able to comment on the merits of the planning application at the moment, but the Health and Safety Executive has taken a view which is public knowledge, since I have made it available to the various parties to the inquiry. It is also possible for other interested parties to see those conclusions.

Will the Secretary of State accept that, where human safety is concerned, he is right to take time over such matters? However, can he indicate what sort of central co-ordination exists to look at, for example, the Barry Buddon project, where there is a plan for a methane pipeline to cross it? Is he aware that some of the problems that have arisen in connection with Moss Morran may have been avoided if there had been prior consultation on the issue?

I cannot comment on what might be a planning application for Barry Buddon. I understand that there is no specific proposal definitely committing ICI to that location. If there were, it would almost certainly be the subject of some sort of inquiry and I might then have to make a decision about it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that local authorities in Fife are becoming extremely exasperated about the long delay in reaching a decision on this project? We appreciate the need of my right hon. Friend to secure maximum safety, but is he aware that we believe that the time has come for a final decision to be made? Can he therefore give an assurance that a decision will be made as expeditiously as possible after 28 April?

All I can say is that a decision will be made as expeditiously as possible, but I cannot at the moment say what that decision is likely to be or, indeed, whether I shall be able to make a final decision when I see the results of any representations that I receive on the documents that I have circulated. It would be wrong for me to say to the House or anyone else that, regardless of the nature of these representations, I shall immediately make a decision. I have to await the representations.

Will the Secretary of State say whether many of the difficulties that he is experiencing stem from the radio spark hazard or result from evidence in other parts of the world following explosions in similar plants?

If the hon. Gentleman will look at the documents which have been circulated, he will see that we are dealing with the question of radio transmissions.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what reply he intends giving to the letter written by the convenor of the Western Isles about Liniclat school.

I have explained to the convener of the Islands Council that I am unable at present to allocate the level of capital expenditure required for this project.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the project for this school has the backing, which is greatly appreciated, of hon. Members of every party in the House? Is he aware also that there is general agreement in the Scottish press that this is a long-required facility for the education of the people of the islands concerned? Is he saying that funds are so short that this project, which is planned over three years, cannot be started now, even though he has given approval to it in principle?

The right hon. Gentleman is right. I have given approval in principle, but I am afraid that such approval, by itself, does not determine the priority of any particular project. Unfortunately, there are a number of other desirable projects with a higher priority than this one, which contains a large element of replacement rather than new building to meet, for example, expanding population, which is often the problem in other parts of the country.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress is being made on extending the pout box.

I share the right hon. Gentleman's wish to see the pout box extended northwards to 61°N, and we have made this clear to the European Commission. We now await the outcome of a study by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, which may provide the basis for a new measure.

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer, which follows representations made to him at a meeting with the Orkney and Shetland representatives. Can he give any indication of the timing, because the matter is becoming urgent? When does he expect to make further progress?

A report from the working group is with the international council at the moment. As soon as that is submitted to the European Commission we shall be able to decide whether there are grounds for pressing our claim.

Does the Minister accept that the extension of the pout box is only one measure being urged on the Government by the fishing industry? Will he say what immediate and, if necessary, unilateral action the Government propose to take to ensure that only one size of net is carried on one vessel in United Kingdom waters?

That does not arise out of this question. As the hon. Member knows, it is only one of a number of aspects of conservation measures which we will be pursuing at the appropriate time.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the emergency services available in Scotland to deal with tanker collisions and oil spillages round the entire Scottish coast.

The arrangements for dealing with oil spills at sea or on the shore, whether they come from tanker collisions or from any other source, are kept under constant review. In the context of this on-going review, I refer the hon. Gentleman to the announcement about oil pollution measures made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade on 23 February.

Does the Minister agree that there are not sufficient tugs of sufficient size in the area to pull 300,000-ton tankers should they get stranded? Some of these tugs are as much as 36 hours steaming time away, on the Continent. A great deal of damage can be done to areas around our coasts if proper emergency facilities are not available. Will the Minister show some sense of urgency and go to the areas concerned, particularly Shetland, to see the tremendous damage being done to areas by oil pollution of all kinds?

As regards the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, we are prepared to keep an open mind on this whole issue. Tomorrow, a working group, under Department of Trade leadership, is due to meet in Aberdeen primarily to consider safety of navigation around the Shetlands. Orkney Islands Council will participate, and tanker routes throughout Scotland, including The Minch, will be discussed. The Scottish Office will also be represented. Next Monday there is to be a seminar, which is widely known about, to discuss the whole question of pollution by oil around our coasts. I hope to be taking part, together with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade

Will the Minister accept that, as the Clyde pilots have pointed out, it is unnecessary for the supertankers to go through The Minch at all? By going through The Minch they are subject to unnecessary hazards and are a tremendous threat to a valuable coastline. Will he consider banning tankers from that area?

As I indicated in my previous response, this is a matter which will be discussed by the working party which meets in Aberdeen tomorrow. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend's views will be taken into account during those considerations.

I have been in correspondence with Ministers on numerous matters relating to pollution. Will the Scottish Office make a special effort in one direction? There are still hundreds, possibly thousands, of wretched sheep in the Shetlands covered in thick black oil. With the lambing season coming on, this is a serious situation. If the Scottish Office can do anything to find ways to clean the sheep, such a move will be a great help.

I know of the representations made by the right hon. Gentleman. My right hon. Friend is writing to the right hon. Gentleman about some of these matters today. My right hon. Friend will also be writing to him at the earliest opportunity about other associated matters. My right hon. Friend will in due course respond in correspondence on this issue of the sheep.

Has the Minister's attention been drawn to a list recently published by Lloyd's indicating that 1,400,000 tons of shipping were lost at sea last year? That is an increase of almost 40 per cent. on the previous year. Many of the losses were tankers. By contacting Lloyd's my right hon. Friend would, I am sure, gain some practical indication of how this matter can be com- bated The problem is becoming worse. In addition to the losses at sea, there was the Bantry Bay explosion—the sort of thing that could occur in other parts of the country. Will my right hon. Friend get in touch with Lloyd's to obtain some practical information on how incidents can be prevented?

The question that my hon. Friend raises is one for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade. I assure him that his views will be conveyed to my right hon. Friend.

Is the Minister aware that some of the trouble seems to have been caused by the unauthorised discharge of oil by tankers in Scottish waters? Will he contact his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence in order to step up the patrolling of areas where tankers are likely to be working, at least as a deterrent against this most objectionable practice?

Just before I came to the House today I discussed this matter with my colleagues at the Department of Trade. I have been assured that all aircraft flying over the area most affected are obliged to report any incidents. We can be assured on that matter. There is certainly a difficulty about people dumping stuff that ought not to be dumped. I stress that it is illegal. If we catch these people, which is always a problem, they will certainly be punished.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give a definite starting date for the proposed Kirktons primary school in Arbroath; and what provision he is making to ensure that this necessary project is expedited.

It is for Tayside regional council to decide when and if this proposed project should go ahead. On present information it cannot be regarded as a project required to provide extra school places, which means that resources would have to be found from the general allowance for school improvement and replacement work in the council's capital allocations.

That is a very disappointing answer. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that children in Kirktons are being scattered into other areas because of poor planning by Tayside regional council? Is he aware that many of these children will later attend Arbroath high school, which has atrocious accommodation problems? Will he take action to bestir Tayside regional council into carrying out this long-overdue project?

The position in Arbroath is that the number of places in the six non-denominational primary schools is 3,891. The number of pupils in February 1978 was 2,818. In other words, there are 1,000 spare places in Arbroath at primary level. If a school is built there will be 1,500 spare places—50 per cent. more than are needed. That is the difficulty. If the Tayside region wants to make that a priority, it has sufficient capital allocations from my Department to carry out the work.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the current rateable value of the Assembly building in Edinburgh.

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer which my right hon. Friend gave him on 8 March.

As £2·75 million has already been spent on the construction and fitting-out work of the Assembly building, and as it is contemplated that another £1 million will be spent on it, is it not clear that the rateable value will be very high? Will the Minister tell the House what proposals he has to dispose of the building now that it is clear that no Assemblymen will ever sit in it?

As my right hon. Friend explained, Crown property does not have a rateable value. The hon. Gentleman has obviously not read the answer that he received. An arrangement is reached between the Treasury valuer and the local authority assessor, an ex gratia payment is made from one authority to the other and subsequently a valuation appears on the valuation roll.

Is not the reason for the question mark over the Assembly being filled that the Cabinet has a difficulty in that it is afraid to table the Assembly motion as a vote of confidence because about 40 Labour Back Benchers would rather bring down the Government than honour the fact that the"Yes"side won in the referendum?

I think that it is true to say that all Cabinets have difficulties of one kind or another. I am sure that the present Cabinet is no exception.

In any advice which my hon. Friend gives to the Cabinet, will he take into account the very large number of Scottish people who voted"No "? Will he further take into account the deliberate attempt by the Scottish National Party and my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Sillars) to depress the"No"vote by saying that if people did not vote they would be counted as having voted"No "? Should we not perhaps for once take them at their word?

On the question of people who did not vote being counted as having voted"No ", I understand that the hon. Member for Moray and Nairn (Mrs. Ewing) did not vote because of some error or mistake on her part. I should hesitate to hazard a guess that she intended to vote"No ". No doubt my right hon. Friends in the Cabinet will take into account everything said by my hon. Friend.

Is it not presumptuous of the hon. Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hughes) to talk about people voting"No ", when he does net have a vote in Scotland?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. Will the hon. Gentleman wait until after Question Time?

No, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. Henderson) is wrong. I have a vote. I voted"No ". Therefore, I should be glad if the hon. Gentleman would withdraw the statement that he made.

Mr. Speaker, it will give me great pleasure, if I have been misinformed, to withdraw the comment that I made. It would give me even greater pleasure if the hon. Gentleman—

Order. The hon. Gentleman has said enough. He has withdrawn his comment.

How can the Minister justify further expenditure on the proposed Assembly building? Whatever the future for devolution, Ministers have no authority to assume that, for example, the 158 closed-circuit television sets at present being installed at a reported cost of £250,000 will ever be required. [HON. MEMBERS:"Reading."] Is the Minister aware that his dogged determination to spend more money on this building might be admirable if he were using his own money, but that this expenditure is a flagrant misuse of public funds?

My hon. Friends indicated that the hon. Gentleman was reading. If so, he did not read very well. The contracted expenditure will take place, because contracts are contracts, but no further contracts will be placed for the balance of the expenditure—in other words, the difference between the £3·75 million which was allowed for by the House of Commons and, not the £2·75 million mentioned by the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Gow), but the £2·68 million which has already been spent.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will use his reserve powers to limit rent increases under section 15 of the Housing (Financial Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1978.

My right hon. Friend will use his powers whenever he considers that any particular increases would impose an unduly heavy burden on tenants. He has decided to use them in order to restrict the increase proposed by Cumbernauld and Kilsyth district council.

I thank my hon. Friend for stopping Provost Murray from behaving like a medieval landlord by imposing savage increases of 40 per cent. on the tenants of Cumbernauld and Kilsyth district, but will he give some indication of the kind of limitation that he has in mind, bearing in mind that this time last year the Government promised that rent increases, if necessary, should be in line with the average increase in earnings?

I never attempt to compete with the eloquence of my hon. Friend in his public criticisms. I hope that he will continue to direct them to Provost Murray and not to me.

While being sure that Provost Murray will listen to the hon. Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan) more readily than he will to certain members of his own party, may I ask the Minister to look carefully at the comparison between district council house rents in the Cumbernauld and Kilsyth district and those for comparable houses owned by the Government-controlled SSHA and Cumbernauld Development Corporation in the area? If he does, he will find that the rent levels there are substantially higher than district council rents.

If the hon. Lady, whom I have never noticed as being much of an expert on housing—[HON. MEMBERS:"Oh! "] The hon. Lady specialises in other subjects and interests. She will recollect—or perhaps someone could advise her—that, in the Green Paper, when we talk about local contributions rising in line with earnings, we take local contributions to include rents and rates. Unfortunately, new towns do not have a rate fund contribution, nor does the SSHA.

How can my hon. Friend justify this decision today in regard to the Cumbernauld and Kilsyth district council when his right hon. Friend has agreed to increases of over £100 per year—a 50 per cent. increase—by the SNP-controlled Cunninghame district council? Surely he must reconsider that decision as well.

As my hon. Friend knows, we regret the circumstances which made it necessary to allow increases—

What circumstances?

I have already explained them. We regret the circumstances which made it almost inevitable that we had to approve higher increases than we would have wished. I should point out that the average increases allowed in Cunninghame are about the same as we have allowed for Kilsyth and Cumbernauld.

Does the Minister accept that, as the hon. Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mrs. Bain) said, there is a feeling of injustice in areas where tenants of the SSHA and new town houses and district council tenants live in comparable houses but pay different rents?

That is an omnibus question. I shall stick to the part that is relevant. As I have explained, there is no rate fund contribution to the SSHA and new towns, where the deficits are wholly funded by the Government. If the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) on behalf of the Opposition, is saying that he will require a rate fund contribution from local authorities to both these organisations, I am happy to hear it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total capital expenditure being allocated for housing to local authorities in 1979–80.

Provisional allocations amounting to £248 million, based on November 1978 prices, were given to local authorities on 14 February. These will be updated to 1979–80 prices at the end of March.

Is the Minister aware that Kirkcaldy district council's share of that allocation will allow it to complete only about 50 per cent. of its projected housing in this financial year? Will he therefore give an assurance that the Glebe Park development, which he visited last November, will not be delayed by the lack of financial provision?

I can give a general assurance that, as has happened this year, there will be supplementary allowances within the total amount in the kitty. I have no reason to doubt that Kirkcaldy will get the same sympathetic consideration that other authorities have received, since the authority is proceeding with a worthwhile improvement scheme.

Will the Minister confirm that last year, under a Labour Government, housing completions in Scotland were the lowest since 1951? Will he tell us how that ties in with the pledge given by the Labour Party at the last general election that it would reverse the disastrous rundown in house building?

That does not arise out of the question. There is no restriction on new house building in Scotland. It is now being shown that local authorities, when submitting housing plans, want to switch more of their resources to modernisation and improvement. The figures are available for anybody to see. If any hon. Members wants to submit, through his authority, a scheme for new house building it will be given sympathetic consideration.

Can my hon. Friend say whether the housing plans submitted by district councils have been fully examined by his Department? Can he give an assurance that the continuity of housing modernisation—which is so necessary and which is embodied in these plans—will be honoured by his Department in future?

Yes, in general terms I can give that assurance. What I am trying to say, if I have not made it clear already, is that the bids made by local authorities collectively far outweigh anything that we have in the kitty, or the total amount that they spend in a year. That is the argument which I imagine will go on whether or not I am in this job, and whatever Government are in power.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the current level of expenditure on the provision of nursery education.

In recent years education authorities have not been able to expand nursery education as rapidly as I would have wished. The Government remain committed to the expansion of nursery education and the recent White Paper on public expenditure, Cmnd. 7439, made plain that resources will be made available for this purpose.

Is the Minister satisfied that all the regional authorities concerned are using the resources allocated to them for nursery education expansion, since the reply he gave to me earlier this year indicates that not all the resources are being taken up by authorities? What consideration is being given to the use of empty classrooms in primary schools by changing them into nursery wings attached to the schools?

The hon. Lady makes two fair points. She asks whether local authorities at regional level are using all the money available for nursery education. A number of them have underspent on nursery education. This is largely due to staffing ratios, which are quite high in these establishments. I hope that local authorities will take very seriously the suggestion about using spare primary school accommodation. There has been a substantial drop in the number of primary schoolchildren in many areas, which means that there is spare accommodation. It is there to be used, with suitable adaptations. That would be better than waiting for purpose-built nursery schools. I hope that this message will go to local authorities.

Will my hon. Friend investigate how many specially built nursery places are not being used and make that the first priority for the future?

It is true that because of a drop in the number of births there are many spare places in nursery schools. But unfortunately this is not spread evenly over the regions. I hope that local authorities will advertise and ensure that families in greatest need are encouraged to use the spare places. I hope also that local authorities will consider the concept, which I have been pushing, of children's centres which give whole-day coverage for mothers with children under five, one-parent families and working mothers.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many ambulances equipped with four-wheel drive are available for use in Scotland; and if he is satisfied that this number is sufficient to afford adequate cover in wintry conditions.

We have 54 four-wheel drive ambulances available and they afford adequate cover.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that there were many occasions during the first two months of this year when many roads were passable only by four-wheel drive vehicles? Is he really satisfied that the number is adequate?

We are advised on this matter by the Scottish ambulance service, and it is true, as the hon. Gentleman said, that these vehicles are at their best in bad weather conditions and on long journeys over class B roads. The Scottish ambulance service is satisfied that the 54 vehicles available to it at the moment are adequate to meet its needs.

Does the Minister realise that the best way to avoid long journeys on dangerous roads is to stop the closure of many of our local hospitals?

Order. That is stretching the question.

Is the Minister aware that it might not matter how many four-wheel drive ambulances there are in Scotland shortly if the threat by the National Union of Public Employees in Scotland, which we have heard about today, is carried out? That will virtually close all Scottish hospitals this week. Can he assure the House that—

Order. The same rule applies to the Front Bench as to the Back Benches. The hon. Member is also stretching the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the decline in Scottish farming incomes during 1978.

The return to more normal potato prices is the main cause of the decline in farming incomes in the year ending March 1978. A general improvement is forecast for 1978–79.

Is not the hon. Gentleman glossing over the fact that there has been a decrease of 33 per cent. in farm incomes in Scotland in the last year? Can he tell us what measures he intends to take to ensure that that is made up in the coming year? Farmers are getting a bit fed up with the Government's"jam tomorrow"policy.

I am not glossing over anything. I attended the annual general meeting of the National Farmers' Union of Scotland on Friday, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that I was not allowed to gloss over anything. I give the House the assurance that we expect a rise in incomes for the year ending 1979. I readily concede that the hard winter may, perhaps, influence that and that there are other factors that do not give any ground for optimism or complacency. But, to be realistic, the farmers will not starve.

Will my hon Friend take all possible steps to help the hard-pressed hill and marginal farmers? Will he bear in mind that a number of the perhaps less hard-pressed lowland farmers in my constituency managed to find enough spare income to raise £7,500 for the Tory Party two weeks ago?

I am glad to say that there are enough intelligent electors in Berwick and East Lothian to return a Labour Member. I am sure that that will continue. We made a specific announcement that we were putting more than £1 million into farming in the hill areas in Scotland where there is the greatest need to supplement incomes.

Surely the hon. Gentleman, after his meeting with the Scottish NFU last Friday, can be in no doubt about the genuine concern amongst farmers in the hill and upland areas. Is he aware of the genuine concern among cattle producers at the inflation in costs and their vulnerability to market prices? Is he prepared to do more to help this hard-pressed sector of Scottish agriculture?

I share the concern expressed by the hon. Gentleman, and I have already said that we have applied aid to the areas of greatest need. The hon. Gentleman knows that the production of cattle is a risky business, and I am assuming that the supporters of private enterprise do not want to take away all the initiatives that should be open to the producers. Nevertheless, there is a real concern, which I have recognised. We certainly shall not see the hill farmers lost.

Will the Minister assure us that all the agriculture Ministers will fight to prevent the implementation of the iniquitous EEC milk levy, which is designed to perpetuate the existence of small inefficient farmers by penalising efficient British farmers? We would be glad of that assurance.

Yes, I can give that assurance, but I do not want to pre-empt anything that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister may say later.

Will the Minister comment further on the special problems facing Scotland's hill farmers because of harsh winter conditions and high interest rates? Does he accept that the delay in announcing the hill livestock compensatory allowances was disgraceful? What further steps is he prepared to take to help hill farmers?

The delay was not disgraceful. The reasons were explained to the NFU of Scotland and I think that it accepted them. But as always when we are handing out money, there will be people who say that it is not enough.

Does the Minister agree that the more or less unanimous view of those at the conference which he attended was that the announcement that he made to hill farmers was inadequate to deal with the serious escalation in costs and the Government's high interest rates? Was he not made aware that what is at stake is the very viability of many of the marginal hill farms in this country, unless he does something more to help them?

I assumed that most of the Labour farmers were at Perth and not at Peebles on Friday. Perhaps the warmth of the reception that some of the farmers gave me had political overtones. There are always variations in an industry which is as diverse as agriculture. But, overall, Scottish farmers are doing reasonably well. I do not put it any higher than that.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the future structure of the Scottish fishing fleet; and if he will make a statement.

Along with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, I am considering the structure of the industry, but it is too soon for any statement to be made.

I accept the right hon. Gentleman's view that it is impossible to come to a conclusion in advance of the final negotiations on the common fisheries policy. However, does he accept that there is great uncertainty in the industry about its future structure and building plans? Will he give some indication of the programme that he envisages for the renegotiation of the CFP? When does he expect that to come to some conclusion that will enable the industry to undertake proper long-term planning?

Unfortunately, it is difficult to be categorical about the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. Progress in the negotiations on the common fisheries policy has been disappointingly slow, as he knows. However, we are not leaving consideration of the structure of the industry to a final conclusion of the CFP. We are considering the proposals of a catching industry working group which was chaired by the White Fish Authority and which has recently sent proposals to the Government.