asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total value of grants made towards projects in Scotland by the European regional development fund since its inception in 1975.

Scotland has received grants totalling £120·5 million from the European regional development fund since its inception in 1975.

Does my hon. Friend agree that these grants have brought considerable advantage to Scotland and provide a further example of the benefits that Scotland gains from our membership of the Community?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. Scotland has received approximately 25 per cent. of total ERDF grants paid to the United Kingdom since the inception of the fund.

Do these figures include grants not only to projects but to individuals and individual enterprises? Secondly, can the Minister say something about the state of the comprehensive projects believed to be sponsored by the EEC and how far they may affect transport costs?

The ERDF figures are for industrial and mainly local government types of projects. But the total funds in grants and loans received from the Community during the period were in excess of £800 million. That, of course, includes the investment bank, the social fund and other things of that kind.

I welcome the moneys that we have received from Europe, but is this not simply United Kingdom cash being recycled after taxation and coming back to Scotland, is not this welcome recognition of Scotland's needs through the efforts of our Ministers?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's remarks. He rightly says, of course, that the funds that are sent back into this country from the European Community are essentially the contributions of the member States.

Is not the Minister aware of the great anxiety among local authorities about the principle of additionality in this regard? Does he realise that many local authorities regard this as the Government using these EEC grants to cut back the capital allocations that they should otherwise be making to local authorities?

These grants are extremely helpful to local authorities in that they reduce the loan burden with which they have to deal. They are, therefore, welcomed by local authorities in that respect.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects to complete his review of the powers and operation of the children's panel system; and if he will make a statement.

First, may I congratulate the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) on his appointment to the Opposition Front Bench. In reply to his question, my right hon. Friend hopes to be able to make a statement on this subject within the next few weeks.

I thank the Minister for his kind remarks. The fact that a statement is imminent is welcome to the Opposition, as is the fact that the original consultation document emphasised the worth and the established place of the children's panel system. However, will the Minister also note in his final deliberations that any introduction, as a result of the review, of a wide range of punitive powers for the panels which would change their atmosphere and intent would he anything but welcome?

First, I am glad to reciprocate the hon. Gentleman's compliment in respect of our unique system of children's panels in Scotland. We had about 170 submissions on that paper. I can confirm that most responses were against any type of punitive measures.

Will my hon. Friend accept that there is an overwhelming need to restore a sense of parental and family responsibility for the anti-social actions of children? Will he ensure that any new powers brought forward will include powers to fine the parents of children found guilty of such anti-social activities?

No, I can give no such guarantee. I had meetings with the Scottish Association of Children's Panels, the Children's Panels Chairmen's Group, the Association of Reporters of Children's Panels, the Regional Reporters' Group, the Scottish branch of the British Association of Social Workers and the Association of Directors of Social Work. Although most people agreed that there was a case for some voluntary reparation, punitive fines on parents or children were largely not wanted by most people I saw.

Will the Minister confirm that, following three years of decline in the number of referrals to children's panels, the indications, certainly from my own constituency in Glasgow, are that, as a result of the Government's economic policies and the social deprivation that they are causing, a big increase in referrals to children's panels will be shown in the statistics for 1980?

That has not happened yet. In the lifetime of the children's panel system, including the present year, referrals have gone down, as have the number of children in list D schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to encourage the promotion of Scottish seed potatoes at home and abroad.

I have been considering a number of different options to encourage marketing of Scottish seed potatoes both within the United Kingdom and abroad. I have received representations from various interested bodies and hope to make a statement before long.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the £50,000 contribution to keep the ball in play has been widely welcomed in the industry, perhaps most particularly by Mr. John Hay the convenor of the potato committee of the Scottish NFU? Does he not accept that we need a major long-term initiative, not just a short-term palliative, if we are to have a seed potato industry that can compete effectively with our major competitors who work in a tightly operated industry based on levies on their own producers?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he said about the £50,000 aid that we have given to the association. I also agree with him that there is a generally agreed need for some action to be taken to give our seed potato industry some procedures equivalent to those that are available to its competitors. I hope to get an agreement on the type of organisation that will be acceptable to all concerned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman likely to give the Scottish Seed Potato Association development council status, as has been requested by the NFU?

That is one of the options that we are considering. It is not one that is universally agreed, but we are considering it.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the greatest number of representations that he has received on this issue are to the effect that the Scottish Seed Potato Association should be given development council status so that it can perform the job of marketing Scottish seed potatoes throughout the world?

I can confirm that the argument that has been put to me is that the Scottish seed potato industry is now in direct competition at home and abroad with French and Dutch producers who already have central organisations which collect compulsory levies for promotion and marketing. It is that proposal and others that we are at present considering.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is satisfied with the current state of the Scottish fishing industry.

The fishing industry, like most others in Europe and elsewhere, is having to adapt to changed economic circumstances and reduced fishing opportunities. To sustain it through these difficulties we have already provided substantial financial assistance. There are, however, grounds for cautious optimism for the future, once a common fisheries policy is agreed.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Will he confirm that in his further negotiations to achieve a common fisheries policy there will be no weakening of resolve on the part of the Government to ensure an adequate settlement which takes due note of the particular interests of the Scottish inshore fisherman, particularly in regard to quotas and access?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. We were as disappointed as anyone that it was not possible to reach agreement at the December meeting. But our negotiating objectives remain exactly the same as they always have been, and we intend to pursue them in close consultation with the industry itself.

Is the Secretary of State aware that his phrase "cautious optimism" will be met with amazement by fishermen in Scotland, who are suffering severely as a result of reduced fishing opportunities, low prices and cheap imports largely caused by the over-valued pound? Does he not accept that a CFP agreement is now less likely, partly as a result of the French situation and also because of the tragic death of Mr. Gundelach, and that, anyway, agreement on the CFP is no substitute for effective action to save our industry?

I do not quite agree with the last part of the hon. Gentleman's comment. I think that the whole industry is united in feeling that the best thing for its future is to get an agreed CFP which it can accept, so that it can then plan realistically for the future. The fact that we got so near to an agreement in December gives some grounds for hope that this will be available not too long hence. I agree with the hon. Gentleman's reference to the tragic death of Mr. Gundelach yesterday, which is a great blow to everyone concerned with Europe.

Does my right hon. Friend foresee that the tragic death of Mr. Finn Gundelach will further delay the completion of negotiations on the CFP? If so, will he take steps to discuss with the fishing industry the cash problems which would then arise in view of that further delay?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, but I do not think the tragic death of Mr. Gundelach will by itself cause any delay in the negotiations on the CFP. That is more likely to arise from difficulties in the negotiations than from anything else. I can assure him that we shall keep in the closest touch with the industry through what may be a difficult period ahead, with the objective of getting an agreement as quickly as possible.

rose—

Order. This matter comes up again on question 8, but I shall call one more hon. Member for either side in order to ease the pressure on question 8.

Has the Secretary of State had any further thoughts on either a fuel subsidy or an abatement of tax on fuel, given that such methods are used by our competitors in other countries?

The Commission is already taking action against the French on account of the fuel subsidy, which they have been operating without agreement or permission. We have already provided about £17 million worth of aid this year for the industry, which is proving extremely helpful at a difficult time. However, a fuel subsidy as such is extremely difficult to justify, particularly as we should probably be taken to task by the Commission if we were to give one.

With regard to possible delays in reaching agreement on a common fisheries policy, is my right hon. Friend aware of the great difficulties faced by Scottish fishermen who in the past have had access to Norwegian waters? Will he undertake bilateral talks with Norway in order to regain that access urgently?

I sympathise about the difficulties that some sections of our fishing industry are facing as a result of the accident whereby Norwegian waters are denied to them because of the failure of the December meeting. However, it is not open to us to hold bilateral discussions on this matter. It must be pursued by the Commission. That will be done urgently and we hope to get some arrangement as quickly as possible so that our fishermen may resume fishing in Norwegian waters and the Norwegians in ours.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give an assurance that the Scottish Assembly building will not be used for any purpose which would restrict its ultimate availability for a future Assembly.

The Government have decided that the buildings of the former Royal High School shall be used primarily to house the Crown Office, with provisions being made also for some ancillary court accommodation. The debating chamber, a lobby and associated rooms will be available for parliamentary use when required. As all buildings will remain in Government ownership, any future change of use will be within the control of the Government.

Does the Secretary of State realise that that is a deeply disappointing answer for the majority of people in Scotland, who voted in favour of a Scottish Assembly? It is the final betrayal in a series of betrayals which started with Lord Home's double-cross. Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that when the Labour Party takes power after the next general election, it is committed to introducing a Scottish Assembly and, therefore, all the buildings should be kept available for that purpose?

I am sorry to say that I fear that the hon. Gentleman is remarkably out of touch with opinion in Scotland. The vast majority of people in Scotland will be extremely glad to hear that this large and expensive building, which has remained unused since the debacle under the previous Administration, will now have a purpose which will involve public money being put to use. I would have thought that most Scots would regard that as an extremely good piece of news.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that his answer means that the building is at the disposal of a future Government for use by a future Assembly if that Government so decide? He said that the building would be available for parliamentary purposes. Will he consider transferring Scottish Grand Committee debates, such as the one we had recently on teacher-training colleges, to that chamber for the greater convenience of the public and the greater depth of our debates?

The buildings will be available to any 'future Government for any use which they decide to put them to. The right hon. Gentleman's second point is tied up with the all-party talks and the motions that will have to be discussed by this House before any change is made. No doubt my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House will take note of what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that there might have been something to be said for leaving the building standing empty as a monument to the folly, arrogance, extravagance and disregard for the will of Parliament shown over the matter by the Labour Government?

I agree with my hon. Friend that the use of that large sum of money, without any assurance that Parliament or the Scottish people wished it to be spent in that way, was a deplorable performance.

rose—

Order. I shall call the Front Bench after one more hon. Member from the Back Benches.

Will the Secretary of State accept that the real scandal is not the changed use of the building but the failure of the Government to come forward with the revised constitutional proposals promised by his right hon. Friend Lord Home of the Hirsel? Will he say when the Government propose to take such steps, or will it be only on the brink of an election that another series of promises is put up as a sop to the Scottish people?

As I understand the point of view expressed by that person, he is resolutely opposed to any form of devolution. As he took no part in the all-party talks, I do not think that he has much status in this matter.

Why does not the Secretary of State use as part of his defence on the question of devolution the fact that five of the six present occupants of the Government Front Bench, including himself, were in favour of devolution at one time? Is the Secretary of State now saying—against the background of what he has said to the right hon. Member for Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles (Mr. Steel)—that the building will be available for use by a future Government and that in future he will be in favour of or against devolution? What work is going on in the Scottish Office in relation to devolution?

That is entirely dependent on the circumstances at the time. The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that the issue here is what these buildings are to be used for, and at long last the Government have found a use for something that was left as an expensive white elephant by the Labour Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what opportunities exist in Scotland for those in the 16 to 18 year age group to participate in training schemes promoted by the Manpower Services Commission relating to work on offshore platforms.

Under the youth opportunities programme, the Manpower Services Commission provides short introductory courses in a range of basic skills for unemployed young people aged 16 to 18 years. A number of these are relevant to offshore work. Young people completing such courses can progress to shore-based work experience projects with oil companies, which can lead to offshore employment once they have reached the age of 18, the minimum age at which offshore employment is legally permitted.

My hon. Friend has often made the point that great employment opportunities exist in the North Sea. Against that background, will he agree that what is provided at present by the MSC is, frankly, insufficient? Will he, as a matter of urgency, ask the MSC to examine this matter and to look into it with the oil companies, to see whether there can be directly related training courses through the youth opportunities programme for young people of 16 to 18 in Scotland?

I agree with my hon. Friend, and the MSC would also agree with him, because it is most anxious to increase the number of training opportunities available so that young people can learn as quickly as possible to take advantage of the job opportunities that are directly related to the expansion of North Sea activity.

Will the Minister comment on the finances available to the petroleum industry training board for this purpose, although I recognise that that is a direct responsibility of the Department of Employment? Will he pay a visit to the establishment at Montrose?

I would be happy to consider visiting Montrose. The petroleum industry training board is encouraging oil companies to take a greater part in the youth opportunities programme so that the board can also expand its activities.

I accept and appreciate what the Minister has said about the youth opportunities programme. Will he give us an assurance that there will be no question of lowering the age from 18 to 16 for youths employed offshore, in view of the very dangerous duties involved in work on offshore platforms?

Yes, I can, and I know that a survey done by the board has shown that people who are between the ages of 18 and 24 or 25 are unlikely to stay long in North Sea activities. The age at which people retain such employment there is between 25 and 30.

Will the Minister agree that there would be better opportunities on offshore platforms if the Portavadie scheme had materialised? Will the Secretary of State order a full public inquiry into this sordid affair, in view of the grave public concern that a mysterious business man such as Mr. Oliver Iny can make a profit of over 150 per cent. in a few days out of an asset that was built with over £3 million of public money?

With respect, Mr. Speaker, I do not think that that matter arises from the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends next to visit one of the preserved railways in Scotland which have been assisted by the Scottish Tourist Board; and what steps he intends to take further to promote Scottish railway preservation.

I have no immediate plans to visit any preserved railway. If, in the opinion of the Scottish Tourist Board, any proposed railway preservation scheme will provide or improve tourist amenities or facilities and will be commercially viable, financial assistance can be offered under section 4 of the Development of Tourism Act 1969.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Is he aware that the Department of Employment has stated that the youth opportunities programme could be usefully combined with the activities of many railway preservation companies, to their mutual beneft? Will he, therefore, in functions both within and outwith his Department, do everything he can to see that as much use as possible is made of the tremendous voluntary effort that is available within the railway preservation movement for the benefit of the economy generally?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his suggestion and I shall draw it to the attention of the Scottish Tourist Board and the Highlands and Islands Development Board, both of which have some interest in these matters.

Although the Secretary of State has no plans to visit a preserved railway, would he care to visit the railway station at Cumbernauld and travel with me to Glasgow, as that rail link is in very poor condition and would be best served by electrification? Will he press for that improvement with the British Railways Board?

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his kind invitation to me. I am always anxious to make a journey on the railways whenever I can. As he knows, decisions on electrification have to be taken by the British Railways Board, and in some cases by Strathclyde region and the passenger transport executive. No doubt they will note the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the latest discussions he has had with representatives of the fishing industry.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and I met representatives of the fishing industry on 11 December and again during the Council of Fisheries Ministers on 16–17 December. They indicated their continued support for and encouragement of the Government's approach to the common fisheries policy negotiations.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that there will be great dangers to very large parts of the fishing industry—not just confined to Aberdeen—if the Aberdeen fishmeal factory is allowed to close? Has he been following the sad saga of burdens and impediments imposed on the new consortium by Aberdeen district council? In particular, will he tell the House whether Aberdeen district council is within its rights in demanding a surety of £200,000?

I understand that Aberdeen district council, in asking for this surety, is acting in its capacity as the owner or landlord of the site and not as a local authority as such. I understand, however, that a useful meeting was held yesterday between representatives of the present owners of the factory and representatives of the consortium which hopes to be able to take it over.

Will the Secretary of State accept that the very sad and sorry saga of the fishmeal plant is that from the very beginning it has polluted the atmosphere, to the great detriment of those who live and work in the constituency of Aberdeen, South in particular, and that the Aberdeen district council, in its efforts to get a surety from the consortium, is concerned to make certain that there is money available to provide equipment to deal with pollution? Will he, therefore, look very carefully at ways and means whereby the difference between the consortium and the town council can be resolved in a constructive way, and not follow the path taken by his hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Sproat), who has let his insatiable demand for political headlines overcome his good sense and judgment in taking care of his own constituency?

I very much disagree with what the hon. Gentleman says about my hon. Friend, who is quite rightly championing a very important unit in his constituency which provides jobs and which is also an important support for the fishing industry. But I share the hon. Gentleman's hope that all concerned will look at the problem constructively and bear in mind that it is not only a question of pollution, important though that is, but that there are also jobs involved.

Has my hon. Friend recently had discussions about local fishing plans such as the one suggested for the Clyde estuary? Does he agree that such plans are essential if a secure future is to be given to those fishermen who fish in their local waters, who have largely conserved fish in those waters, and who have not fished in other people's waters to the detriment of such people?

I agree that fishing plans can be extremely important, and we have frequently dealt with the matter in discussions with the fishing industry and in the negotiations. Fishing plans are an accepted part of the Community's attitude to the common fisheries policy, and we shall make sure that they are not forgotten in the ultimate solution.

If representatives of the fishing industry were to ask the Government for fuel subsidies similar to those given to their competitors across the Channel by mainland European Governments, what would be the Secretary of State's response?

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman was present, but I said a few minutes ago that the Commission has already taken action against the French for introducing such a subsidy. There is, therefore, not much future in our getting into the same position.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he intends to take to reverse the rapidly accelerating de-industrialisation of Scotland.

The Government are taking numerous steps to help industries which are adversely affected by the recession and to help those who are affected by unemployment. We are also assisting new investment in many areas, including some notable developments in the hon. Gentleman's constituency.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that tens of thousands of jobs in manufacturing industry have been lost and are increasingly being lost as a direct consequence of the Government's policies? When will the process end? Is he aware that the CBI, the trade unions and everyone else in Scotland, except apparently Ministers, are desperately concerned? What action will he take?

The situation will improve when wage awards match the economic situation of the country. As the rate of inflation continues to come down, so will interest rates. That is the best thing that can happen for jobs and investment in Scotland.

With regard to industry in the West of Scotland, has my hon. Friend seen the press stories concerning the Talbot car factory at Linwood? What is the up-to-date position?

The Government stand ready to assist with any investment that the parent company, PSA, wishes to make at Linwood. We shall be only too pleased to discuss that with the company. My right hon. Friend is meeting the chief executive of Talbot later this week. Recent reports in the press that my right hon. Friend has been discussing the future of Talbot with Japanese or any other foreign car companies are quite untrue.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that we are sick, sore and tired of listening to him blaming the wage earners for the de-industrialisation of Scotland? Is he aware that small businesses, which were the prime supporters of this Government during and after the election, have been sadly let down? Is he further aware that we have a record number of liquidations in Scotland? Is he therefore prepared to take some action, and perhaps even do what I have asked him to do on several occasions —resign and let someone in who will do something for the country?

I am not surprised that the hon. Gentleman is sick, sore and tired. However, I hope that by now he realises that the people who are destroying jobs in this country are those who incite wage demands that employers cannot afford.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the antics and actions of Opposition Members over defence spending have much to do with uncertainty in Scotland, where we depend so much on avionics, aviation, shipyards and manufacturing industry, which are directly linked to such expenditure and where 50 per cent. of the output is exported?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. The United Kingdom defence budget is extremely important to jobs and investment in Scotland.

Going back to the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Bothwell (Mr. Hamilton), is the Minister aware that in Cunninghame we have lost 6,000 jobs in the past two years and that more than a quarter of all manufacturing industry has disappeared in the same period? When will the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend, who represents an Ayrshire constituency, do something to stop all industry in Ayrshire from disappearing?

As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, within the past few weeks I have had meetings with Cunninghame district council and other representatives in the area. We are planning a new initiative that will help to attract jobs to Cunninghame.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that his Department is working actively with other economic Ministries to tackle the vexed question of energy pricing that is troubling many firms in my constituency? Will he accept an invitation from me to visit companies, particularly small companies, in East Fife that have excellent products, first-class industrial relations and are improving their trade, particularly in the export market, and increasing their work forces, even in the present difficult circumstances?

I look forward to visiting my hon. Friend's constituency within the next few months. My right hon. Friend is closely involved with the Secretary of State for Energy and other Cabinet colleagues over the subject of energy pricing.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is extremely silly and offensive to blame wage demands for the deteriorating industrial situation in Scotland, which has arisen directly as a result of Government economic and industrial policies? Will he note that the French company gave the most specific and categoric assurances about maintaining manufacturing capacity at Linwood and that we expect to see them fulfilled? Does he accept that it would be catastrophic for the West of Scotland, not least the steel industry, if Linwood were in danger of closing, and that everything must be done to maintain capacity at an assured level?

I accept entirely the right hon. Gentleman's concern about Linwood, which we share. I am fully aware of the assurances to which he refers. However, when he challenges our view on the reason for the economic recession, I cannot believe that he does not appreciate that inflation has destroyed jobs and that inflation has been caused by undue wage demands.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will estimate the effect of the rate support grant settlement on the level of rates in Scotland.

If local authorities respond reasonably in their expenditure to what the Government have provided, there is no reason why rate increases next year should not be substantially less than in the current year.

Since the Minister realises that, given the savage cutback in the rate settlement this year, the only way that councils can prevent rate increases from spiralling is by sacking more people, is he not ashamed to encourage the disgraceful campaign to abolish more jobs, with 250,000 Scots already out of work?

If local authorities wish to reduce their rate burden, they must reduce their expenditure. Manpower, unfortunately accounts for 70 per cent. of the expenditure of most local authorities.

Has my hon. Friend had a chance to study reports of the forecast of the convenor of Grampian regional council of future rate levels? If he has, does he agree that it is an object lesson to other more prodigal and less conscientious authorities?

Yes, indeed. I am delighted that already two regional councils, including Grampian, and one major city have indicated that they expect their rate increases to be significantly under 20 per cent. in the forthcoming year.

Does the Minister recollect that a year ago he was assuring us that rate increases in the coming year would be very modest, although the actual increases averaged 32 per cent. in Scotland? Why should we therefore listen to him now, when it is already clear from the evidence coming from the authorities in Scotland that we shall be faced next year with substantial and savage rate increases similar to those that we have already suffered in the current year of 32 per cent?

If, for the current year, local authorities had not budgeted £83 million in excess of the Government's guidelines, rate increases would have been nothing near what they were.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when next he plans to meet the chairman of the South of Scotland Electricity Board to discuss the provision of energy in the South of Scotland.

My right hon. Friend and I are to meet the chairman of the South of Scotland Electricity Board later this month.

Is not my hon. Friend concerned that the vast over-capacity of around 60 per cent. in the generating capacity of the South of Scotland Electricity Board area over the next six years will create a very large wastage of public money? What action does he intend to take to mitigate or reduce that glaring example of wastage of public funds?

Over-capacity is difficult to judge at this stage. However, on straight capacity grounds, although Torness is not expected to be required until 1993, the planned commissioning of the first unit in 1987 is justified by the overall fuel balance in the Scottish generating system that Torness should achieve. My hon. Friend will know that the SSEB has estimated that that will produce savings of up to £400 million.

How on earth can the Minister justify the SSEB spending money on mothballing a conventional power station at the same time as it is building a new one?

That is a strong argument in favour of Torness. The fuel costs of the oil-fired station at Inverkip are such that, unfortunately, its use must be kept to a minimum. Torness on stream will be much more economical.

Will the Minister confirm that it is the intention of the SSEB, and possibly also of the hydro-electric board, to close power stations? Will he give the cost of Inverkip and say how much public money has been thrown away on that project, in the same way as public money will be wasted on Torness?

The purpose of the board is to produce electricity at the lowest possible cost for domestic and industrial consumers in Scotland. It is easy for the hon. Gentleman to be wise after the event on Inverkip, but when that station was planned and commissioned, no one expected the quadrupling of oil prices in 1973 and further, subsequent, rises.

When Ministers meet the chairman of the board, will they seek an assurance that Barony power station, which is in an area of already high unemployment and is efficient and produces electricity cheaply from coal slurry, will remain open? Can he assure me that he will seek that assurance from Mr. Berridge?

If the hon. Gentleman tables a question or writes to me on that matter I shall be happy to answer him.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the latest information available to him on manning levels in Scottish local authorities.

The latest joint manpower watch report shows that in September last year Scottish local authorities were employing 2,000 more staff than in September 1979 and 15,000 more than in December 1977. My right hon. Friend and I have made it abundantly clear since May 1979, and I reiterate this in the strongest possible terms, that the national and local interest requires an absolute reduction in the manpower and financial resources devoted to the public sector, and therefore that this upward trend must be reversed.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Given that many local authorities are acting responsibly, does he agree that the overall figures are absolutely appalling? Are they not a further justification for the Government to take powers under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Bill to curb the continuing extravagance of a minority of mindless bureaucrats who pay no attention to the needs of ratepayers or taxpayers?

My hon. Friend is correct in saying that the major increases are concentrated in a number of authorities. I am pleased to be able to tell the House that I have been informed today that the joint manpower committee of COSLA has agreed to the voluntary release and publication of local manpower figures. From now on it will be possible to identify where staff increases are taking place.

Manning levels are dependent on rates income and the Minister has already referred to COSLA. What is his response to COSLA's view that, in order to prevent the breakdown of local authority finance, it is faced with having to make a much higher provision for inflation or meet a large deficit in 1981–82?

I have no doubt that if local authorities reduce expenditure, as a number of regions and districts have indicated they intend to do, rates increases can be at a moderate level. The previous Government showed that there can be substantial reductions in local authority manpower without redundancies if local authorities respond constructively.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the increase of 15,000 to which he referred is mainly in administrative grades and not among working operatives? Is it not the case that the 15,000 would have been better employed in the small businesses that are being continually penalised by the Government? Those 15,000 people could easily have been found jobs in small businesses.

My hon. Friend and the House will be interested to know that since September 1979 the largest increases in manpower have been in the categories of social services, and recreation, leisure and tourism.

If it is the Minister's thesis that local authorities that are responsible in terms of manpower planning will have low rate burdens, will he direct his attention to the Strathclyde authority, which has certainly co-operated in that way but which is also facing massive rate increases? Can he explain that?

Certainly. I am pleased that Strathclyde began last year to reduce its manpower, but even that authority shows a net increase compared with the time when the Government first called on local authorities to reduce manpower. I have no doubt that if Strathclyde continues the trend that it began last year, the prospect for its ratepayers in future years will be that much brighter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he expects unemployment to fall in Scotland.

It has not been the practice of this or previous Administrations to forecast unemployment. The best means of ensuring a fall in unemployment is to reduce inflation and restore competitiveness. That remains the objective of our policies.

In the light of the 80,000 increase in Scottish unemployment last year to 260,000 would the Minister care to tell us why the figure of 350,000 will not be reached by December this year?

I have already answered that question by making clear that it has not been the practice of this or previous Governments to forecast levels of unemployment.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that it would be far easier to attract new industries and jobs to Scotland if Labour Members stopped describing Scotland as a sort of industrial disaster area and used their undoubted talents to sell Scotland at home and abroad as a sound base for industrial development?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. There is no question but that the more we emphasise industrial deprivation and hardship in the economy, the less attractive we make Scotland to investment from other parts of the country and overseas.

May I assist the Minister by giving him an example of how unemployment could increase? Is he aware that motorists who use the National Car Parks facilities at Edinburgh airport are given a glossy brochure telling them that Fiat cars are the best buy since sliced bread? Is not that a betrayal of our car industry? What will he do about it?

It is not a betrayal of our car industry, but a challenge to it, and we should accept the challenge.

Is my hon. Friend aware that perhaps the most important step towards reducing inflation is to get rid of inflation-proofing of Civil Service and our own pensions?

That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, among others.

Is the Minister aware that the hardship caused by unemployment is likely to increase when redundancy payments are expended and when oil construction projects begin to run down in a year or two? What steps are the Government taking to have plans ready for those eventualities?

Neither the right hon. Gentleman nor any other hon. Member need worry about the running down of oil supplies, which have a future of at least 20 or 30 years. In the past few days, there has been a massive increase in BP's finds in the North Sea. Of course, redundancy payments have a short life and we hope that they will help people to manage until the economy starts to improve.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the proposed microelectronics research centre for Scotland.

As my right hon. Friend indicated in a written answer on 16 December, the Government have decided that the combined resources of the Wolfson Microelectronics Institute at Edinburgh university and Computer Application Services at Heriot-Watt university provide a strong base for developing the wider application of microelectronics technology throughout industry. Public financial assistance for this important new project is under active consideration.

In some ways, that is a welcome answer, but will the Minister say why he has rejected the general tenor of the report given to the SDA on going downstream to condition the market for the use of microelectronic appliances in Scotland? What steps will he take, together with the SDA and other organisations, to continue the downstream activity in that respect?

The downstream activity is the prime Government interest. We envisage it starting on the good foundations of Wolfson and CAS. That does not exclude Strathclyde and Glasgow universities and other organisations, including the SDA. We thought it better to add the marketing and awareness programme to an existing technological base, and we are doing that.

Bearing in mind that Central Scotland has a greater concentration of electronics activity than anywhere outside the state of California, and the importance of the microelectronics centre that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary is supporting, will my hon. Friend ensure that funding of that important British national centre will not have to rely only on funding from Scottish budgets? It is a centre of major national significance on which we should build in a national way.

The bulk of the funding will come from private sources. Government funding will be United Kingdom Government funding, as my hon. Friend requests, and will not come only from the Scottish Office budget.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what are the principles on which he decides to hold a fatal accident inquiry.

Section 1 of the Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976 provides that inquiries must be held into deaths occurring during employment or while in legal custody, unless criminal proceedings have been brought in relation to the incident. The section also gives the Lord Advocate power to direct the appropriate procurator fiscal to apply for the holding of an inquiry into a death where it appears to the Lord Advocate to be expedient in the public interest to have one.

Does my hon. and learned Friend realise the importance of the latter part of his answer, in that fatal accident inquiries are of great advantage in allaying public misgivings in cases of accidental death, such as those due to the wooden road barriers in Argyll which have now been removed as a result of the inquiries? Will he continue to make wide use of the power to order a fatal accident inquiry in similar circumstances?

I confirm that I shall do that. The inquiries have proved to be extremely useful. The fact that, in the main, the barriers in Argyll have been removed as a result of the comparatively cheap inquiries shows that this is a major way to assure public safety.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what consultations he has had recently with the Lord President of the Court of Session about machinery for criminal appeals.

The machinery for criminal appeals is one of a number of topics which have been discussed at meetings which take place on a regular basis between the Lord Justice General and my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate.

Does the Solicitor-General accept that one cause of appeals is the lengthy prison sentences imposed in the High Court? Has he studied the admirable speech made by the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind) to the Scottish Association for the Study of Deliquency at Peebles, when he questioned the present lengthy sentences being imposed and suggested that courts should consider carefully whether three years would be sufficient rather than five years? Does he share the scepticism about the present lengthy sentences being dealt out by the courts?

The question of sentence—which is not for me—is nevertheless one which has two sides, namely, public reassurance and appropriate penalty. If the hon. Gentleman cares to study the figures relating to what he calls "lengthy sentences" that were decreased by the Appeal Court, he will find that they were very few indeed. The judiciary, on the whole, got it right.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many sittings of the High Court in Glasgow will be required for the first quarter of 1981.

There will be three sittings of the High Court in Glasgow in the first quarter of 1981 in January, February and March. There are no plans at the present time for any additional sittings.

Does my hon. and learned Friend accept that the number of cases that will be heard at those sittings will represent a massive increase compared with the number of cases heard in the immediate post-war years? Does he agree that that emphasises the importance of bringing into effect the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 at the earliest possible moment?

With regret, I confirm my hon. Friend's remarks. Whereas the average number of cases in the Glasgow High Court in the 1960s was 112 per year, in 1980 it was 394 on indictment. The numbers throughout Scotland as a whole have risen from 149 to 607. I am sure that the provisions of the Act will help to reduce the crime that we are suffering.

In the light of my hon. and learned Friend's answer, may I ask whether he is satisfied that his noble Friend has sufficient deputes to cope with the predicted number of cases, in Glasgow and elsewhere in Scotland?

Yes. The Solicitor-General also helps out from time to time to increase their number.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if he is satisfied with the arrangements which exist for the payment for witnesses.

Yes, Sir. Since April 1976 about 80,000 claims for expenses by witnesses have been processed, and as far as I am aware there have been very few complaints regarding the arrangements which exist for the payment of witnesses.

Does my hon. and learned Friend accept that it is important, as far as is possible, to ensure that witnesses are not summoned unnecessarily to attend courts, and should not be detained there for undue periods?

Yes. I am especially concerned about that matter. There is an important responsibility upon members of the legal profession to ensure that responsible pleas are timeously given, especially if they are pleas of guilty that can be negotiated, so that witnesses are not unnecessarily cited and, when they attend, are not unnecessarily detained. I hope that the legal profession will use the new provisions of the intermediate diet and the early service of indictments to ensure that responsible pleas, adjusted pleas of guilty, are given timeously so that members of the public are not unnecessarily inconvenienced.

As witnesses, among others, are greatly inconvenienced by the present arrangements in the Glasgow sheriff court, will the Solicitor-General give an assurance that the long-awaited project for a new sheriff court in Glasgow will go ahead?

The right hon. Gentleman knows that I am not entirely responsible for building projects in Glasgow. I understand that there is a dispute about the desirability of spending so much money. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will ensure that the building in Glasgow, whatever form it takes, will not interfere with justice.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if he intends to institute a separate register for charges arising out of offences committed at or near the location of sporting events in Scotland.

No, Sir.

Does not my hon. and learned Friend agree that, until such a register is instituted, it will continue to be more difficult to assess the measures that are needed to control the growing incidence of violence and other offensive behaviour at sporting occasions?

I do not agree with that. It would be difficult to say whether somebody who commits an offence as a result of a dispute about a football match would fall into the register. I am sure that the new measures will have considerable effect. If figures relating to those prosecuted under the new Act are required, they can be extracted with ease.

Although he does not agree with the content of the suggestion of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram), will the Solicitor-General at least recognise that there is considerable public interest in how the new provisions will operate?

Indeed, I agree with the hon. Gentleman. We shall take every opportunity to demonstrate their effect, or lack of effect. I hope that they will be very effective in controlling football violence.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he considers the present arrangements by the Crown Office and procurators fiscal for the retention of property for long periods to be used as evidence needs revision.

There are standing instructions from the Lord Advocate to procurators fiscal relating to the retention, safe-keeping and return of property which is a production in any criminal case. Such instructions must also have regard to the rules of evidence applying in criminal cases which require the Crown to produce the article itself in court unless it is not practicable or convenient so to do. Unfortunately, in the majority of cases the Crown is forced to retain property until the proceedings have concluded. This could regularly be avoided by the lodging by the defence of a minute of admissions and I hope that this will become a much more frequent practice.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that the retention by the Crown Office and procurators fiscal of motor vehicles for anything up to six months is a ludicrous practice? After all, those vehicles will never be driven into court as evidence.

I agree with my hon. Friend. It is normally the practice to lodge a label instead of a vehicle concerned in a case, but I should like to see a much wider adoption of the practice whereby the presentation of objects or the deprivation of witnesses of their possessions for long periods can be avoided by agreement with those who act for the accused.

I may gain some advantage myself out of that.

Pursuant to the leave that you granted me yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I wish to call attention to a conversation concerning British Steel Corporation policy towards Workington that took place in the offices of the corporation on Thursday 18 December 1980 between Mr. Ian MacGregor and myself, and I beg to move,

That the matter of the complaint be referred to the Committee of Privileges.

I make no comment on what the hon. Gentleman said, or on the matter that has been proposed by him for reference to the Committee of Privileges. I believe that the best course for the House to take is to refer the matter, as proposed in the motion. When the Committee has reported, the House can of course comment if it wishes to do so. On that basis, I agree with the motion and think that the House would be well advised to accept it.

This is obviously a complaint which, under the new procedure, the Committee of Privileges should deal with as rapidly as possible and, I should have thought, without any real comment from the House.