asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give consideration to methods by which the market for sheepmeat in Scotland can best be stabilised.

The Government have done so, and negotiations for a Community market organisation for lamb have now virtually been completed. We shall have a full deficiency payment scheme financed entirely from Community funds, which will assure producers of a substantial increase in their returns this year and, I believe, of a secure future. This stabilisation of the market will also benefit the consumer, because adequate supplies of home-produced lamb will be assured at reasonable prices.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the concern among Scottish store sheep producers that this regulation will not operate before the autumn lamb sales?

Yes, I am aware of that, and I appreciate their concern. I very much hope that negotiations with New Zealand will be completed in time to implement the regime before the main autumn store sheep sales, but if they are not I hope to be able to indicate by then when the regime will be implemented, so as to minimise the uncertainty.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the market could be improved by a review of the Meat and Livestock Commission's grading regulations, which have been in force since 1945? As the public taste has changed in favour of leaner meat, hill sheep farmers are losing because of these regulations not being brought up to date.

I am aware of that problem. The Meat and Livestock Commission, in conjunction with my right hon. Friends, is looking into the matter.

I assure my right hon. Friend that the new arrangements have been well received by the sheep farmers in my constituency. May I press upon him the need to take full advantage at the end of the year of the increased maxima in the hill livestock compensatory allowances, which will be needed to continue the restoration of confidence in this sector?

I thank my hon. Friend for what he has said. That is also my experience. We shall, of course, look at this matter in the autumn, as we have undertaken to do.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the current state of negotiation on Scottish teachers' pay.

Statutory responsibility for negotiating teachers' pay rests with the Scottish teachers salaries committee, and it is not for me to intervene. I understand that at a meeting on 4 June the teachers rejected an offer of 14 per cent. with effect from 1 April. The committee is to meet again tomorrow.

To what extent does the Secretary of State believe that his allocation of 13 per cent. in the rate support grant ties the hands of the negotiating committee? Will he allow it to go to arbitration and accept a higher figure? In the absence of a pay policy, how does he expect the teachers to accept 14 per cent. when the rate of inflation is 22 per cent. and the rate of wage settlements is 20 per cent?

The figure that the right hon. Gentleman quoted is not correct, and in any case the allowance made in the rate support grant order was greater than that, and it also took into account the allowances for the Clegg awards. With regard to the details of the negotiations, the last thing that anyone would want me to do would be to lay down how they should turn out. I have told the local authorities how much money is available to them, and it is up to them to negotiate.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that one way in which to prevent the post-Houghton decline that happened under the previous Labour Government is for the negotiators to agree to pay 18 per cent., but with effect from 1 July, and thus keep the total wage bill for the year at 14 per cent.?

I note what my hon. Friend has said about the progress of teachers' pay during the last few years. The second part of what he said is, of course, a matter for the negotiating committee.

The Secretary of State cannot escape his responsibilities here, Does he accept that there is no point in Governments appointing Clegg and Houghton commissions, and accepting their findings if, between times, teachers do not receive the going rate? Is he further aware that it is clear from Government statements on public sector salaries that, if teachers do not get a fair deal this year, they will find it very much more difficult to get one next year?

It depends upon what the hon. Gentleman means by the going rate, but the negotiating committee and the local authorities concerned must decide how much they can afford to pay.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is a positive step forward that the management representatives have dropped their previous requirement on conditions of employment with respect to out-of-school hours which caused a great deal of irritation to the teaching profession?

I note what my hon. Friend says, but as I am not part of the negotiations that matter must be left for them.

Why does the Secretary of State continually try to deceive people into believing that he is not part of the negotiations? What instructions is he giving to his representatives on the management side of the STSC? Why does he not have the decency and courage to say that he does not want a settlement above 14 per cent., instead of hiding behind the charade of it not being his responsibility?

As the hon. Gentleman probably knows, there are two representatives from my side who attend the meetings, but they are in no sense able to dominate what goes on, nor do they seek to do so. As the hon. Gentleman must appreciate, the amount of money available for paying teachers is what the local authorities have available, taking account of what the rate support grant provides and what their own rate income provides. That is what is available, and they will decide what they can afford and wish to pay.

What are the Secretary of State's representatives instructed to do at these negotiations?

Those representatives are present to represent the interests of my office, but they are in no sense part of the negotiations, except as two people among those present. The responsibility here is with the local authorities to decide what they wish to pay.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received from Lothian regional council in response to his consultative document on parental choice in education.

Lothian regional council's reaction was that is was, in principle, totally opposed to the parents' charter on the ground that it was an attack on the concept of comprehensive education. I reject that imputation. I fail to see how the concept of comprehensive education in Lothian region would be threatened by the granting of reasonable applications from parents for the school of their choice.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Is he aware that the Lothian region education authority is still turning down reasonable applications for transfer to schools in which places are available? Is not this authority's attitude intolerable, especially as it is now playing cynical politics with the prospects and lives of young children?

There is ample evidence that Lothian region disregards the preference of parents when appeals are made about transfers. Despite the fact that under the Education (Scotland) Act 1962, it is required to see that children are educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents, the authority makes little effort to comply with that legislation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the principal agencies and schemes operating in Scotland to encourage the development of small businesses ; and if he will make a statement.

Small firms are eligible for assistance under the Industry Acts. In addition, a range of advisory and financial services is provided specifically for small firms in Scotland through the following main agencies : the small firms information centre of my Department, the Scottish Development Agency, the Highlands and Islands Development Board and the Scottish Tourist Board. The Manpower Services Commission has sponsored courses for small firms and people starting in business. A number of voluntary and other bodies, including chambers of commerce, provide important services for small businesses.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the small business sector appreciates the help that the Government are giving to it, but that there is particular concern about the level of interest rates? If these were reduced, not only would that reduce the influx of foreign money, which would help to control the money supply, but it would help to bring down the rate of exchange as well as giving encouragement to the small business community.

The Government are aware of the difficulty caused by the high rates of interest, but the No. 1 priority must be the fight against inflation, of which high interest rates are a symptom.

Has the Scottish Office received a copy of a booklet entitled "Creating Jobs Through Community Enterprise" by Mr. John Pearce of the Paisley college of technology? If not, may I send the Minister one?

Yes. thank you very much.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the problems that small businesses are facing is that of high and increasing local rates? Does he agree also that the activities of spendthrift local authorities are effectively destroying jobs in small businesses?

My hon. Friend is right. One of the strongest complaints that the Government receive concerns the number of businesses that are struggling to keep going, not so much because of high interest rates, but because of the burden of local authorities' rate increases in Scotland, which is destroying jobs.

Will the hon. Gentleman note what the CBI has stated, if he will not take note of hon. Members? It has stated clearly that unless interest charges are reduced as rapidly, and by as much, as is humanly possible there will be more liquidations? Is he aware that every day small businesses in Scotland are going into liquidation because of the Government's policy on public expenditure? Will he, for once, change the Government's policy and do something about the problem?

I cannot say too often to the hon. Gentleman that the No. 1 priority of the Government must be to reduce the rate of inflation. When that has been achieved, interest rates will fall.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends to make a decision on the status of the areas which have been affected by oil-related industries in relation to the assisted areas which have to be decided by him before August 1980 ; and if he will make a statement.

The changes to be made this August in assisted area status in areas affected by oil-related developments are as announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry last July. For those areas which are being downgraded by more than one step there will be, as has already been announced, a review in the light of the circumstances prevailing at the time before the final step is taken in August 1982.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that there is widespread concern in the Grampian region, particularly in my constituency, about the threat of the removal of assisted area status, especially in respect of the highly specialised large and small firms that have come into the area? Will he have a further meeting with local authorities and other interested parties before removing assisted area status from these areas?

I note my hon. Friend's concern, which he has expressed to me on many occasions. I am aware of the case put by the Grampian region. There will be a further review of the situation, as my hon. Friend requests, before the final step is taken to alter the assisted area status.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Levenmouth area will be deprived of its special development area status in August? Unemployment in that area is presently over 13 per cent. and rising, and an even greater number of redundancies have recently been announced. Will the right hon. Gentleman approach the Secretary of State for Industry to see that the Levenmouth area has its special development area status restored by August?

I know the position there, and it causes me some concern as well. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman will be in touch with my right hon. Friend about it. This is a matter which was decided in last July's review, and I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman will raise the matter again with my right hon. Friend.

Will my right hon. Friend consider giving grants on an industry basis rather than on a geographical basis? The latter is not always beneficial.

I note that suggestion. Parts of the regional aids are provided on an industry basis under section 8 of the Industry Act, but the real aim of regional policy is to bring special help to areas in which there are high levels of unem- ployment. That is the theme of the whole policy.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, despite the unanimous view of, and a deputation to the Department of Industry from, every local authority in the Grampian region, and of virtually every Member of Parliament for that region, it has been confirmed that the development area status will be changed in August, in advance of the special study that he announced with a great fanfare on 17 July of last year, saying that there would be a special study of the effect of oil-related industry? Is not that inquiry a sham, bogus and a hoax on the people of the North-East of Scotland?

No, the hon. Gentleman is not correct about that. If regional policy means anything, it means the concentration of help where the need is greatest. The fact is that in the Aberdeen area in May 1980 the unemployment rate was 3·9 per cent., compared with a Great Britain figure of 6·1 per cent., and a higher figure than that for Scotland.

Does the Secretary of State accept that one of the most important oil-related developments is contained in the decision of his right lion. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry on the gas-gathering system for the northern area of the United Kingdom continental shelf? Will he give, as soon as possible, his views on how that system will operate?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, I, too, am extremely interested in this exciting project. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will make an announcement shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what percentage for increases in teacher's salaries was used in the rate support grant settlement for 1980–81.

Separate provision for individual pay settlements is not made within the cash limit total.

When will Ministers come clean and give an honest answer about public sector salaries? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that although specific figures are not given, the Government have given an overall figure of 13 per cent. for increases in public sector salaries? If the Government do not increase the percentage given in the rate support grant, how can Scottish teachers gain an increase of 18·6 per cent., without incurring a substantial increase in the rates? When will the Government increase that percentage?

The hon. Gentleman's assumptions are wrong. The figure of 13 per cent. relates to overall cost increases. Pay is only one factor.

Whatever the precise amount provided for teachers' pay in the rate support grant, is it not more realistic than the amount provided by the previous Labour Government? Is not my hon. Friend surprised that, although the Clegg award has just restored the five-year erosion of the Houghton awards, teachers have chosen to disrupt classrooms within a month of that settlement?

My hon. Friend is correct to say that in the last year of the previous Labour Government an allowance of 5 per cent. was made for average salary increases. That figure was unrealistic. My hon. Friend is also right to say that industrial action by teachers is unlikely to help their cause, which will be judged on its merits alone.

Is the Minister aware that earlier when I used the figure of 13 per cent. the Secretary of State said that it was wrong? What is the right figure?

My right hon. Friend has made it clear that no specific figure was allowed for individual pay settlements. An overall figure of 13 per cent. was allowed for cost increases. That figure includes a special figure of 6 per cent. for comparability awards. The amounts to be settled in individual cases will be decided solely by those taking part in the negotiations.

Does the Minister accept that during the last year of the previous Labour Government inflation ran at 8 per cent? Does he further accept that during the first year of this Tory Government inflation has risen to 22 per cent. and that there is every prospect that it will continue to rise? The Minister has spoken about salary increases being part of the element under consideration. Will he accept that that is the most important part of the equation? How can the Secretary of State tell the right hon. Member for Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles (Mr. Steel) that the figure is higher than 13 per cent., when the Minister will not tell what the figure is? For how long will the Government continue to confuse teachers?

The hon. Gentleman must appreciate that local authorities are the employers. The Government cannot ignore the fact that local authorities in Scotland have budgeted for volume expenditure of £83 million more than was assumed at the time of the rate support grant. The hon. Gentleman is therefore wrong to suggest that the cash limit of £194 million—a substantial amount—should be increased, despite the excessive budgeting of local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce legislation requiring manufacturers to place health warning notices on the containers of all alcoholic products on sale to the general public in Scotland ; and if he will make a statement.

Alcohol presents a health risk only if misused ; I therefore do not consider that it would be appropriate to have a health warning on containers of all alcoholic products.

Has the Minister noticed that competent authorities judge that alcohol is Scotland's second biggest killer? Does he accept that drinkers of alcohol indicate that such consumption may result in irreversible brain damage, cirrhosis of the liver, heart failure, violence, suicides, malnutrition and in disastrous consequences for the home? Does he think that he should do something to warn such people about the dangers of drink abuse, just as smokers are warned about the dangers of smoking?

I accept a lot of what my hon. Friend has said. The Government are not complacent. We acknowledge that during the past 20 years there has been an appreciable increase in the number of alcoholics in Scotland. Although that trend is not peculiar to Scotland, it remains very disturbing. The vast majority drink sensibly, and only the minority abuse alcohol. As the hon. Gentleman may know, the Government have taken action in Scotland. I recently attended the inaugural course of the alcohol study centre at Paisley, which is financially supported by the Government. We shall continue our campaign of health education on this vital subject.

I am relieved that I do not suffer from any of the problems related to drink. Is my hon. Friend aware that a conference on alcohol education was held in October 1979 at Pitlochry? Is he further aware that that conference was sponsored by the Scotch whisky industry? Should we not go down that avenue and bring education to the notice of individuals at the right age?

I compliment my hon. Friend on his well-known abstemious habits. He certainly will not suffer from any of the complaints mentioned by the hon. Member for Coatbridge and Airdrie (Mr. Dempsey). I had the pleasure of attending that course at Pitlochry. I shall reiterate my previous reply. We are making every effort to extend education. This year we shall spend a considerable amount of money on health education in this sphere.

In view of last year's events in Scotland, would it not be a great advantage to have a major poster campaign that simply said "Younger, Fletcher, Fairgrieve and Rifkind are bad for you"?

It is always wrong to poster inaccurate information.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that the Government do not intend to reduce from 18 to 16 the age at which youngsters can go into a pub to order a drink? Will he give an assurance that the Government have no intention of falling for such legislation?

Yes, I give that assurance.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will increase rate support grant cash limits to Scottish local authorities to finance salary settlements which at least keep up with the level of inflation.

The cash limit of £194 million represents the maximum amount of additional rate support grant which may be paid towards pay and price increases affecting local authority expenditure after November 1979, and will not be increased.

As the Minister has said that the cash limit allows for an increase of only 13 per cent., and as all other local authority costs—interest charges, fuel costs and so on—are rising more rapidly than that, will he confirm that it is the Government's policy to reduce the living standards of local authority employees?

I shall not confirm that, because our objective is to ensure that local authority expenditure is confined to a level that the country can afford. Local authority employees have as much interest as others in ensuring that local authorities act in a responsible way about expenditure.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the whole point of cash limits is that they are limits? Will he reassure the House that the Government will stand by the discipline that they impose on local authority expenditure, as part of the fight against inflation?

I confirm that. We impose no cash limit obligations on local authorities that the Government are not prepared to accept for themselves.

How much lower than the going rate of inflation should the salaries of local government employees be?

The hon. Gentleman seems to assume that the going rate of inflation is a scientific fact. However, it depends on the amount that employers choose to pay their employees as a result of wage negotiations. Local authority employees are the concern of local authorities, because they are the employers.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce legislation to amend the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 so as to require effective provision to be made for the disabled on transport undertakings.

The Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 covers the whole of Britain and there is at present no intention of introducing amending legislation.

I am dismayed at that reply. Is the Minister aware that recently in Glasgow the completed underground system went into operation without any facilities for the disabled? The Glasgow passenger transport executive completed the plans without any consultation with those representing the disabled. Does the Minister agree that, unless we have some legislation with teeth, the Government will be thought of as purveyors of platitudes about the disabled, rather than as a Government prepared to do something positive on their behalf?

As the hon. Member knows, the refurbishing of the Glasgow Underground began in 1975, and from the beginning the transport executive had discussions with the Disablement Income Group and representatives from Access. The problem is that the Glasgow Underground has smaller coaches than the London Underground or British Rail. There is no problem for anyone who can walk, but if there were an emergency people in wheelchairs would have to be taken out through 20in wide front doors on to the track. It is not possible to put wheelchairs into these Underground carriages, and therefore there was no need to install lifts at the five stations concerned.

I must support the comments made by the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. McKelvey). It is dreadful that disabled people are unable to have these facilities. Will my hon. Friend reconsider his reply and give further consideration to this matter with a view to future projects being put forward?

The Government must deal with facts, and we take an extreme interest in this matter. This year my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State attended the annual general meeting of the Disablement Income Group, at which he spoke. Only recently I saw the newly-formed Scottish Access Committee. Wherever possible, the Government intend to ensure that the disabled are properly looked after.

Which political party was in control when the essential decisions about the Glasgow Underground were made? [An HON. MEMBER : "Roy Jenkins."]

I think that it was the Labour Party.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, although there may have been initial discussions with the representatives of the disabled about the Glasgow Underground, there was subsequently a regrettable breakdown in consultations between those representatives and the people responsible for the Underground?

My hon. Friend is right. I do not think that anyone would deny the facts of the situation. There is no way in which the disabled in wheelchairs could be catered for on this Underground. However, the PTE has recently apologised for its oversight in not informing the disabled representatives of the necessary change in decision.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has any plans to meet the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to discuss overspending by local authorities.

On 20 June I shall discuss with the convention once more the need for local authorities to reduce planned expenditure for 1980–81 to the level envisaged in the rate support grant settlement.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the expansion of local authority staff numbers by about 14,000 in the last two years, including a 25 per cent. increase in public relations staff, represents an unnecessary and intolerable burden on the ratepayers in some areas? Will my right hon. Friend assure those authorities that the Government will not allow them to get away wish such inflationary policies with impunity?

I agree that the continued growth in local authority staffs at a time when money is not available for such expansion is very worrying. The figure for the year ending December 1979 showed that manpower in local government had increased by 2·9 per cent., in a year when everyone was supposed to cut back. It is essential that the local authorities should cut back, in the interests of ratepayers and the country as a whole.

Will the Minister desist from interfering in the day-to-day work of local authorities, which must live with real 22 per cent. inflation rather than his cloud-cuckoo 13 per cent.? Can he explain why the East Lothian district council has been stopped from building a desperately-needed community complex with its own money? That application to spend its own money has been lying on the Secretary of State's desk for seven weeks.

Unfortunately, for many years local authorities have been permitted to spend more money than the country can afford. It is our duty to make sure that they understand what the country can afford and that they get their expenditure down to that level.

When my right hon. Friend next meets COSLA will he ask its representatives how many of its members, including the East Lothian district council, were mandated by their electors to spend ratepayers' money to support the Olympics in Moscow? Will he ask what the political complexions of these councils are and what services will have to be cut to finance these grants?

I sympathise with my hon. Friend's remarks. It is difficult to believe that local authorities are as short of money as they claim, when they appear to be able to splash money around to help the Moscow Olympics to get off the ground.

One of the main problems associated with local government is interest payments. What help will the Secretary of State give to local authorities in Scotland to assist with this problem?

I can reassure the hon. Member to some extent. The rise and fall in the interest rates is automatically allowed for in the rate support grant settlement, and that gives considerable security to local authorities on that matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the effect on schools of the industrial action of some Scottish teachers.

Because education authorities keep their records in different ways it is not practicable to determine precisely the total number of pupils whose education has been affected. Since 12 May, however, the education of about 620,000 Scottish pupils has been affected in varying degrees.

When my hon. Friend is next in contact with the teachers' leaders will he remind them that the Labour Government were brought down in order to bring back free collective bargaining, and that is the situation in which the teachers find themselves to-day? Unfortunately, the teachers are indulging in and using political muscle of the kind that is more suited to industry. Therefore, it seems incorrect for them to claim professional status and professional pay when they are indulging in industrial activities of this sort.

I agree. I hope that the teachers will realise that their cause is not helped in any way by this sort of action, particularly when the opportunities are available for them to sit round the table and negotiate. Another meeting is due to take place tomorrow, and I hope that a settlement will be reached then.

Since the Secretary of State and the Minister feel able to interfere in local authorities' staffing levels, why are they so unprepared to try to bring about a settlement of this dispute which, if it goes on, will destroy education? If that happens, the Government will be responsible.

The prospects for a settlement lie entirely with the management—the local authorities—on the one hand, and the teachers' representatives on the other. The sooner they reach a settlement, the better for all concerned.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the most effective action that the teachers can take to draw attention to their salaries is to make representations to their regional councillors? Sadly, that action is often omitted.

My hon. Friend is light to underline the fact that the teachers are employed by the regional authorities—and theirs is the body with whom they must negotiate in this dispute.

Does the Minister appreciate that the teachers, who are probably listening to this discussion on the radio, are becoming increasingly frustrated by the Government's complete insensitivity and the deceitful manner in which they have approached the dispute? The teachers are in no doubt that the people who have the money are those in St. Andrew's House, and it is from them that a solution to the problem must come.

The Government are being open and frank with the teachers. They have the ability to sit down with their employers and try to reach a settlement. That is the fairest way in which to find a solution, and the more talking that there is between the local authorities and the teachers, the sooner a solution will be reached.

May I repeat a question that was not answered earlier? If the meeting tomorrow decides that this dispute should go to arbitration, will the Government accept the result?

That is a matter for the STSC meeting tomorrow. Whether the teachers go to arbitration is entirely a matter for them, and the Government will not interfere with that decision.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what assessment he has made of the effect of the Government's policy of sanctions on Iran on industry in Scotland.

As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade explained in answer to the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) on 23 May, statistics of overseas trade are not collected on a regional basis.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on his policy on toll charges on road bridges in Scotland.

The Government's policy was announced by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport on 27 July last.

Why is the Under-Secretary of State so reticent about the financial stability of the boards responsible for toll charges on Scottish road bridges? Is he aware that any increase in the toll on the Forth road bridge will be regarded by my constituents, as a severe imposition and will inhibit industrial development in Fife?

I doubt that. The present level of tolls is substantially less in real terms than when first imposed. The representatives of the Forth joint board indicated to me that, in their assessment, abolishing tolls would increase the traffic flow by just over 1 per cent. That does not suggest even a remote effect on industrial development.

Given the toll-free status that Kessock bridge will enjoy, as it spans tidal waters, does the Minister recognise that there are anomalies in the imposition of tolls, and not only in Scotland? Does he accept that if such anomalies are to be removed it must be done on a United Kingdom basis?

My hon. Friend is correct. There has to be a United Kingdom policy. The original construction of the Forth and Tay bridges went ahead when local authorities said that they would agree to the imposition of tolls, and successive Governments have supported that view.

Is the Minister aware that I am one of the few hon. Members in the House who have been consistent throughout the years, despite changes in Government, about the need to abolish tolls on these bridges? Does he recognise that it is absurd that a motorist can travel from Land's End right through Fife, which is several hundred miles, and that the only bit of road that he has to pay for is that little bit across the Firth of Forth? Is it not time that such nonsense was ended?

The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that half the debt outstanding on the Tay Bridge is due not to the Government but to local authorities. There would be significant consequences for ratepayers in the Tayside region if action were taken to get rid of the tolls.

Will my hon. Friend keep the situation of the Erskine bridge under particular scrutiny? Is it possible that the costs of collecting the tolls will exceed the revenue?

My hon. Friend is correct. It is difficult to set a realistic level of toll to cover the cost of the outstanding debt on the Erskine bridge, but it is clearly right and proper that those using the bridge should make a contribution comparable to that for other toll bridges in Scotland.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I shall seek leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if, in view of the failure of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board to discharge the duty laid on it by section 4 of the Electricity (Scotland) Act 1979, he will commission another organisation or firm to carry out experiments into the possibility of using wave, tide, wind, natural gas or other forms of energy as alternatives to oil, in the Scottish Islands.

No, Sir. The board already generates some electricity from natural gas on Orkney, and is examining the possible use of other alternatives to oil for the generation of electricity on its isolated systems.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the board's record on this is deplorable? Will he ask the Highlands and Islands Development Board, which has its headquarters in the area, to show some interest and at least carry out experiments. The latest folly of the hydro board is to send four or five copies of a pamphlet on saving energy to each firm in my constituency. We know all about the need to save energy. What we want is cheaper energy.

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says. I am not sure whether he is being entirely fair to the board. It already generates electricity from cheap surplus gas in Orkney, it has had extensive discussions with the British Gas Corporation about the purchase of gas for electricity generation in Shetland. There is also a proposed experiment to develop wind generation in Orkney, which it is hoped will operate experimentally by the end of 1981. We all have to face the problem of saving electricity. The board's area can be no exception.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that my constituents in Tiree and Caol would be happy to try to save electricity, but are not happy to have a surcharge imposed on them? Is he further aware that they will refuse to pay that surcharge?

I note what my hon. Friend says. As he knows, I am still considering the representations made to me by the consultative council. I hope to make an announcement before long.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many workers have been made redundant in Scotland during 1980.

The number of workers involved in redundancies affecting 10 or more people notified to the Manpower Services Commission as due to occur in Scotland up to the end of May 1980 was 18,532. This total includes provisional figures for April and May.

Is the Minister aware that that tragic figure means that it will be little short of criminal if the Government permit the sale of the National Enterprise Board's holdings in Ferranti to jeopardise employment and the company's expansion plans? Will the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend serve notice on the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Industry that they are not prepared to see the company taken over by a giant like GEC, with the consequent implications for employment and the future of the enterprise in Scotland?

As the hon. Gentleman implied, this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry. The importance of the Scottish divisions and the jobs and success that the company brings to the Scottish economy are fully appreciated in the Scottish Office. The Government are aware of the significance of the disposal of NEB shares.

Will my hon. Friend take the opportunity to compliment the steel workers at Glengarnock, who recently agreed to drop traditional demarcation barriers between craft skills and have accordingly avoided redundancies? Does my hon. Friend agree that that is an example to other industries in Scotland?

My hon. Friend is right. It is a good example. The tragedy is that, too often, many companies and workers in Scotland wait until it is too late before taking sensible steps to save their jobs.

Since the Minister is supposed to be responsible for industry in Scotland, is he aware that the Prime Minister's answer yesterday about the sale of Ferranti shares is inadequate? Does he accept that the issue is not the principle of the NEB disposing of the shares, but the manner in which it is done? Does he rather accept that, if the shares go to the highest bidder, regardless of social consequences, that will be carrying out Tory economic policy to a ludicrous extent?

The Government are fully aware of the right hon. Gentleman's point with regard to Ferranti's operations in Scotland. This comes within the responsibility of my right hon. Friend and myself, and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is also aware of the importance of the matter.

Is the Secretary of State prepared to fight the Secretary of State for Industry in the Cabinet with regard to Ferranti?

The Government are fully aware of the problems of the disposal of Ferranti.

"Yes" or "No".

There is no need for the Government, publicly or privately, to conduct their business in the way that the Labour Party regularly does.

Is my hon. Friend aware that much of Scotland's unemployment is in the construction industry? Does he accept that that is partly due to the delay in decisions from St. Andrew's House on public inquiries? Will my hon. Friend try to speed up such decisions and thus create more employment in the construction industry?

We are taking steps to improve the time that it takes for public inquiries to complete their work.

Will the Minister acknowledge that Ferranti has been conspicuously successful in Scotland? Is he aware that management, including top management, and the trade unions are unanimously and bitterly opposed to a takeover by a company such as GEC, which can only prejudice those valuable jobs? Will the Scottish Office do everything possible to prevent that disastrous result?

It is no part of our job, in disposing of NEB shares in Ferranti, to prejudice jobs and the successful operation of the company in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what assistance he has offered to lobster fishermen in the Western Isles.

I am very conscious of the difficulties being experienced by lobster fishermen in the Western Isles and elsewhere as a result of the increase in the import of lobsters from Canada into the United Kingdom and the European Community generally. I am considering as a matter of urgency whether any action can be taken to alleviate the situation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some areas more than half the boats have withdrawn from lobster fishing, and that there is a crisis in the industry? Does he accept that lobster fishermen need assistance now?

There is a problem. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, it is not possible to exclude such imports. The Highlands and Islands Development Board has been asked to help, and it is considering the matter.

May we have an assurance that Canadian lobsters will be seen by the housewife to be Canadian, so that they are not passed off in the shops as lobsters from the Western Isles of Scotland?

I shall look into my hon. Friend's suggestion. Scottish lobsters are of a higher quality than Canadian lobsters, and I have no doubt that that is known to the housewife.

The Secretary of State has known about the problem for many weeks. Why does he come to the House today and say that he is considering the matter, albeit with urgency? Why is not he in a position to announce the help that the industry needs?

Help is being given to the industry, but, unfortunately, the organisation of that part of the industry is not suitable to take advantage of the help that we are channelling through the producer organisations. We are looking for other ways to help, and the Highlands and Islands Development Board is considering the matter.