asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on current progress toward a power cost and price agreement with companies interested in acquiring an interest in the aluminium smelter at Invergordon.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement on the future of the aluminium smelter at Invergordon.

I propose to make a statement about Invergordon to the House after Question Time.

rose—

Does the hon. Gentleman prefer to wait until the statement?

Normally I would delay a supplementary question in the hope of catching your eye later, Mr. Speaker.

I shall do my best. Whenever an hon. Member says that I try to call him early among the hon. Members who are called to put supplementary questions on the statement.

May I not—

Does the right hon. Gentleman wish to give up his chance of asking a question on the statement?

No, Mr. Speaker, but I wish to ask the Secretary of State whether he is aware that during Monday's Question Time when Energy Ministers were cross-examined about the future of Dounreay, a large question mark was raised about the future of the experimental fast-breeder reactor? If the statement is to be anything other than hopeful about the future of Invergordon, the question mark over Dounreay, the shutting down of the Fort William pulp mill at Corpach and the cancellation of the gas-gathering pipeline will all add up to very bad news for the Highlands.

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says. I do not think that he has read correctly the answer given by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Energy.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many public works contracts were started in Scotland in the last convenient 12-month period with the help of the European regional fund; and what percentum of the cost of each scheme this represented.

One hundred and twenty-four public works contracts for which grants have been approved from the European regional development fund started in Scotland in the 12 months ending 30 June 1982. In 117 of those the grant is 30 per cent. of project costs; for the six projects in support of the Western Isles integrated development programme the grant is 40 per cent.; for one project the grant is 20 per cent.

Does the fact that those grants are being given affect in any way the priorities given to particular schemes by the hon. Gentleman's Department? If so, does the Minister not think that that is wrong, as the Prime Minister has said, that it is our own money that we are getting back?

The priorities for grants from the EEC are related to the nature of the project. These are all infrastructure projects by local authorities and other public bodies. We are anxious to ensure that Scotland continues to receive a full share of the money coming to the United Kingdom. So far, 25 per cent. of the grants have been related to projects in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many new factory units and how many square feet of factory space have been built by the Scottish Development Agency since its inception.

Since its inception the Scottish Development Agency has built 546 factory units providing over 4 million sq ft of factory space.

How many of those factory units are occupied, and is my hon. Friend satisfied that their provision is sufficient to meet demand?

I am satisfied that the provision is sufficient to meet demand in Scotland. Although the occupancy rates vary, at present fewer than 10 per cent. of the agency's factories are vacant.

Does the Minister accept that one of the SDA factories that is likely to become unoccupied is the Falmers factory at Patna? Following the meeting that I had with the Minister and the Prime Minister, is there any hope of keeping the factory occupied, preferably by Falmers but, failing that, by some alternative manufacturer?

I met the chairman of the company this morning. It is clear that the decision on the closure of Patna is firm. We undertook to do what we could to find a new tenant for the vacant factory.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is the letting rather than the building of the factories that is important? Is the SDA following up every conceivable opportunity with the full determination that is required, particularly in relation to small business men?

I believe that to be the case. If my hon. Friend knows of any case to the contrary that he would like to draw to my attention I should be delighted to look into it.

In view of the Chancellor's statement yesterday about the proposed new enterprise zones for Scotland, has the Minister discussed its factory building programme with the SDA? If so, what was the outcome of those discussions against the background of the Chancellor's statement? Will the Government's decision on the allocation of those enterprise zones be based on the need for employment in the area rather than on the availability of factory space?

I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman on the last point. My right hon. Friend's main criterion in deciding where to locate the new enterprise zones will be the need to create jobs in an area, and the SDA will be involved in the consultations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland on what dates since coming to office he has met representatives of the Confederation of British Industry in Scotland and the Scottish Trades Union Congress at official meetings; and what plans he has in mind for future discussions.

I have met representatives of the Confederation of British Industry in Scotland four times and of the Scottish Trades Union Congress nine times at official meetings since May 1979. In addition, my hon. Friends and I have frequent informal contact with representatives of both bodies. We have made it clear that we are willing to meet representatives of both bodies whenever that would be useful.

How seriously does the Secretary of State treat the Scottish CBI's latest economic findings on export orders and manufacturing capacity? Will he consider setting up a Scottish NEDC to involve the STUC and the Scottish CBI?

I take seriously forecasts produced by the CBI, the chambers of commerce or anyone else. The survey published in May was the third in succession to show a more optimistic trend, but I understand from more recent statements by the Scottish CBI that at present it sees less favourable trends. I am watching the trends carefully and will of course be glad to discuss them with the CBI.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that in the CBI regionalised statement last week a lack of improvement rather than a deterioration was reported for Scotland, in sharp contrast to other areas of the United Kingdom? Although that is gloomy, does he agree that, taken with the fact that unemployment is rising less fast in Scotland, it is a reason for optimism?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he said. Compared with the same period a year earlier, industrial production in Scotland from March to May 1982 was up 2 per cent., and manufacturing production was up 1·7 per cent. Manufacturing output in Scotland has fallen since 1979 by 8·3 per cent., but that compares with an overall United Kingdom fall of 14·5 per cent. Scotland has weathered the recession remarkably well.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that meeting the Scottish CBI and the STUC will not produce the necessary increase in employment while the Scottish Development Agency continues extortionately to increase rents? Is he aware that a factory in my constituency has had its rent increased by almost 100 per cent. in the past year, and that such increases are driving factories to the wall?

I shall look into any complaint by the hon. Gentleman. However, like the rent for other factories, those for SDA factories should be on a proper commercial basis. Whether an increase is fair depends on the previous rent and how long it had appertained.

Have the Scottish CBI and the STUC welcomed the new training initiative?

The CBI has warmly welcomed it and pledged all possible support to make it a success.

Is not the CBI in Scotland, as elsewhere, expressing anxiety about the economy almost as strongly as the trade unions have done over the past two or three years? Is the Secretary of State aware that, even though he may be satisfied with the 8·3 per cent. reduction in industrial production in Scotland, the rest of us, including the CBI, certainly are not? Will he comment on the disturbing reports today from Russian sources that the John Brown contract may be irretrievably lost?

I have no reason to believe that the contract is lost. We have kept in close touch through my right hon. Friends and directly with John Brown, and pleged every support, right up to the level of the Prime Minister, and the firm has expressed its appreciation. But I shall look into what the right hon. Gentleman says.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what expenditure on services associated with civil aviation has fallen on his Department's Vote in the last three years for which figures are available.

In the financial years 1979–80 to 1981–82 inclusive, my Department's expenditure on services associated with civil aviation totalled £6·9 million. I shall publish detailed figures in the Official Report.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the great achievements of the Highland division of British Airways, which has managed to turn substantial losses into profits for the forthcoming year as a result of the efforts of management and unions to increase productivity and to give a better service for the money? Could not the same be done in other parts of British Airways throughout the country and in other companies?

The division has been in operation for only two months. My hon. Friend's detailed knowledge and expertise are well-known, and I am glad of his comments.

What are the Government doing to bring together all interests in Scotland to increase direct flights to Europe and North America out of Glasgow, Edinburgh and Prestwick to counter the pull of the South-East of England?

When my right hon. Friend gave evidence to the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs on 19 July he emphasised the Government's commitment to the long-term potential for Prestwick and our wish to encourage all involved, including the British Airports Authority, to support the airport. Considerable effort is being devoted to that end in North America by the Scottish Tourist Board.

Will my hon. Friend confirm the great importance of Edinburgh airport and pass the information on to those responsible that there is widespread demand for intercontinental services out of Edinburgh?

No doubt my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Department of Trade will note what my hon. Friend says. We have recently reiterated our policy on the Scottish Lowland airports, which is that the three airports should complement each other to achieve the best use of resources.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is able to estimate the quantity of Scottish produced goods and services that are exported to the European Community; and how many jobs are dependent on these industries.

Exports of Scottish produced goods are not recorded separately, and it is therefore not possible to give an estimate of the number of jobs connected with exports to the Community. We know, however, that United Kingdom trade with the Community is now 43 per cent. of our exports, and it can be assumed from that that a large number of jobs are involved in such activities.

Of all its stupidities, is not the Labour Party's most asinine policy to withdraw from the Common Market, which could put at risk 200,000 jobs in Scotland and which, added to our present problems of high unemployment, could make the Labour Party responsible for 500,000 unemployed?

I, too, find it almost impossible to believe that the Labour Party really intends to take us out of the Common Market, with the catastrophic effect on jobs that that would have.

Is not one factor affecting jobs anti job creation additional transport charges? Will the right hon. Gentleman take urgent steps to abolish tolls on the Forth road bridge, even though he has just increased them?

We should see the issue in proportion. The Forth bridge was built on the understanding that tolls would be paid. It is an extremely good bargain, since it is much more expensive to drive the long way round. The tolls have not been increased since 1969 and the present levels are moderate.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that many jobs in Scotland depend on other aspects of the EEC, such as the less favoured areas directive and the integrated development programme for the Western Isles? Will he take note of the report on the subject of the Select Committee on Agriculture, published yesterday?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding me of that report, which I shall study with great care. He is right in saying that a good example of the benefits that we receive from membership of the Community is the IDP for the Western Isles, which is warmly welcomed by everybody there.

Has the Secretary of State kept a record of the jobs that we have exported to the EEC, among which would be the 1,800 jobs that have disappeared from the Massey-Ferguson plant in Kilmarnock to be: exported to Marquette, in France? How many jobs have we exported in this fashion?

I do not have that figure, but many more jobs than that have been created by firms coming to Scotland to serve the European market. Virtually all of those firms make it crystal clear that if Scotland were not in the Common Market they would have had no intention of setting up in business in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he is taking to improve job prospects in Levenmouth.

The Levenmouth and Methil employment office area remains a development area eligible for all forms of Government and European regional assistance.

I thank my hon. Friend for the personal interest that he has taken in the complex problems of Sybron-Balfour. If Henry Balfour is to be left out of the deal between Sybron and Sohio, are the Government satisfied that no one else will be prevented from taking over and operating the glass lining operations at Leven? In the wider context of Levenmouth, will my hon. Friend urge the SDA to respond positively to the proposals made by the local authorities for an integrated project in the Levenmouth area?

We shall examine carefully the local authorities proposals. I know that the SDA will do likewise. As to the agreement that is being negotiated between Sybron and Sohio in the United States, which is still not completed, we are closely involved with the parties concerned. We are doing our best to ensure that the business at Henry Balfour is retained.

rose—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If some of my hon. Friends on the Back Benches wish to catch your eye, perhaps—

Order. I shall call those hon. Members who rise, but the House must bear with me, as I thought that this was a constituency matter for the hon. Member for Fife, East (Mr. Henderson).

Levenmouth covers my constituency as well, Mr. Speaker. Is the Minister aware that Henry Balfour Ltd. has about 75 per cent. of the glass lined vessel market in the United Kingdom? If that business were to go to West Germany, as is anticipated, it would be a major loss to Scotland generally and the Levenmouth area in particular. Therefore, what do the Government propose to do to try to prevent this tragedy?

I agree that it would be a tragedy if the glass lining business were to be lost, not just for Levenmouth but for the United Kingdom. That is why we are doing everything possible to persuade the parties making the contract to agree that the business should be allowed to remain at Levenmouth. At this point, however, I cannot predict the outcome.

A number of my constituents are deeply worried about this matter, as they are employed in Sybron-Balfour. Does the Minister realise that there is already 28 per cent. male unemployment in that area and that if these jobs are lost—about 500 of them—it will be a disaster?

I have already said that this is a serious matter, but the Government are not in a position to interfere in the negotiations. We are doing our best to influence the parties by pointing out to them the serious position that would arise if the proposed deal were to go through.

The Minister's answers are abysmally complacent. The Minister must understand that Sohio American is a subsidiary of BP. Has he made any direct approach to seek to influence BP to stop it taking those viable jobs away from Balfour at Leven? Does the Minister realise that we are talking about a company that has been successful in attracting orders and has a full order book? Contrary to what the Secretary of State has said, all 600 jobs are to be exported to Germany and the EEC. Does the Minister understand that he must make much greater efforts to help Levenmouth?

I refute the charge of complacency. I have been in direct contact with BP, which owns 53 per cent. of Sohio and we are in direct contact with Sohio and Sybron. Talks are taking place at the moment, but there is no complacency in the Scottish Office about Henry Balfour or any other project in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what information is available to him as to the number of people who have left Scotland for other parts of the United Kingdom in each of the last three years.

The estimated net migration from Scotland to the rest of the United Kingdom in the year to 31 December 1981 was 1,500. This corresponds with 5,000 for the year to 30 June 1981, 9,900 for the year to 30 June 1980 and 7,100 for the year to 30 June 1979.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this represents an appalling picture? Is he further aware that Governments have a responsibility for the movement of jobs as well as people? Is his right hon. Friend using the influence available to him as a member of the Cabinet to speed the process of Civil Service dispersal so that we may have jobs in Glasgow serving the rest of Scotland?

I appreciate that it is difficult to pick up figures in an oral answer of this kind. I am sure that when the hon. Gentleman has time to see the written answer he will realise that, far from what he has said, the figures show an improving picture. With regard to the transfer of Civil Service jobs to Glasgow, he will have seen the announcement by my right hon. Friend the other week that the plans are going ahead, and some are even being brought forward.

Surely the Minister is aware that the real trend in emigration is to outside the United Kingdom. Internal migration has stopped only because he has ruined the English economy as well. As emigration has been the bane of Scotland for the past 25 years, what is the Minister doing to stimulate the Scottish economy so that there are opportunities of jobs for Scots people at home so that they will stay in Scotland?

We are already taking action to stimulate the Scottish economy, and my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced additional moves for jobs yesterday, including two enterprise zones in Scotland. I should make it clear to the hon. Gentleman, if only for the sake of my colleagues, that I have no responsibility for the English economy.

Will my hon. Friend accept that, thanks to higher education standards in Scotland, one of our best exports is qualified people, and that England has benefited from people going south and taking over banking, industrial and factory jobs and trade unions?

I do not know whether my hon. Friend intended to, but, while I agree with his remarks, he is perhaps suggesting that the rest of Scotland is responsible for the English economy.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement on the industrial dispute in the National Health Service in Scotland.

I regret that disruptive action by some groups of health service workers continues to affect the care of patients in Scotland. Many patients suffer discomfort and inconvenience, and the treatment of many sick people is being delayed.

Is the Minister aware that many hon. Members such as myself continue to support action being taken by the nurses and ancillary staff in the health services? Is he surprised about that, since large numbers of nurses will be worse off, net, after their pay increase of 7·5 per cent? How can he, or anybody in the Government, defend the 10·3 per cent. increase to the police and the 7·5 per cent. increase to nurses? Is it because the Government think that nurses are less important than policemen?

My right hon. Friend is meeting the negotiating body on police pay today and it is not for me to join in speculation on that. I remind the hon. Gentleman of the last four years of the Government in which he served, when increases in pay for nurses lagged well behind the RPI, whereas since the last general election the increase to nurses has been in advance of the RPI.

Although some of us do not support the industrial action, we are puzzled by the Government's policy. What is the logic of giving senior civil servants, judges and now the police a much larger increase than the nurses? What is the logic of saying that the people who work in the Health Service, who do a good job and are badly paid, should have a much lower increase?

The right hon. Gentleman ought to compare like with like. The groups most comparable with the Health Service, such as those in local government and the Civil Service, have received wage increases averaging 6 per cent. Indeed, the Armed Forces received 6·1 per cent. and teachers 6 per cent. Therefore, our offer to the Health Service workers is well in line with what the vast majority of other workers have received.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a considerable sum of money is spent by health boards on property and administrative staff? Were the Government to carry out an investigation into that sort of wastage, they could well have more money to pay the nurses and the ancilliary workers.

That is certainly an area where the health boards could look for savings, and I hope that they will do so. We have encouraged the health boards to look over the next two or three years for an average percentage reduction in administrative costs so that as much taxpayers' money as possible goes direct to patient care.

Is the Minister aware that many people are beginning to question the way in which higher salaries are being treated by the Government and believe the Government's philosophy to be "To him that hath shall be given"? As many people regard as unfair the way in which defenceless people on low incomes are being treated, is it not about time that the Government took action to give a reasonable wage increase to the NHS workers?

As I have already said, since the general election the Government have given considerable extra money to the NHS and to its employees. We feel that the 7½ per cent., 6½ per cent. and 6 per cent. offers currently on the table are consistent with the other offers that have been accepted in other walks of life, both in the private and public sectors. We know that neither the taxpayer nor the Health Service can afford to pay the 12 per cent. claim for which the NHS workers have asked.

If the taxpayer cannot pay the 12 per cent. to the nurses and the ancillary workers, how does the hon. Gentleman justify the taxpayer paying 18 per cent. to judges, 14·6 per cent. to higher civil servants and 10 per cent. to the police? He cannot have it both ways. What does he mean by "negotiations", especially when he has gone out of his way to say that there is no room for further negotiation? What about the dispute in his Department? We understand that some of his civil servants have withdrawn co-operation as a result of the way in which he has handled the Health Service dispute.

Perhaps I can convince the hon. Gentleman of the realism of this situation. I noticed that this morning the national executive of the Labour Party was picketed by its employees who are unhappy about the fact that their wages will not be increased.

Answer the question.

If the hon. Gentleman reads my previous answers, he will see that I have answered all his questions. We have moved from our original offer of 4 per cent. The unions have made no move and I urge them now to do so.

What about the dispute in the hon. Gentleman's Department?

Part of my Department is involved in a dispute, which means that some of the questions tabled by hon. Members cannot be answered because we do not have the detailed statistics. I hope that those involved will take the same advice as I am giving to the rest of the Health Service and return to normal working and negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what further measures he proposes to introduce as a means of reducing the number of people unemployed in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

Details were announced yesterday of a new job-splitting scheme to provide more part-time jobs and of the community programme for the long-term unemployed. We have also announced a further two enterprise zones for Scotland, in addition to the measures to assist industry announced earlier in the Budget.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the majority of Scottish Members believe that the measures announced by the Chancellor yesterday do little more than tinker with a real and serious problem in Scotland? They will not create any real new jobs. About 350,000 Scottish people are unemployed, and they will have little hope of employment unless there is a radical change in Government policy. If the right hon. Gentleman is not willing to listen to Labour Members, will he at least listen to his friends in the CBI and the Scottish chambers of commerce, who have advocated a change in direction? There will be nothing shameful in admitting that such a change—

Order. That question is long enough.

I understand that the CBI is proposing a measure of reflation to be paid for by public expenditure cuts. If the right hon. Gentleman is in favour of such a measure, I shall be glad of his support for the appropriate cuts. It is not fair to suggest that a change in Government policy could improve the position, unless it takes great care not to endanger the progress of reducing inflation, which is the only long-term security for Scottish jobs.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there is still a possibilility of commencing the Fife regional road this year, which will provide both direct employment and employment prospects for Fife as a whole?

We do everything that we can to bring forward such projects to help employment prospects. If my hon. Friend will table a question on the starting date for that road, I shall do my best to answer it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that we are happy that some progress has at least been made in attempting to bring new jobs to Scotland? However, the measures announced yesterday are an absolute sham and an insult to the intelligence of the Scottish people. In view of the number of factories that are now derelict through liquidation and the number of people unemployed, will the right hon. Gentleman embark on a public expenditure programme to provide real jobs that will bring people off the dole?

I am grateful for what the hon. Gentleman said at the beginning of his supplementary question. Yesterday's measures were not intended to be a huge change in policy. They will be useful in themselves. I am sure that people who get places in an enterprise zone will be glad of them. The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that, were the Government to spend taxpayers' money on extra inflationary policies, the long-term position for jobs in his constituency and elsewhere would be very much worse. That has happened on every occasion since the war when such a policy has been tried, and the Government are determined not to do it.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the key to reducing unemployment is to attract new industry and jobs and that the two things that will make that least likely are industrial distruption in Scotland and the kind of talking down that we have heard today from the moaning minnies on the Labour Benches?

I agree with my hon. Friend that the attraction of new industry is vital to replace jobs that are lost in older industries. In addition to the examples given by my hon. Friend, any threat to leave the EEC would make it almost impossible to attract any new industries to Britain.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce further measures to increase employment in the Highlands and Islands.

The Government attach high priority to encouraging employment opportunities in the Highlands and Islands and will continue to support the efforts of the Highlands and Islands Development Board as the principal development agency in the area. In addition, the whole Highlands and Islands area benefits, as an assisted area, from a wide range of aid from the Government and the European Community.

In view of the collapse of the pulp mill at Invergordon, the non-progress on the gas-gathering pipeline, the failure of the aluminium smelter at Invergordon and the Government's refusal to implement the National Farmers Union's recommendations on an agriculture development programme for the Highlands, why should the House and the people of Scotland have any confidence that the future of the major employer left in the Highlands at Dounreay is in good hands?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that successive Governments have made great efforts to attract investment to the Highlands, and much public financial support has been given to such projects. Projects have failed simply because, over a number of years, they have not been viable, despite the large amounts of public funds that have been made available. The hon. Gentleman will know that the Dounreay firm has a full work programme in support of the United Kingdom fast reactor project. It is, of course, premature to consider the future of any commercial fast reactor. However, Dounreay has a well-established site and a supportive community, and those are two important factors for the Government in deciding about the future.

My hon. Friend will be aware that a large part of the highlands of Perthshire is not covered by the Highlands and Islands Development Board or by the Highlands region. In considering proposals to help the Highlands, will he bear in mind the highlands of Perthshire?

Yes, Sir; and we frequently do so, thanks to the urging of my hon. Friend.

The Minister is not viewed in my constituency with the total disfavour with which he is viewed in the South—perhaps because he has given us assisted area status. Has he considered creating free ports or free enterprise zones in the Highlands?

We are now in a position to consider that matter, as we have two additional enterprise zones. In due course my right hon. Friend will make a statement about them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the numbers of patients awaiting major surgical operations in Scotland at the present time; and what they were six months before.

This information could be ascertained only by a special inquiry of health boards. During the current industrial disruption it would not be fair to add to the work load of the boards in this way.

Nevertheless, will my hon. Friend confirm that, since the Government came to office, waiting lists for serious surgical operations have reduced considerably as a result of the 6 per cent. increase in real terms in expenditure in the National Health Service? Does he agree that the current industrial dispute is severly endangering the well-being of the patients who need these operations, and that we cannot stand for that?

My hon. Friend is right. Since the Government came to power in 1979, waiting lists in the Health Service in Scotland have been reduced. Part of the reason for that reduction is that we have considerably increased the financing of the National Health Service in Scotland and in the rest of the United Kingdom. My hon. Friend is also right when he says that the dispute, as the Labour Government found in 1978–79, will result in waiting lists increasing and patients having to wait for operations which, frankly, they could have had but for the dispute.

Health Service staff in Scotland have become accustomed to slurs from the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram) and the Minister. Is the Minister aware that my personal experience during the day of action five weeks ago confirmed that NHS staff are providing full cover for emergency cases while pursuing their justified wage claims? If anyone is guilty of putting patients in danger, surely it must be the Minister and his right hon. Friend?

I am not sure whether I should congratulate the hon. Member on his return to good health, although I do so. I join him in congratulating those in the Health Service who declined to go on strike and have continued to work, often well beyond their normal duties, to maintain the high standard of patient care to which we are accustomed in the National Health Service.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is now in a position to announce the date of the publication of the report by Lord Hunter on the Meehan case.

Lord Hunter's report into the whole circumstances of the murder of Mrs. Rachel Ross at Ayr in July 1969 will be published on Thursday 5 August.

Will the Secretary of State take it from me that that answer is totally unacceptable and a gross insult to Patrick Meehan, myself and many hon. Members who have taken a keen interest in this case? Does he accept that he has had this report on his desk since last August? It is a gross insult to the House to publish the report in a dummy form. Does the right hon. Gentleman also accept that he demeaned himself yesterday by involving himself in a shabby manoeuvre with the former Scottish Tory Whip in tabling a late priority written question in an effort to dodge proper qestioning on the matter? Finally, does he accept that what he has done has brought the Scottish Office into disrepute and, indeed, the good name of justice in Scotland as a whole?

I do not understand what the hon. Gentleman is saying about a question. I hope that, on reflection, he will think that his questions were inappropriate. This is a long report about important matters, which occurred a long time ago. It is vital to get this report presented in some form to Parliament before the recess so that it can be studied—that will take a very long time—by the many people who are affected by it. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will feel that there is no discourtesy to anyone in taking great care to do that.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that, whatever explanations are given, the effect of this report being published when Parliament is in recess—missing a year's delay by only three days—will be that Members may not comment on it under privilege, at least until we reassemble, which will be too late? Secondly, will he advise us on the mechanics of getting this vast report, so that those who are entitled to immediate comment, and the media, may have copies in their hands at the earliest possible moment, and not be delayed by the time that it takes to get from the Vote Office to our constituencies next week?

My hon. and learned Friend knows that he can apply to the Vote Office for a copy and that it will be sent to him as quickly as possible. Alternatively, he can pick it up in person—or, of course, if he has a secretary, no doubt he or she can pick it up.

Is the Secretary of State aware that it is wholly unsatisfactory for this report to be published a week after Parliament rises for the Summer Recess? It has been in his hands since August 1981. When was it sent to the printers? Will he comment on the statement by the managing director of the printers this morning that he delivered the report to the Scottish Office on a timetable that was agreed four or five weeks ago? If that is correct, it sheds a rather different light on some of the things that have come out of the Scottish Office in recent days.

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says. Perhaps I should say, first, that my Department, the printers and I have done all that we possibly can to produce the report as quickly as possible. The printers have done a good job. They have had to take on extra staff and to work overtime. However, it has not been possible for them to produce it any earlier. They received the report in its initial form at the end of last year. They had complete proofs, and corrected galley proofs were returned on 24 May. The final detail was in their hands by 28 June, and since then they have been working very hard. When hon. Members see the report and appreciate its size and weight, they will understand why it has taken so long.

Is it not extraordinary that the galley proofs were available at the end of May but that we still do not have the report at the end of July? As the report is important and raises sensitive issues, it is all the more important that there should be an early opportunity to comment upon and ask questions about it inside rather than outside the House. The real mischief in mishandling the printing of the report is that hon. Members will not have the opportunity to do that until they return in October.

I can only disagree with the right hon. Gentleman. He says that it is extraordinary, but he will find that it is not extraordinary when he sees the size and weight of the report and exactly what is involved. If he wishes, he can consult the printers.

Does the Secretary of State realise that he has given the House a choice between Government incompetence in taking so long to produce the report and scabby and cynical manipulation of the House of Commons and parliamentary procedure to avoid hon. Members having the opportunity to question the contents of the report in the public interest?

I wholly disagree with the hon. Gentleman. I am one of the few Members who have no axe to grind, having had no responsibility at any time for any part of these events. Therefore, the hon. Gentleman should clear me of that.

I shall allow an extra two minutes at 3.30 pm.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I give notice that I should like to raise a point of order at the end of Question Time in relation to that question?

May I also give similar notice?

Certainly.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what proportion of trials in Scotland, for the most recent 12-month period, have had to be postponed because of the non-appearance of Crown witnesses.

Statistics are not kept for this purpose, but it is thought that the proportion of trials which have had to be postponed because of the non-appearance of Crown witnesses is small.

Is the Solicitor-General aware of a constituent of mine who lost his job and suffered severe health problems as a result of two prolonged delays for that reason after being charged with a minor offence? Will the Solicitor-General assure the House that he will look into that case with a view to awarding my constituent some compensation? Will he discuss with the Lord Advocate the possibility of taking some action to minimise such delays in other cases?

I know about the case to which the hon. Gentleman referred. It was an exceptional case. I accept that it was most unfortunate that, for reasons beyond the Crown's control, adjournments were necessary on three occasions. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any undertaking on compensation, but I recognise that in such cases individuals do suffer as a consequence of adjournments.

I know that the Solicitor-General is sensitive about delays in this area. Will he undertake to look at the situation again? He said that no figures were available for delays caused by the Crown, but I should have thought that there are often considerable delays. At the same time, will he take an early opportunity to report to the House on the working of the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980, with its intermediate diets, which are meant to stop delays caused by people who plead guilty and change their plea at the last minute?

I shall certainly report to the House on that latter point. It is important that we know how the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act is working.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if he is satisfied with the procedures in the Crown Office before decisions not to prosecute are taken in cases of serious crime.

In general, I am satisfied with procedures in the Crown Office. However, my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate and I do instruct changes in procedures from time to time.

The Solicitor-General may be satisfied, but does he accept that several cases recently have caused public concern? Some of those cases have involved an individual accused, but others have involved the increasing practice of indicting large groups of accused persons. Will he reconsider those procedures carefully and report more fully at a later date?

Regrettably, that is the result of the pattern of crime in Scotland. Several incidents recently have resulted in the indictment of many accused. It certainly presents problems for the Crown, the defence, the police and members of the public. I shall certainly look at the problem.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that, however good the procedures, there will always be borderline cases where the public interest has to be weighed against the chances of a successful prosecution and the use of public funds? Ultimately, it must be a matter for the discretion and experience of highly qualified advocates depute. Decisions can never be made by a hard and fast rule.

There are great difficulties, where a large number of people are intitially accused of a crime, in determining whether some or all of them should be indicted in court. As my hon. Friend said, it is a matter for discretion, and there may be occasions upon which it is difficult to determine immediately just where that discretion should lie.

Have there been any further changes since the statement about the rape case in the categories of offence that now require the personal consideration of the Lord Advocate before a decision not to prosecute is taken?

No. The last occasion on which any change in procedure with regard to decisions to be taken personally by the Law Officers was made was the statement to which the hon. Gentleman referred. There are several types of crime where, if the recommendation is not to prosecute, the Law Officers must personally be involved.

Does the Crown Office take any special part in decisions not to prosecute when the only witnesses involved are police or prison officers and the person who makes the complaint? Will the hon. and learned Gentleman pay attention to that matter of public concern?

I am not aware of any particular statistics on that aspect of the matter, but I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern. If there are any figures that might be of assistance, I shall certainly provide them to him.

The Solicitor-General will be aware that, at the time of the original statement about the Glasgow rape case, considerable concern was expressed about procedures in the Crown Office. I understand the difficulties and do not wish to go into the merits of that case until it is finally disposed of, but we would like to have a more considered statement about the procedures after that event. We have not been able to pursue the matter since then. I should be grateful if the Solicitor-General would consider it and make a statement later, when it is appropriate.

As the right hon. Gentleman clearly recognises, it would be inopportune and inappropriate at this time to make a full statement. One change in Crown Office procedure was immediately announced. If other changes are to be introduced, I shall certainly undertake to make them known to the House.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what instructions his Office has issued to the procurator fiscal of Perth in the matter of the illegal parking on public property of caravans.

No special instructions on this matter have been issued to the procurator fiscal at Perth. As my hon. Friend will know, all procurators fiscal have been directed by my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate to report to the Crown Office for the instructions of Crown counsel any case reported to them involving unauthorised camping by travelling people.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. He will be aware that around the city of Perth considerable encampments have caused trouble and aggravation. Will he assure the House that that situation will not be allowed to continue and that he will encourage his colleagues in the Scottish Office to give the go-ahead for the two permanent sites for travelling people, which are urgently awaited in the city of Perth?

As my hon. Friend recognises, the provision of funds for such sites is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. However, it is correct to say that proceedings may not be taken if there are no alternative sites available in the area. Once sites have been provided, the Crown Office's instruction—which my hon. Friend finds objectionable—has a good chance of being reversed.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many charges of vandalism have been brought by the Crown Office over the past 12 months.

The statistics on court proceedings for the past 12 months have not yet been processed, However, I can inform my hon. Friend that in 1981 41,959 contraventions of section 78 of the 1980 Act were made known to the police. Of those, 8,610 were cleared up in that one or more persons were apprehended, warned, cited or traced for the offence.

Is my hon. and learned Friend satisfied that the charge of vandalism is now acting, as intended, as a deterrent?

There was some initial apprenhension that what was being introduced was little more than cosmetic, but it is interesting to note that groups such as the Scottish Legal Action Group have now recognised the importance of demonstrating to offenders exactly what they have done. It is well worth having the crime of vandalism on the statute book.

The Solicitor-General is laughing at his own reply. Does he really maintain that position? Surely the change is cosmetic. All the offences would have been recorded as breaches of the peace and would have been prosecuted in exactly the same way. It is brass-necked to suggest that the provision represents some contribution to better government and law enforcement in Scotland.

It is no laughing matter that there should be 47,000 incidences of vandalism in Scotland. People should be charged with that offence so that they, the courts and the public know exactly what they have been engaging in. In addition, it makes it easier for the courts to take advantage of compensation orders and allows offenders to contribute properly towards rectifying the damage that they have caused.

Is there any way in which my hon. and learned Friend can point out to the courts that although a particular offence, such as vandalism, may not in itself be of major, world-shattering importance it can have a serious impact on a local community if it is carried out on a large scale?

I recognise the great damage that can be done to individual communities and the concern that it can cause to people. That is why it is important not only to have the offence of vandalism, but to couple it with compensation orders. Contrary to what the Opposition may say, it makes a valuable contribution to law and order in Scotland.