asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his assessment of the losses to farmers in southern Scotland caused by the blizzards of 23 and 25 April; and what consideration has been given to the payment of compensation.

It is too early for a final assessment. A preliminary survey indicates that the bulk of the Scottish hill farming industry has escaped relatively unscathed, though there are reports of heavy losses by individual farmers in the south-western and border areas. I shall consider the matter further when I have fuller details of the losses.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Although it seems that the overall situation may not be as bad as one feared, does he not agree that some individual farmers, especially in my constituency, have suffered badly? Can he hold out any hope of aid towards recovery for them under one or other of the funds under the common agricultural policy? Will the Government add their weight to such an application?

I agree with my hon. Friend. Information that I have received suggests that some farmers have suffered severe losses, as they have in the area of my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Mr. Monro) and in Ayrshire too. In the past assistance has been received from the European Community disaster fund for this sort of occasion. I understand that the National Farmers Unions are considering whether to put a case direct to the Commission. My officials will be available to help in preparing any such case.

There were some reports that the Scottish Office had turned down the suggestion of making financial recompense. Are those reports inaccurate? Is it not true that the initiative to the Common Market should come from the Government, not from the NFU?

I did not see such reports, but if there were any they were inaccurate. The Scottish Office has not turned down such a suggestion. It is normal for organisations to apply to the Commission, but my officials will help in doing so.

Although my constituency did not suffer heavily from those storms, when the Secretary of State is considering the condition of agriculture in general will he bear in mind the poor economic returns that it is suffering? Will he consider some general help to the industry?

I accept what the right hon. Gentleman says. As he will appreciate, the decision to be made is whether there has been such a large-scale national disaster that special aid is required. I agree that agriculture has had a difficult time generally but the Government have done all they can to help.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how much was spent per pupil in secondary schools in Scotland in each of the past three years at constant prices.

Local authority current expenditure on secondary schools at November 1979 prices, excluding items such as meals and milk, was £778 per pupil in 1977–78 and £786 in 1978–79. The provisional figure for 1979–80 is £813 and the provision made in the rate support grant settlement for 1980–81 was £825 per pupil.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that those attending secondary schools in Scotland are benefiting fully from the extra expenditure on their education and that the extra money is not being wasted on more administration?

I take my hon. Friend's point. We are satisfied that sufficient provision is being made in our secondary schools to give the school population a first-class education. We are constantly urging local authorities to ensure that the expenditure is used in that way and not wasted on unnecessary administration.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there must be increases and decreases of expenditure to keep up with the times? Will he accept that there is widespread appreciation of the Government's increase in funding for microcomputers in schools? Is he aware that already in Madras college in St. Andrews there is to be a demonstration within the next fortnight of the work that pupils have done in programme development?

I am pleased to hear that. I have seen examples of the splendid use being made of microcomputers in a number of schools in Scotland. Children take to the new technology with great ease. It is therefore most important that the Government's programme should be introduced now so that the younger generation will not grow up with fears of modern technology.

Surely the Minister is not being frank with the House. He cannot have it both ways. He cannot condemn local authorities for overspending and at the same time—

:Order. The hon. Gentleman must ask a question.

Will the Minister tell the House what level expenditure on education by authorities would have reached had his guidelines on rating been followed? He cannot claim high levels of expenditure and at the same time condemn local authorities.

We condemn local authorities which wastefully spend the funds made available. We do not condemn local authorities which make proper use of the funds made available for education—for example, the funds that I was happy to announce to the House this afternoon.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to provide employment services for those declared redundant at the H. D. Lee factory in Larkfield industrial estate, Greenock.

All the normal employment services of the Greenock jobcentre are available to the redundant workers. In addition, a team of employment advisers from the Manpower Services Commission's employment service division is ready to visit the factory to offer advice on alternative employment and training opportunities.

Is the Secretary of State aware that this firm, unlike most firms in my constituency, is behaving badly to its employees, who have reacted by having a sit-in for nearly 15 weeks? I would expect the right hon. Gentleman to bring in the company and to ask it to explain why it has acted in this way towards my constituents. I would at least hope that the Secretary of State would turn to the Scottish Development Agency and seek to find another firm in this activity to sustain employment in the area for these loyal and hard-working people.

I appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman has said. The employees concerned must be upset to have their employment terminated. The circumstances were no doubt particularly upsetting to them. We are ready—from the SDA or other sources—to assist any new viable project which it may be possible to devise for this factory or the area. However, the decision to discontinue production is for the firm.

Is the Secretary of State aware that this problem has been going on for many weeks in Greenock? Is he telling the House that, as Scotland's industry Minister, he has done nothing to try to resolve this problem on behalf of the workers at this factory in Greenock?

There is nothing that I can do if the workers concerned feel strongly enough to act as they have been acting. Nor can I do anything to make more pairs of jeans, or whatever else, at that factory. It is a commercial decision for the company. I have given all the help that I can to the employees.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend is endeavouring to do his best for Greenock. As the right hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Mabon)—

Order. Even the hon. Member must ask a question.

I beg your pardon, Mr. Speaker. Will my right hon. Friend consider asking the Minister with responsibility for industry to visit the factory and discuss with the workers the possibility of getting some alternative means of keeping the factory in production?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he said. As I made clear, we are ready at any time to assist with or advise on any new project for the factory. The company has decided that it cannot continue to manufacture jeans at this factory. As a matter of interest, other companies in Scotland manufacturing similar products seem to be carrying on.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he intends to take to lower the level of unemployment in the Strathclyde region.

In addition to the expansion of the West Central Scotland special development area my Department has, since May 1979, offered selective financial assistance to more than 200 projects in Strathclyde. We have continued the development of the new towns and the Glengarnock task force, and we have taken special initiatives such as the enterprise zone at Clydebank. "Locate in Scotland" is actively promoting the region and the Scottish Development Agency is committing substantial resources there.

Is the Minister aware that, in view of the Manpower Services Commission's projection, published this morning, that long-term unemployment will continue to rise dramatically, people in Scotland will find his answer dangerously complacent? Is it not time that the Government changed their policies and started to invest money in public projects, particularly capital projects, to get the people of Strathclyde back to work?

The hon. Gentleman might bear it in mind when he accuses me of complacency that since May 1979 more than 200 projects have been offered selective financial assistance. They involved around 23,000 jobs, and the total associated investment amounted to more than £400 million. There is nothing complacent about that.

Will my hon. Friend remind the Opposition that the Government are concentrating a far higher proportion of Government aid on Strathclyde than did the Labour Government and that Strathclyde has been helped particularly by the massive aid that the Government have given to the shipbuilding and steel industries?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. Last year, the Government made available £1,121 million to the steel industry, much of which is in Strathclyde. This year, the figure is £730 million. The shipbuilding industry has also received substantial support.

When will Ministers stop making optimistic and misleading statements about all the wonderful new jobs that are coming to Scotland and instead face the reality that unemployment in Scotland will soon go beyond 300,000? There is no support for the Government's policies in Scotland. It is down to only 15 per cent. in the public opinion polls. Unless there is a complete reversal of the Government's policies, the outlook for Scotland will continue to be extremely grim.

Is the right hon. Gentleman suggesting that we should reverse our policy—[HON. MEMBERS: "Yes."]—of reducing inflation and interest rates?

Is my hon. Friend aware of the importance in Strathclyde of employment and employment prospects in the defence establishments at Coulport and Gairloch? Does he agree that the anti-nuclear posturing of a portion of the Labour Party, plus the striking civil servants at Coulport, does not help to bring to the defence establishments in Strathclyde the investment that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) wants?

The Labour Party is famous for its posturing. The point made by my hon. Friend is absolutely correct. Defence jobs are important in Scotland. The opportunities that new jobs provide should be welcomed, not criticised, by the Opposition.

Is the Minister aware that, despite all the initiatives that he has named today—many in my constituency—unemployment in Cunningham is still more than 21 per cent.? Last week, Beechams advertised 70 new jobs in the local press and there were 2,800 applicants for them.

Nothing could be more dangerous for the Scottish economy than for the Labour Party to come back into power. I know that there is high unemployment in the hon. Gentleman's constituency and elsewhere. However, if the Labour Government had been realistic and taken heed of the need to reduce inflation and to tackle Scotland's economic problems at their root, unemployment would not be as high as it is today.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the best way to provide long-term employment is to create jobs manufacturing goods that customers want to buy and that capital projects, however desirable, do not produce many jobs?

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. For example, the oil industry has created 90,000 new jobs in Scotland in the past 12 years, and there are 40,000 jobs in electronics, and more coming.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps are being taken as a result of the effect of the Civil Service industrial action on the Scottish courts.

The sheriffs principal at Glasgow and Edinburgh, where there is strike action, continue in consultation with the Scottish Office, the Scottish Courts Administration, the sheriffs and court users to see how to increase the amount of work which sheriffs, without the assistance of supporting staff, can undertake. Emergency cases continue to be dealt with, and I am glad to be able to say that a limited amount of other business has been possible, but the courts will not be able to achieve anything near normal working until staff return to duty.

Does the Minister agree that the time is overdue for the introduction of legislation similar to the Administration of Justice (Emergency Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1979? Does he not agree that the time has come for meaningful negotiations with the Civil Service unions so that there may be an end to that dispute?

If the Government thought that emergency legislation would bring back normal working to the courts, we should introduce it. However, sadly, that is not so. The greatest service that the hon. Gentleman could do in this regard would be to stop making the kind of inciting speeches that he made in Cumbernauld earlier this month, when he encouraged civil servants to escalate their action and thereby bring hardship to old-age pensioners and others on pensions and cause disruption to the general public.

Does my hon. Friend agree that people who work in the courts have an overriding duty to sustain and promote the administration of justice? Will he take an early opportunity to remind those people who are hindering justice by industrial action that that duty is greater than their desire for personal gain?

My hon. Friend is, of course, correct. It is fortunate that on this occasion, unlike the last occasion under the Labour Government, the industrial action has been restricted so far to the Edinburgh and Glasgow sheriff courts, whereas last time it affected every sheriff court in Scotland, the High Court and the Court of Session.

Do we take it from what the Minister said that there is no need for emergency legislation to preserve individual rights? Does the Minister accept that public confidence in the administration of justice has been badly shaken, in that the busiest court in Europe has been effectively closed since 23 March? Although he may think that inaction is a plausible posture for this Administration, will he accept that most people in Scotland think that it is time that we saw some signs of life from Ministers?

The hon. Gentleman will know that the provision of discretion to the courts to extend what would otherwise be time-barred civil cases, introduced under earlier legislation, has dealt with the problem that could not be dealt with at the time of the last industrial action under the Labour Government. Normal working can return to Glasgow sheriff court not by emergency legislation—sadly, it would not have that effect—but only by those who normally work in the courts recognising that their real duty is to the public and thus returning to normal working.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the uptake of domestic insulating grants in Scotland; whether he plans a further advertising campaign during the summer; and if he will make a statement.

Despite extensive publicity last autumn, the uptake of domestic insulation grants in Scotland has remained relatively low. However, the extension of the scheme in August 1980 to provide 90 per cent. grant for the low-income elderly, and a small increase in the maximum rate of grant for other applicants, has resulted in some increase in the number of grants given in 1980–81 over the previous year. I shall certainly wish to consider further publicity later this year.

Has the Minister thought about using youth employment to help old people to insulate their lofts and their houses generally? Does he realise that any false economy in insulation would be silly, in view of the cost of electricity, gas and other fuels in Scotland?

We are willing to consider anything that would enable a greater take-up of the resources that are available. Local authorities implement these proposals, and in the current year we were able to give them every pound that they asked for this purpose.

Surely the Minister should consider making a 100 per cent. grant to the low paid and elderly people? Is it not true that those people cannot meet the 10 per cent. difference? Would it not be socially and economically desirable and desirable in every way if domestic insulation were widely increased?

I note what the hon. Gentleman says. He will recall that it was only in August last year that the proportion that can be paid was increased to 90 per cent. At the moment, there is no reason to believe that people find it impossible to pay the remaining 10 per cent. If the hon. Gentleman has any evidence to prove what he says, we shall be happy to see it.

Has my hon. Friend read disturbing reports about some cavity wall insulation products, which suggest that in the long term they are not entirely safe? Will he undertake that the Scottish Office will look into the matter before giving grants for cavity wall insulation material which may have a damaging effect on the health of the people who live in the houses?

The Government continually monitor the products that are used to see whether they are safe or whether they create any problems. If there were any reason to believe that any product is not safe or has become unsafe, we would give the matter our urgent attention in the advice that we give to local authorities and others.

Does the Minister accept that Scotland has one of the lowest levels of energy efficiency in the domestic sector in the northern European countries? As more and more people are finding it difficult to pay their electricity bills when they are heating the outside environment as well as their homes, will he give increased urgency to the Government's programme alerting people to the grants that are available, increasing them, as the hon. Member for Inverness (Mr. Johnston) said, and mounting a major campaign to improve the standard of energy efficiency?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman's objectives. That is why we made a number of changes last year, which we hope will lead to a greater uptake. However, I remind the hon. Gentleman that we are constrained by the sums that are requested by local authorities. We have allocated to local authorities the total amounts that they have sought. We hope that the changes that have already been made will lead to a greater uptake this year, and we shall be happy to look at any means of facilitating that process.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he will publish his comments on the report which has been prepared on the re-assessment of the assisted area status in the areas covered by the Grampian region.

My right hon. Friend is presently considering the report which we commissioned from consultants on the performance and prospect of industries in areas affected by oil developments, including Grampian region. The report and the Government's conclusions on it will be published in due course.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that a further recent survey shows that there is considerable concern about the loss of employment in the old-established and indigenous industries in the Grampian area and that, in addition, there has been a direct loss of assisted area status? In considering the report, will he seriously consider the reinstatement of assisted area status, at least to the old-established and indigenous industries in the Grampian region, and particularly in my constituency of East Aberdeenshire?

I share my hon. Friend's concern for the economic health of the non-oil sector in Grampian. Although the prime purpose of the report is not related to the development area status of the region, it will nevertheless be useful to my right hon. Friend in coming to a decision about development area status there.

Further to what my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. McQuarrie) said, may I ask my hon. Friend the Minister, in considering the report, to pay attention also to the indigenous industries in Banff, which have suffered considerably as a result of the activity of the oil-related industries?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, in the light of the large number of families in the South of Scotland whose electricity is disconnected, he will take special measures to help them.

The Government have already taken substantial steps to help with fuel cost hardship, mainly through the supplementary benefit and family income supplement schemes. The South of Scotland Electricity Board carries out disconnections in accordance with the gas and electricity industries' code of practice dealing with the payment and recovery of fuel debt. I understand from the board that there has been no significant increase in the number of disconnections in the year to 31 March 1981.

In view of that disgraceful reply, does not the Minister realise that, in the South of Scotland, about 1,200 homes were without electricity for the whole of 1980, and that, proportionately, that is the worst record for the whole of Great Britain? Does he not agree that the code of practice that is being operated by the South of Scotland Electricity Board is a complete failure, considering that it affects those families who are in a high priority category of need? Should he not introduce statutory limits to the powers of the Scottish boards so that these poor people may be protected?

The operation of the code of practice by the South of Scotland Electricity Board is monitored by the electricity consultative council for the South of Scotland district, and the consultative council is satisfied that the board's procedure and its application generally complies with the aims and spirit of the code of practice.

I have on occasion criticised nationalised industries, but will my hon. Friend accept that, over the past two years, South of Scotland Electricity Board, in dealing with constituent's problems, has dealt sensitively with people who have had difficulty in paying their bills? Will he assist the SSEB to make more widely known a number of schemes that it has to assist the people to pay their electricity bills?

We shall be happy to assist with publicity, if we can do so. I welcome what my hon. Friend has said, and I hope that the House will bear it in mind that it is damaging to produce statistics and make false claims and criticisms about the way in which the board is undertaking this task, unless they can be properly substantiated. If any Members have evidence that the board is not behaving properly, I hope that they will direct such evidence, first, to the chairman and, secondly, to myself.

Has the Minister seen the evidence in the excellent pamphlet produced by the Scottish Fuel Poverty Action Group called "Living in the Dark Ages", which catalogues the appalling hardship of poor families who have been disconnected? What action will he take on the recommendations contained in that pamphlet to end disconnections, to abolish warrant sales and, above all, to improve liaison for early action to deal with fuel debts?

The Government have increased substantially the funds available to help those who have difficulty paying their electricity bills.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will ask health boards to discuss with hospital broadcasting services in their health board area the difficulties they are facing as a result of the increase in the land line rental; and if he will make a statement.

The volunteer hospital broadcasters provide a valued service to patients and many boards already assist that work. They will, I am sure, be happy to discuss any problems which the hospital broadcasting services wish to raise with them. The determination of rental charges for land lines is, however, a matter for the Post Office.

Is not the Minister aware that the hospital broadcasting services now face serious problems because of the decision to increase their land line rental by 50 per cent. each year until 1984? Against the background of an increase from £1,000 to £5,000 per annum, would it not be better and far more constructive if the Minister, through the health boards, came to an arrangement with such organisations as the Edinburgh hospital broadcasting service and Radio Royal in Falkirk to guarantee a specific income each year to meet the enormous increase in land line rental?

The charges have not been raised since 1975—

That is because the Labour Government kept them down.

They were raised in 1980 because of inflation under the Labour Government. The hon. Gentleman is, once again, wrong. The suggestion is that over a four-year period the charges be increased by a factor of between two and five times, but never by more than 50 per cent. in one year. Last year, as a guarantee of income, we gave permission for the services to use advertising time if they so wished.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the considerable enterprise of those who run the Buckie hospital broadcasting service and raise a large amount of money voluntarily to help themselves to a great extent?

Knowing who represents Buckie in Parliament, I am not the least bit surprised at the enterprise in that area.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the latest figures of unemployed people in Scotland.

On 9 April seasonally adjusted unemployment in Scotland stood at 270,800–12 per cent. While I share the right hon. Gentleman's concern about the continuing high level of unemployment, I am encouraged by the fact that the rate of increase in seasonally adjusted unemployment in Scotland has slowed down somewhat during the past three months and has been relatively less severe than in other parts of the United Kingdom.

Is the Secretary of State aware that in my constituency alone during the past two years an additional 3,571 people—about 89·25 per cent.—have been added to the unemployment register? Is that not all too sadly typical of what is happening in the rest of Scotland? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large proportion of those people are more than 45 years of age, and that they fear that unless something drastic is done they will never work again? Without eroding any of the other programmes, can the right hon. Gentleman do something to help that group who are thoroughly demoralised?

I appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's concern, both on the general point and for his constituency. The new scheme announced recently as a supplement to the youth opportunities programme, for the older unemployed, should help the group that he mentioned who are the longer-term unemployed. I know that he will be the first to agree that, having seen the position develop in his part of Scotland, the Government have given that area the highest priority in assistance for regional development. Many hundreds of millions of pounds have been pumped into the steel industry, in which many of his constituents work.

Does the Secretary of State accept that the attempt to reduce the public sector borrowing requirement at a time of world recession—as the Government are doing, and to which policy he is apparently committed because of his ministerial responsibilities—is having a deeply devastating effect on Scottish employment? Will he abandon that course? When he announces the number of new jobs created in Scotland, as he did last week—he said that 43,000 new jobs had been created since the Government took office—will he also tell us of the number of jobs lost?

I am interested to hear a piece of policy from the Social Democratic Party. That is extremely helpful. The hon. Gentleman may wish to contemplate what the opposite effect would be if we were to increase the public sector borrowing requirement at a time of recession. How much would it add to the interest rates about which his constituents are complaining, with the backing of the Social Democratic Party?

In view of the attention that my right hon. Friend has paid to the problem of unemployment in Scotland, may I ask whether he has found evidence to suggest that we can afford the stunning complacency about the level of rates in Scotland and its effect on unemployment? Can he recollect one cheep from his opposite number on the Labour Benches when rates were increased, especially following the 150 per cent. increase that Dundee district council imposed on industry in parts of my constituency?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. There is overwhelming evidence that the excessively high levels of rates being imposed by irresponsible overspending authorities is threatening many thousands of jobs in small firms in those areas. I have not noticed the right hon. Member for Glasgow, Craigton (Mr. Milian) making any strong appeals to local authorities not to overspend. Perhaps I simply failed to notice.

Is the Secretary of State aware that school leavers this year will face the worst employment prospects since the 1930s? Does he realise that there is complete demoralisation among large sections of youngsters? We are told that things will get better. When will they do so, and when will he hold out even a little hope to this year's school leavers?

I share the right hon. Gentleman's concern about school leavers. I am sure that he will acknowledge that we have increased the youth opportunities programme for that precise reason by no less than 80 per cent. Even if he wishes, as I do, that we could do more, at least he might acknowledge that we have made a fine contribution.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be far better for Scotland if Opposition Members occasionally stopped moaning and started pointing to the many job opportunities coming to Scotland, especially in the oil industry? Does my right hon. Friend recall that only last year Shell UK predicted that during the next 15 years a further £60 billion would be spent developing North Sea oil? That is more than five times what has already been spent. Does not that mean massive new domestic market opportunities for Scottish jobs and products?

I share my hon. Friend's puzzlement at the attitude of the Opposition Party on this issue. Their contribution to a difficult position appears to be that we should withdraw from the European Community, thus threatening about one-third of the jobs in Scotland, abandon the defence commitment, which would instantly threaten about 30,000 Scottish jobs and, as if that were not enough, institute huge public spending programmes that would threaten the remaining jobs.

Has the Secretary of State read reports in today's press about the attack on his Government by the president and chairman of the North Lanarkshire Conservative and Unionist Association, both of whom have declined reselection as Conservative councillors as a five-point protest against Government policies? In the light of that and in the light of the Government's pathetic 15 per cent. support in the latest opinion poll, will even this stubborn Government recognise that they are being condemned on all fronts and change their policies before they cause any more damage to Scotland?

I have not seen the report that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. However, I understand that the president and chairman reaffirmed their remaining loyalty to the Conservative Party. If I wish for any advice on how to deal with dissension within the party, I shall turn to the Labour Party, which is expert on such matters.

If the right hon. Gentleman is genuinely sympathetic and concerned about the problems of growing unemployment, will he consider the Robb Caledon yard in Dundee, which no longer has any orders in hand and where 400 jobs are in danger? British Shipbuilders is apparently determined to close the yard. Will he intervene with Department of Industry Ministers and British Shipbuilders to bring new work to the yard?

I note the hon. Gentleman's remarks. I, too, have been greatly concerned about the Robb Caledon yard. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman will deny that the Government have been extremely generous to the shipbuilding industry. It is for British Shipbuilders to decide which yards can continue and which cannot.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many meetings he has had with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities since he took office.

Eight, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that COSLA and many councils throughout the country, including Conservative councils, feel that the meetings with the Secretary of State are a waste of time because he is not interested in what COSLA says? Special powers have been adopted by the right hon. Gentleman and it is being seen that local democracy has virtually ceased to exist in Scotland? Does he appreciate that the mandate that he thinks he has does not operate in Scotland. Does he accept that councils have the job of resisting the policies of his Government, especially those that are attacks on jobs and living standards? Will he—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long".]

Order. I have been very fair. The hon. Gentleman has asked three supplementary questions. The Minister is entitled to choose which he answers.

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will agree that all democratically elected Governments have a mandate to carry out their policies. I think that he will find that the convention accepts that if it is necessary to take action against high-spending authorities it is better to concentrate that action on the authorities responsible than to direct it against all authorities, including those that have behaved responsibly.

Will my hon. Friend have an opportunity to discuss with COSLA the recent press release by the EIS on section 88 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980? Will he assure the convention that hon. Members do not react positively to threats of strike action, distortion and vulgar personal abuse?

It is correct that the House does not react favourably to protests and demonstrations, whether carried out by trade unionists or Labour Members of Parliament.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has any plans for relieving the acute housing shortage in Scotland.

It is quite wrong to refer to an acute housing shortage in Scotland. On the most recent estimate, the number of houses exceeds the number of households by more than 150,000 and in the public sector alone there are an estimated 35,000 empty houses. There are, of course, some local shortages and the special needs of particular groups need attention. I expect housing authorities to concentrate their resources on these priorities.

Is the Minister aware that there are more than 150,000 people on waiting lists throughout Scotland and that local authorities are currently building about 5,000 houses a year? Does he accept that the recent White Paper on public expenditure shows that the Government are intending to slash public expenditure on housing by 42 per cent.? That is the largest cut in any sector of the Scottish economy. Was the Prime Minster told about this "success story" before she made her rather stupid speech in Perth last weekend?

The hon. Gentleman uses, as so many others, the simplistic total of those on waiting lists and implies that all those on waiting lists are homeless or in grossly unsuitable housing conditions. He must be as aware as anyone that a large proportion of those on waiting lists merely wish to transfer to a house in another area or, for some other reason, would prefer to move house. Few local authorities would seek to suggest that the size of the waiting lists is equivalent to the degree of housing shortage in their areas.

In turn, will the Minister avoid giving simplistic statistics to the House? Is he aware, for example, that in Roxburgh district there may be some empty houses but that that is no argument for doing what his Department has done—namely, to refuse consent to the SSHA to build a scheme at Kelso merely because there are empty houses at Hawick 18 miles away? Will he exercise some realism in housing in Scotland?

It is for the SSHA to decide how to use the resources that are available to it. I emphasised in my main answer that shortages remained in certain localities. It is wrong to suggest that there is an overall housing shortage in Scotland.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the problems in Scottish housing is lack of mobility? Further, does he agree that the Government's highly successful policy of selling council houses will ease the problem?

My hon. Friend is correct. The problem will be eased by not only the sale of council houses but the removal under the Tenants' Rights, Etc. (Scotland) Act 1980 of residential qualifications that are imposed by a number of local authorities. The latter provision has made an important contribution that has been recognised by both the CBI and the STUC.

Will the Minister accept that there is a shortage of houses in which people want to live and of a standard that it is right to ask them to live in? Does he appreciate that his remarks about the lack of a shortage of housing will be regarded as crassly insensitive in Scotland? Is he aware that new-build starts in the private sector in 1980 were the lowest since the war and in the public sector the lowest for over a decade? Is this not a record of which he should be thoroughly ashamed?

If the hon. Gentleman believes that, I ask him to listen to the following words:

"the overall housing shortage is virtually a thing of the past in most areas and the worst problems of overcrowding and bad conditions have been dealt with."

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland which non-elected bodies he consults in the exercise of his planning functions.

I consult a wide range of organisations, including a number of non-elected bodies, on different aspects of town and country planning matters. The main non-elected bodies consulted on a regular basis are the Countryside Commission for Scotland, the Nature Conservancy Council, the Royal Fine Art Commission for Scotland and the Historic Buildings Council.

rose—

The hon. Gentleman is a non-elected body.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the anger that has been caused in the Highlands by the Secretary of State's proposals for areas of scenic beauty, for implementation in less than a year? Why is he persistently and stubbornly refusing to accept the advice of the Highland regional council, the Western Isles Islands council and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities that these proposals are inapplicable in the Highlands and will inhibit the development that he and others wish?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. There is no reason why these arrangements should inhibit any development in the Highlands or anywhere else. These measures have already been brought into action in the rest of Scotland. As a special concession to the susceptibilities of the Highlands, I postponed their operation in that area for one year. The planning authority remains the decision-making body. If it can receive some extra advice from other bodies from time to time, surely that will be entirely to its advantage.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Western Isles Islands council shares the concern of the Highland region and COSLA about the possible interference of the Countryside Commission for Scotland in any future development? In an area in which unemployment is over 21 per cent. that is a serious consideration. Is he aware that Highland region and Western Isles councillors, being residents and natives of the area, have as much concern for the environment as the Countryside Commission?

I appreciate the concern of the right hon. Gentleman and of the Highland regional council. However, I would have thought that not even the Highland regional council could be so perfect that it could not benefit from some advice from some other bodies such as the Countryside Commission for Scotland. If it is of any reassurance to the right hon. Gentleman, that scheme has been in operation in Argyll for some months. There is no sign of any difficulty.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that in planning and development matters it is essential that there is an approach which balances the needs of the community, including creating jobs? Is he aware that, while I am no friend of quangos, I believe that the Countryside Commission has a role to play which should be carefully monitored?

I too have confidence in the Countryside Commission for Scotland and in the Highland regional council, and its planning authority. I am sure that they will do right in planning for the Highlands. However, none of them can be any the worse off for good advice from other bodies. I hope that they will accept that.

rose—

I propose to call one more hon. Member on this question and allow one minute extra at the end of questions at 3.30.

Is the Secretary of State aware that a non-elected body, namely the South of Scotland Electricity Board, is causing planning blight at Chapeldonan near Girvan by reserving a large area of ground for a power station which will not be needed for at least the next 100 years? Will he instruct the chairman of the South of Scotland Electricity Board to meet the duly elected local authority which he knows well—the Kyle and Carrick district council—to discuss the planning blight which the action of the electricity board is causing in that area?

I shall see that the hon. Gentleman's words are drawn to the attention of the chairman of the SSEB. I am sure that he will be prepared to discuss that matter with the planning authority, if it asks him to do so.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many prosecutions have been taken since the passing of the Bail Etc. (Scotland) Act against people reoffending while on bail; and what proportion that is of those on bail during this period.

I regret that no separate records are kept of persons who reoffend whilst on bail and this information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that it is a matter of concern that his office has not seen fit to try to establish those figures, in the light of the concern which has been shown by people and the police about the effect of the Bail Etc. (Scotland) Act? Will he assure us that that will be rectified in the near future?

I can give my hon. Friend some reassurance. A statistical survey covering 45 per cent. of sheriff court cases has been carried out by the Scottish Office for the period from eight weeks before the Act came into force to a year thereafter. The Act came into force on 1 April last year. The Crown Office has also instructed that a survey be carried out over a three-week period in November to December 1980. I would have been able to give my hon. Friend the figures which he wanted but for the industrial action of the court staff.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he will meet the Scottish Law Commission to discuss its recent report on warrant sales.

I have no plans at present to meet the Scottish Law Commission to discuss its second memorandum on diligence, poindings and warrant sales.

Will the Solicitor-General for Scotland tell the Scottish Law Commission that there is bitter disappointment that, after a decade of deliberation, all it has managed to achieve are a few pussy-footed proposals? Will he compliment the print union SOGAT on taking direct trade union action to stop the shameful practice of advertising warrant sales? Will he consider adding his name to the list of sponsors of the Private Member's Bill which I hope to reintroduce on 3 June, which will stop that barbaric, medieval practice once and for all?

I note that the hon. Member used the words "barbaric and medieval practice". It amazes me that someone of his fluency cannot think up two alternative adjectives. He used those words on 20 February—

That shows that I am consistent.

It shows that the hon. Member is consistent, but it also shows that he is boring. The hon. Member has introduced a Bill to control the employment of sheriff officers, presumably meaning that they should be unemployed. That seems contrary to his concept of the matter. I know that the hon. Member wishes to have a debt arbitration service, which would increase the burden of the State on those who pay. He favours a situation in which no one owns anything. Therefore, there would be no question of warrant sales. Nevertheless, all civilised systems have them, regretfully. There are only 300 in Scotland. It is a system on which the Law Commission has reported and which will be reviewed.

I accept my hon. and learned Friend's reply to this question. Would not he further consider the situation in view of the degrading circumstances which people suffer? Is he aware that when sheriff officers arrive at many of the homes early in the morning the children are put in fear of their lives when the officers knock down the doors to take out the goods?

If my hon. Friend has any evidence of such conduct, he should report it. That action is a last resort. There is no evidence that it is taken in circumstances which are wrong or unfortunate. I would have thought that my hon. Friend would remember that in those circumstances there are creditors as well as debtors to be considered.

If the Solicitor-General is unwilling to meet the Law Commission, will he at least draw its attention to the disgraceful practice by the sheriff officers in selling household effects at bargain basement prices, as if the debtors did not suffer enough? Will he insist that the Law Commission ensures that such goods are sold at market prices in future?

I always understood that the bargain price and the market price were the same. Let us be clear about the matter. The Scottish Law Commission has reported responsibly. The law of diligence and the law of warrant sales are bound up together. It is not a question of taking advantage of people. The circumstances of each of the 300 cases are available for any hon. Member to discover. If the hon. Member can demonstrate anything which is wrong about any case, he should bring it to my attention.

Does my hon. and learned Friend realise that, while some of us accept that creditors have rights in such matters, some of us feel that warrant sales are a problem and that we should consider a more humane way Of dealing with that difficult social problem?

This is a matter of last resort. All that is possible is done to prevent any inhumane action being taken. If any hon. Members can bring to my attention a particular case in which they think injustice has been done, they should do so.

Is the Solicitor-General aware that there are umpteen cases of injustice being done? This is a degrading system. Even the Law Commission, which wished to retain the system as a last resort, said that it was urgently in need of substantial reform. Is the Solicitor-General saying that the Government will do nothing about the Law Commission report, which was the product of 10 years' study? The system must be reformed. That view is held 100 per cent. by people in Scotland. Something must be done.

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we have carefully read the vast report on the law of diligence which the Law Commission produced. It produced that report with great diligence, in another sense. Its comments on the law of warrant sales are being taken into consideration, but it would not be appropriate, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will agree, to deal with that matter separately from the law of diligence.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many applications have been made by the Crown for the extension of the 110-day rule as a result of the industrial action in the courts.

Up to Friday 8 May 1981, the Crown has made 28 applications to the High Court for extensions of the 110-days as a result of the industrial action in the Scottish courts.

Is the Solicitor-General satisfied in all conscience with the indications from his ministerial colleague that there was no need for emergency legislation to deal with the crisis in the administration of justice, given the sweeping condemnation which he made of the Labour Administration, whom, he said, should have legislated from day one of the 1979 strike? Is it satisfactory to shelter behind a discretionary power, granted in the recent Justice (Emergency Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1979, to deal with exceptions to the triennium in civil matters, and to ad hoc applications in individual cases of the 110-day and 40-day rule? Will he not accept that without emergency legislation there is no proper protection for individual rights?

We must consider what people term individual rights with care. It is a serious matter to extend the 110 days where no fault is attributable to the Crown, which the courts can do on the application of the Crown or the defence, if it so wishes, although in this case it is likely to be the Crown. To preserve the statutory protections of summary cases in emergency legislation, which I take it is what the hon. Gentleman means, is not protecting individual rights. It would be protecting the right of the Crown to prosecute in certain summary statutory cases.

Is that not yet another context in which the use of the phrase "industrial action" is as misleading and meaningless as its objectives are often indefensible and disreputable? In the circumstances is it not far better to describe such action unequivocally as civil or judicial disruption? Does not even that phrase flatter the motives of those who put self-interest before civil justice?

My hon. Friend's words are apt. In Edinburgh and Glasgow the sheriff clerks have, and should know that they have, a duty to perform their statutory duties if they wish to hold and do justice to such a high office.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I intimate that I wish to seek an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The arrogant management of British Leyland yesterday admitted further failure by announcing yet more closures, yet the Secretary of State for Industry has not seen fit to come to the House to make a statement. How are Back Benchers supposed to answer our constituents' many questions?

I cannot answer that question except to say that Back Benchers can pursue their normal rights.