asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the number of deaths at the young offenders institution and the detention centre at Glenochil.

Since it opened in July 1976 there have been four inmate deaths at Glenochil young offenders institution. There was also a death at Glenochil detention centre on 16 February 1984, the first since it opened in July 1966.

Although the Secretary of State has rejected pleas for a public inquiry into the administration of the two institutions at Glenochil, will he accept that those of my constituents who have been in them have expressed grave disquiet to me about the regime of brutality among the inmates and some members of the staff? If the right hon. Gentleman does not want a public inquiry to take place, will he arrange for himself or his ministerial colleagues to talk privately about the character of the places to some of those who have been in the institutions?

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says, but I cannot accept what lies behind his question. The fatal accident inquiries which have taken place in every case—except one which has still to take place—have found no connection between the causes of the various deaths or any reason to relate these tragedies to the nature of the regime in the institution. I do not accept that there is any such connection in these instances.

Will my right hon. Friend define "regime"? Is this a reference to the punishment regime or to the way in which young offenders are treated by officials within the detention centre?

I am not sure whether my hon. Friend is referring to my views or to those that are set out in the various statements that have been made. The regime which is practised at the institution is in all senses humane, and it is intended that it should remain so in all circumstances. The claim that has been made—notably by the Scottish Council for Civil Liberties—that there may have been as many as 12 suicides—what the council chooses to call para-suicides—in Glenochil is wholly irresponsible. There have been four fatalities at the young offenders institution. One resulted from solvent abuse and three from suicides or accidental death. There has been only one death in the detention centre's 18-year history, during which it has received some 16,000 inmates. The accusations that have been made are irresponsible and should be denied.

I accept the pattern that the Secretary of State has presented, but does he not feel some disquiet in the light of the more recent incidents that have taken place? There is a question mark against this institution which I think he and his Department can dispel; but, if necessary, he may have to take some action to allay public disquiet.

I feel considerable disquiet about every one of these incidents. No one can take lightly the fact that someone has died, for whatever reason, in one of these institutions. However, there have been fatal accident inquiries in every case and no connection has been found between the causes of the various deaths. Similarly, no connection has been found between the deaths and the nature of the regime. Therefore, there is no suggestion that the regime is responsible for these tragic events.

The Opposition recognise that fatal accident inquiries have exonerated the Glenochil staff. We appreciate what the Secretary of State has done and the constructive way in which he has approached the two latest fatalities. However, considerable strain is now being imposed upon the staff by the recurrence of fatalities. That strain is such that we must give close consideration to the regimes within the two institutions at Glenochil and to the sentencing policy which requires immature young people to be incarcerated and subjected to the strains that are imposed upon them and the staff. Will the right hon. Gentleman examine sentencing policy and the adjacent penal policy and try to find a way of resolving this succession of tragedies?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he said at the beginning of his question. I very much support the line that he has taken. I should make it clear that the changes that were made in sentencing policy took effect only in November last year. Therefore, it is far too early to draw any conclusions. Sentencing is, of course, a matter for the courts. Having been laid down in statute, it is for the courts to find the most appropriate sentence in each case. I very much hope that the unwarranted accusations that have been made about this institution will now be laid to rest, as they have no foundation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has recently received from the Scotch Whisky Association regarding impending legislation on minimum volume percentages.

I have received representations in writing, and I have also met representatives of the association. They put to me the case for a minimum alcoholic concentration of Scotch whisky of 40 per cent. by volume.

Does the Minister agree with the representations that have been made? Like many Opposition Members, does he not feel that any dilution of the standard of Scotch whisky would be as unpalatable as the adulteration attempts by some of his hon. Friends to dilute the contents of the latest report of the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs?

I do not know what the latter has to do with the former. Perhaps one needs some of the former before one can stand being a member of the latter.

As one who represents consumers and producers of this substance, may I encourage the Minister to look more closely at the representations that he has had from those who wish the diluted percentage to be allowed? If this afternoon he cares to go into any shop or supermarket in Scotland and buy one of these brands of diluted whisky at its cheap price, he will discover that he is paying far more per percentage volume than is charged for brands at full strength.

Those representations were indeed made to me. That is one of the aspects of the matter that I shall have to take into consideration. However, I have to say that anything below 40 per cent. has to be marked as being under strength and to have the alcoholic strength declared on the label.

Does the Minister accept that he is able to take action against weak continental whisky if the minimum is set at 37 per cent., not 40 per cent.? Does he further accept that if the minimum is set at 40 per cent. that will harm some United Kingdom producers, such as Glen Catrine in my constituency, and reduce the choice available to the consumer? How does he reconcile that with the Government's so-called principles?

The hon. Gentleman has outlined to the House the representations that he and those in the under strength trade have made to me and to my right hon. and hon. Friends. These are matters that we will have to take into account, with the representations of the Scotch Whisky Association.

Does my hon. Friend accept that if the volume content of whisky is reduced that will create considerable problems in the rural areas of Scotland, which are totally dependent upon the manufacture of good whisky, not that referred to by the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes)? The rubbish that is manufactured there is not acceptable, and the small print is not looked at by the people who purchase the whisky.

As the Member of Parliament for the constituency which produces splendid Islay malts, I am all for the production and consumption of good whisky—[Interruption.] I must say to my hon. Friend, as I have said to other hon. Members, that all these matters will be weighed by my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and myself before we come to a final decision.

I should first declare that I have no intention of entering the bad pun of the month competition.

I am well aware of the serious arguments involved. There has been a little levity this afternoon. However, hon. Members have made their representations and I am sure that they appreciate the seriousness of the issue. I assure the hon. Gentleman that I am taking the problem very seriously.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on employment prospects in Scotland.

The growth now evident in the national economy and the measures—particularly the abolition of the national insurance surcharge—announced yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will enhance employment prospects in Scotland.

Did the Secretary of State listen last night to the president elect of the CBI, who, whilst welcoming the abolition of the national insurance surcharge, was unable to give any specific figure as to how it would affect employment? Although some of us do not expect the Secretary of State to give specific figures, we do not see in the Budget, which taxed fish suppers, petrol and the rest of it, any stimulation for growth and for jobs. We do not see the Budget as the means of getting more than 300,000 people in Scotland off the dole queue.

I appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's remarks. I agree that it is probably difficult to make a precise estimate of the number of jobs affected by the abolition of the national insurance surcharge, but one does not need to be very brilliant to realise that a Government who put a tax on jobs are likely to discourage employment, while a Government who abolish such a tax are likely greatly to encourage it.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the most heartening aspects of yesterday's Budget for the North sea oil industry was the Chancellor of the Exchequer's undertaking to look at a change of tax regime on incremental oilfield development? Does my right hon. Friend further agree that within the next few years that should provide substantial additional employment in Scotland, particularly in the north east?

I appreciate that point and very much hope that a change would have that effect. One of the most encouraging factors in many parts of Scotland is the new activity in the oil-related development sector and the extra jobs that that is beginning to create.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Fraser of Allander Institute has found that there is less reason for optimism about the future of Scotland than about that of other parts of the United Kingdom? Why does the right hon. Gentleman not fight against Scotland's percentage of the national cake being reduced year by year?

I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman's latter point. The Scottish share of national expenditure has increased from 9·8 per cent. in 1979 to 10·4 per cent. The right hon. Gentleman may find, as no doubt others will, that a Budget that generally concentrates on helping industry is bound to help to create jobs, particularly in Scotland.

Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to read out to the doom and gloom brigade opposite some of the recent announcements that add up to such good job prospects in Scotland? I think of electronics and Imperial Chemical Industries, which my right hon. Friend is to see on Friday.

The past few weeks have certainly been remarkable for inward investment in Scotland. In the past four weeks we have had the big new development Hewlett Packard, the Shin-Etsu Handotai development at Livingston and the giant National Semi-Conductor at Greenock. Only today a small but nevertheless important addition has been made to the electronics industry in Scotland with the announcement of yet another new development in Cumbernauld by a firm called Berkeley Glasslab, which is providing a new manufacturing unit.

Will the Secretary of State confirm a report on Radio Scotland, which was heard this morning by my wife, to the effect that an announcement is to be made later this week about an order by Caledonian MacBrayne for a passenger ferry being placed with a yard south of the border which has no experience of building such a passenger ferry? If he confirms that report, will he explain why the Scottish Office was so unsuccessful in dissuading a Scottish company from placing such an important order outwith Scotland?

I cannot confirm that report. Caledonian MacBrayne has put out to tender a replacement for the Hebrides and is evaluating tenders from various firms. It is for that company to decide which is the best tender.

Does the Secretary of State remember that he was last in Fort William during the election to promote the Conservative cause? When can we expect him back, given that unemployment in Lochaber has risen steadily since his visit? What hope can he give to the people there of improved prospects?

I have been very concerned about unemployment in Lochaber for a number of years. The people of Lochaber will find, as will people in other parts of Scotland, that the measures announced yesterday will be of great benefit in helping to improve employment prospects.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government's policy on aerospace and other high technology projects, such as the A320 and the European fighter, mean a lot to Scotland, particularly to companies, such as Ferranti, which are engaged in high technology?

That is correct. The part that Scottish industry plays in many high technology industries throughout Britain is an important factor in employment throughout Scotland.

Is it not ironic that the Scottish Office did nothing to save the Henry Robb yard which was in the running for building the Cal Mac ferry?

I was also sorry about the closure of that yard, which I knew well in years past. The matter was for British Shipbuilders to decide, taking into account a proper balance between its activities and the market that it has to serve.

Does the Secretary of State accept that many people in Scotland believe that yesterday's Budget showed a lack of courage and imagination? According to the Chancellor's projections in the White Paper on public expenditure, we may expect the present tragically high levels of unemployment to continue during the next two or three years. Does the Secretary of State accept that the slogan "Steady as you go" makes no sense at all if the economy is on the wrong course? Does he agree that a neutral Budget is a betrayal of the 350,000 Scots on the dole queues?

Of all the criticisms that one might make of yesterday's Budget, even if one disagreed with it, the last would be that it lacked courage and imagination. It was full of both. It is widely accepted as helpful that the Chancellor was able to look further ahead than just one year.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many offences of theft and break-ins to homes were reported to the police in Scotland in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and what was the percentage clear-up rate of crimes in each category.

The available information for 1980 to 1982 was published in Scottish Home and Health Department statistical bulletin No 2/1983, a copy of which is in the Library. Figures for 1983 are not yet available.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the grave concern among my constituents in Edinburgh at the wave of break-ins recently? Will he pass to the chief constable the message that my constituents would warmly welcome the return of more police officers to the beat?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's anxiety, and I shall ensure that the chief constable is aware of what he has said. I remind my hon. Friend that in August an increase in the establishment in Edinburgh resulted in the releasing of 38 police officers for general police duties. The chief constable of Lothian has taken, and will continue to take, steps to put policemen back on the beat.

Since the Government came to power there have been increases in police powers, in expenditure on the police and in the punishment for those who commit crime, so why has the crime rate continued to rise? Have the Government's policies on crime failed as dismally as all their other policies?

The hon. Gentleman knows fun well the Government's concern about increases in crime. He also knows that the Government are committed, in a way that the Labour party is not, to the defeat of crime. It might be helpful if the hon. Gentleman were to suggest to his colleagues in Strathclyde region that they should make good the shortfall of 138 policemen in the establishment, as that would help the fight against crime in that area.

May I offer my hon. Friend some good news? Is he aware that last year house break-ins in Strathkelvin reduced by 10 per cent. and in Bearsden by 15 per cent? Does that not confirm the success of the Government's policy on law and order? Is it not also an impressive result of the work of the Strathclyde police?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding the House of those facts. A large part of the fight against crime can be helped by the public. I hope that they are aware that, by reporting suspicious incidents and ensuring that the security of their homes is as good as possible, they can go a long way towards helping in this important fight.

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.

Excluding major refits, the agency built from 1975 to 1983 a total of 784 factories comprising 4·95 million sq ft.

How many of those factory units are occupied? Is my hon. Friend satisfied that there are sufficient of them to meet anticipated demand?

Yes. Vacancy rates obviously vary over time. My hon. Friend will be pleased to learn that new lettings last year were at record levels.

Is the Minister aware that there is a shortage of higher amenity industrial and business premises, especially in areas, such as Lanarkshire, which have not been as successful as other areas in attracting new industry? Will he consider discussing with the SDA whether the types of factory building and industrial estates being developed are appropriate to attract the wider range of business that the older industrial areas need?

I am sure that the agency will note what the hon. Gentleman has said. It has an excellent record in meeting the demands of the market place, including those for higher amenity factories. The hon. Gentleman will be interested to know that currently the agency has 225 units under construction, providing more than 500,000 sq ft of factory space.

Is there a system whereby a customer can discuss with the SDA a specific type of factory that he might require for his purposes? Rather than take over a factory that has to be changed or renovated, would it not be better to use the finance to build a factory specifically designed for a business?

Obviously, the agency believes that the customer must come first. It is geared to anticipating and satisfying market demands as necessary.

I accept that the factory building capacity and ability of the SDA are welcome as far as they go, but is the Minister aware that some of the factories that it is developing are not necessarily the most appropriate assistance for rural areas? Is the hon. Gentleman further aware that it is galling for people in Roxburgh to listen to a Border Television news programme explaining what the Council for Small Industries in Rural Areas in England is doing to assist, for example, village shops, when such powers are not available to the SDA? Will he redress that anomaly forthwith?

The agency has as good a record in providing appropriate factory space in rural areas of Scotland as it has in industrial areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next intends to discuss the youth training scheme in Scotland with the chairman of the Manpower Services Commission.

My right hon. Friend has no immediate plans to do so. The take-up of places this year on the youth training scheme in Scotland has continued to be encouraging, with over 36,000 youngsters having entered since the scheme's inception, 9,500 of them since the beginning of January.

Is the Minister aware that there is urgent need for him to meet the chairman of the Manpower Services Commission to discuss with him the intention of the Minister of State, Department of Employment to reduce by 30 per cent. community-based schemes within the new youth training scheme? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it would be better to give new community-based schemes the opportunity of the operational year to settle down, so giving them a chance to move smoothly from the youth opportunities programme to the youth training scheme?

The hon. Gentleman is referring to mode B1 places. Of the 10,000 in Scotland, only 7,800 are filled. Each unfilled place costs the taxpayer at least £2,000. Against that, the MSC's new target of 8,000 places next year is perfectly reasonable. Dundee ITEC, which has been a great success, will double its intake.

On the question of the youth training scheme, and further to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber (Mr. Johnston), what real hope can the Minister offer young people, for example in the Highlands of Scotland, who now face great difficulties as a result of the economic policies of the Conservatives since 1979? Many of their parents were encouraged to move from the central belt of Scotland and elsewhere to Fort William. When the Fort William pulp mill closed, some of them went to Invergordon to work at the smelter, and since that has closed they have had little opportunity for employment, and the youngsters have even less. What hope do the Government offer people in that situation?

I am astonished that in the course of that lengthy question the hon. Gentleman could not bring himself even to welcome the youth training scheme. I should have thought that people of all political persuasions could welcome the scheme as a major radical new initiative in providing a bridge between school and work. The Highlands economy will benefit from the steady economic upturn in the United Kingdom and from the measures announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in yesterday's Budget.

My hon. Friend will be aware that we on these Benches are keen that the youth training scheme should be seen to be, and be accepted as, successful. What progress has been made in the Edinburgh area, where the trade unions have been less than constructive—indeed, could be described as having been destructive—by their failure to help to make the scheme work?

While I accept that there has been local opposition in some areas, the support of the trade union movement for the youth training scheme has been widespread. Obviously, however, it is frustrating if a good YTS is unreasonably resisted because of local problems.

Why is the MSC cutting the youth training scheme in East Lothian by closing down the community schemes operated by Lothian regional council? Already more than 4,000 people are unemployed in East Lothian. Why should a further 47 young people be deprived of even this short-term opportunity to do a useful job?

A pause in the start of new schemes in the community programme was necessary late in 1983 to avoid overshooting the target for which funds were available. By providing an additional £15 million nationally for the community programme the Government have ensured that the build-up of places to this year's target of 130,000 may be resumed.

Will the Minister more fully explain why there has been such a disruptive cut in the number of mode B1 places affecting community-based projects and training workshops? What consultation took place before the announcement was made? May we take it that the hon. Gentleman actually talks to the Minister of State, Department of Employment to make sure that the Scottish viewpoint comes across?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I talk to my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Department of Employment regularly——

But does he listen?

and that he listens with extreme care. As for mode B1 places, I have explained the figures to the House and I believe that the MSC target is perfectly reasonable. The employer-based mode A schemes offer the best prospects for youngsters, and a sufficient number of those places will be available. I should have thought that that was a sensible priority.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied with the rate of return of mentally handicapped persons to the community in Scotland and with the level of funding available to achieve this.

There has been a steady increase each year since 1979 in the return of such patients to the community, and the Government will continue to encourage this.

Does the Under-Secretary of State agree that, on reflection, his reply is complacent? In Scotland the proportion of people in hospital to those in community care is twice what it is in England. Perhaps that could be explained by the fact that the financing this year is one third the English figure.

The joint funding project in Scotland started only in 1980, whereas the project in England had been running for three years before 1980, and therefore many more projects were built up in the English scheme than in Scotland. I am happy to say that this year there has been a faster increase in take-up of the scheme than in the past two years. I hope that that will encourage the continuing movement from hospital of those mentally handicapped people who can live in the community.

Given the very considerable savings that have accrued to the Health Service from this scheme, why has my hon. Friend been so unsympathetic to the approaches by the Scottish Society for the Mentally Handicapped for funding for development officers, given the weird and wonderful organisations his Department already funds?

We look carefully at every scheme that comes to us involving health boards and regional councils, which have responsibility for social work. It is a case not just of wondering whether we can save money in the Health Service but of considering the clinical judgment of people involved in the treatment of patients when deciding whether those patients would be better looked after in hospital than in the community.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many agreements have been reached on joint financing between health boards and local authorities; what is the cost to health boards to date; and if he will make a statement

Seventy-two support finance agreements have been made since 1980, involving nearly £5 million of NHS expenditure in the four years to March 1984. Because of the improved response to the scheme, I am making £4·6 million available in 1984–85.

I believe that we would all welcome the fact that in recent years there has been an improvement in the take-up of this concept. Does the Under-Secretary of State agree that it is now four years to the day since the original circular was sent out and that overall progress has been disappointing? We all want to see some of the most seriously disadvantaged people returned to their homes. Unfortunately, often they live in seriously disadvantaged areas and, therefore, need the encouragement of more Government resources.

My Department is reviewing the terms of the support finance scheme. I hope to come to a conclusion reasonably soon about new terms for the scheme. In much of Scotland the uptake has been encouraging. I wish that I could say the same for the Strathclyde region, which, unfortunately, for various reasons, has not been very keen to take part in the scheme. I hope that, given the extra money during the corning financial year—an increase of 37 per cent. over this year—the region will review its position and cooperate with the health board in getting some joint schemes off the ground.

Given the increase in resources, does my hon. Friend accept the principle that the resources should follow the patient?

That is easier in theory than it is in practice. The simple reason is that there will always be a number of mentally handicapped patients who will require hospital treatment. The health boards must try to improve the conditions in hospitals that care for the mentally handicapped and, therefore, spend money on the patients who remain in the hospitals. That is a difficult balance to strike, but one that the support finance scheme is helping to achieve.

I am pleased that the Under-Secretary of State is reviewing the terms of the scheme. Will he take the opportunity to bring the joint financing scheme into line with the practice in England, where the take-up of such schemes has been at twice the level in Scotland? Will he acknowledge that, for example, the health board in my area has expressed reservations about taking up joint financing because it feels that it does not have the resources or the revenue to fulfil that arrangement and that the scheme will take funds from elsewhere? Will the hon. Gentleman bear that point in mind when considering the scheme in England?

The hon. Member means that his regional council is worried because the health board does not have the long-term financing of the project after the joint funding phase is over. That is with the regional council. That matter is part and parcel of the review that we are undertaking. The English reviewed their scheme after five of six years. We are reviewing ours after four years. I am aware of the terms of the English scheme. It is plainly something that I am studying carefully. I shall be consulting COSLA and the health boards about the new terms that I would propose to put before them.

Speaking as someone who is anxious that Strathclyde participates in the scheme, I ask the Minister whether he is aware that the reason for the lack of enthusiasm is the much inferior financial arrangements for Scottish local authorities compared with the position in England? Why is he being so dilatory about reviewing the scheme? We have had the new Act for nearly a year. We were promised a consultation paper. When shall we see an improvement in the terms of the scheme for Scotland?

The English review was conducted only in the past year or two, and the new English terms are only now coming through. Our terms were the same as the old English scheme. I accept the point that the right hon. Gentleman is making, that we need to make progress on the matter. I also accept that Strathclyde region has used the terms as an excuse. It is interesting to note that the other Scottish regions have not felt constrained by the terms.

While I agree that the Minister has been helpful in this matter and has gone some way to fulfil the undertaking that he gave during the Bill's passage, even under the old arrangements in England £96 million was spent. In Scotland we will get only £4·6 million next year. Will the Minister assure us that he will produce the appropriate new arrangement as quickly as possible? I am sure the take-up rate will increase, because about 96 per cent. of the available money has been taken up during the past 12 months. Will he ensure that this will be new money and will not be taken from other parts of the social services budget?

The money that goes to the joint fund comes from the National Health Service budget and, therefore, comes off the amount that is up for distribution among the health boards. As I have already said, I shall try to expedite the matter of the renewed terms of the scheme, because I think that it is an important scheme. Every year since the scheme started the take-up has not reached the figure that we had laid aside. Last year we laid aside £3·1 million; the take-up reached £2·9 million. That was encouraging and was better than in the past. This year I have £4·6 million and I hope that it will all be taken up.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many people have been treated for illnesses arising from drug abuse (a) in Scotland and (b) in the Greater Glasgow health board catchment area in each of the past four years.

I regret that this information is not available centrally. Hospital admissions in Scotland with a principal diagnosis of drug dependence in 1980 and 1981 were 179 and 168 respectively; the figures for Greater Glasgow were 45 and 44. Figures for later years are not yet available.

Is the Minister aware that hospitals such as the one in my constituency at Stobhill in the north end of the city are worried because they find more and more that drug addicts are having to be admitted to undergo heart surgery, and in some cases have to be treated for hepatitis and various abscesses which they contract through using dirty syringes? That puts a deplorable strain on the Health Service. Nurses and staff in general hospitals are not trained to look after the needs of such patients. Will the Minister try to make available funds that will help hospitals such as that at Stobhill, and will he also assist the various police forces to do something about the traders who are pushing those drugs?

The hon. Member made a number of points, which I fully appreciate. I have a great deal of sympathy with him. The increased trade in drugs, especially of heroin, that we have seen mentioned, for example, in the report of the chief constable of Strathclyde, is horrifying. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall do anything that we can inside the Health Service to help deal with the resultant problems. The best way to deal with the problem is for the police to find and convict, and for the courts to deal seriously with, those who traffic in drugs.

Is there any evidence to show that specific areas of Scotland have a specific problem with the number of patients entering hospitals? Is there anything one can do to correlate it to the action being taken by the police in those areas?

I am unaware of any statistics from the hospital side that would compare one area with another. We have the evidence in the report of the chief constable of Strathclyde of the considerable increase in his area, to which I have already drawn attention. I am sure that the House will join me in backing the chief constable and his men in doing something about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the impact of the Government's public expenditure proposals on the Scottish economy.

The Government's expenditure plans are consistent with our overall strategy for keeping public spending, taxation and public sector borrowing under firm control, and this will be of direct benefit to Scotland by helping to sustain the present combination of low inflation and steady growth in the economy.

Will the Minister concede that one of the most fearful statements ever heard was the Chancellor's statement yesterday that there would be a continuation of the public expenditure and budgetary policies that have been in operation since 1979 and have caused massive unemployment? What real hope will there be from this socially divisive Budget, bearing in mind that thousands of young people have not worked since 1979 and, if the Government's policies continue, are unlikely to work during their adult lives?

I am not sure that the hon. Gentleman was listening to my right hon. Friend's Budget with his usual attention. Whatever else one may say about yesterday's Budget, it was geared towards income tax changes to help lower-paid taxpayers, of whom more than 750,000 will no longer have to pay tax, and towards business and industry, which is the critical factor in trying to get people back to work. The hon. Gentleman should have warmly welcomed those priorities.

Does the Secretary of State accept that, as a result of the Chancellor's statement yesterday, our economy in 1984–85 will have the lowest proportion of public spending of any Western industrial country and the highest level of unemployment? Does he accept that those two facts are related and could be altered if the Government only had the political will to so so?

I do not believe that the right hon. Gentleman's statements are facts. We do not have the highest level of unemployment in the Western world, although it is much higher than we should like. The right hon. Gentleman must face the fact that in the past few years we have been through the worst recession ever, at a time when the nature of our industrial base has been changing rapidly in response to changes in the world economy. The most encouraging factor, which the right hon. Gentleman should have welcomed, is the huge inflow of brand new high technology industry to Scotland which the Government have achieved in the past few years.

Has my right hon. Friend noticed that the Opposition constantly complain about unemployment, but never say a word of welcome for new employment or for the measures announced yesterday to promote it?

I entirely agree with my hon. and learned Friend. Other great omissions by the Opposition are their failure to accept the causes of unemployment and the need to introduce realistic policies to put the situation right. That is what the Government have been doing.

Will the Secretary of State recognise that Opposition Members listened very attentively to the Chancellor's statements on the economy, as did many Scottish industrialists? Those to whom I have spoken have made it crystal clear that the Budget will have no impact on the Scottish economy. Is the Secretary of State aware that today 24 per cent. of the male population of Lanarkshire are without employment? As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, there have been several liquidations in my area, with one or two pending. I acknowledge that the right hon. Gentleman has done something for the area. While that is true, however, will his actions be beneficial to construction in Scotland, bearing in mind the Chancellor's statement?

No doubt the hon. Gentleman listened carefully to yesterday's Budget, but he must have been very selective in the business men to whom he spoke this morning. The official spokesmen for the CBI in England and Scotland have made it clear that yesterday's Budget was very favourable and helpful to business.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will increase the special housing allocation to Kirkcaldy district council so that priority remedial work may be carried out to pre-war houses in Kirkcaldy.

It is for Kirkcaldy district council to decide on the priority to attach to remedial work on prewar houses within the resources available to it. The council may, of course, supplement its basic consent in 1984–85 by generating additional receipts, as it has done this year.

Is the Minister aware that it is the cuts imposed by the Secretary of State on the Kirkcaldy housing grant that have led to the postponement of urgent remedial work on pre-war houses because, for reasons of safety, priorities have to be changed to deal with the system-built housing in other parts of the district? Will the Minister reconsider the position to relieve the distress caused for many tenants by the postponement of remedial work on pre-war houses?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, my officials have met representatives of the district council and I am fully aware of the representations made with regard to an increase in housing revenue account allocation. I shall, of course, consider those representations in the light of representations made by other authorities if it becomes possible to allocate additional resources in due course.

asked the Solicitor-General for v many days on average each month the Lord ends (a) in London and (b) in Scotland.

He spends seven to eight days in London. The rest of his time is spent in Scotland.

When the hon. and learned Gentleman next meets the Lord Advocate, whether it be in Edinburgh, London or Timbuctoo, will he make it clear that the recent trial of Councillors McLaughlin and Wood was a disgrace and that the right to democratic protest against the presence of the South African ambassador in the Scottish capital is perfectly legitimate? If not, are we to assume that the legal establishment in Scotland, like the Government, supports and approves of apartheid, just as it approves of the class system?

It is clear from the hon. Gentleman's question that he does not begin to understand the principles on which the rule of law is based. When prosecutions are taken for breaches of the law in Scotland, this is done with impartiality and is in no way motivated by political considerations.

Does my hon. and learned Friend appreciate that the fact that the Law Officers are sometimes in London, sometimes in Edinburgh and sometimes elsewhere results in a huge waste of time and public money now that advocates depute have to seek a Law Officer's personal permission before accepting pleas of guilty to reduce charges in the High Court? Does he agree that such serious and senior people, once appointed, should be allowed to take the decisions themselves?

I accept that advocates depute appointed by my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate are distinguished and experienced advocates capable of conducting High Court prosecutions in Scotland. It has, however, been a standing rule for some time now that if they wish to accept a reduced plea in a murder or rape case before the trial begins they must raise the matter with one or other of the Law Officers. I hope, however, that they do not feel in any way circumscribed in the discretion that they have to exercise once the evidence is before the court.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if he will consult the Scottish Law Commission as to the effects of exclusion orders under the Matrimonial Homes Act.

The Government have no present intentions to consult the Scottish Law Commission on the question of exclusion orders.

If the hon. and learned Gentleman meets the Scottish Law Commission, will he dissociate himself from the comments made by Crown Agent Mr. William Chalmers in the correspondence that I sent to the Solicitor-General on 21 February? Does he agree that such comments are liable to help those in society who believe that domestic violence is not really a crime and is not suitable for the courts?

I think that the hon. Gentleman was upset by comments relating to the diversion schemes being introduced in Ayr. I certainly accept that in problems of domestic violence the exercise of a power of arrest may be an important safeguard to ensure that there is no repetition of violence against the wife. Nevertheless, I wish to reserve this position. In seeking alternatives for prosecution it would be premature at this stage to suggest that there is no circumstance in which we might consider problems arising in the home for use of the diversion schemes.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware of the apparent anomaly in the Matrimonial Homes Act whereby the rights created by the legislation appear not to be subject to the normal Scots laws of prescription? Will he consult the Law Society of Scotland, which has expressed concern about this, and does he intend to introduce legislation to put the matter right?

It is for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to introduce legislation. However, I appreciate that my hon. Friend and others are concerned about prescription. Following my hon. Friend's earlier representations I am glad to say that, together with my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram) and my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate, I shall meet represntatives of the Law Society of Scotland next week to discuss this among other matters.

Is the Solicitor-General aware that the discretionary procedures in the powers of arrest vary from region to region? Does he accept that it might be helpful if a copy of the guidelines issued to the police were placed in the Library so that hon. Members could read them and assist the police in their districts?

My noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate has issued guidelines to the police to assist them in operating the Matrimonial Homes Act, particularly when matrimonial interdicts, ancillary to exclusion orders, have powers of arrest attached to them. I have already indicated in a written answer to the hon. Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Ross) what in essence is provided in those guidelines. The Act has been in force for only a comparatively short time. Only about 400 orders have been granted, and we ought to see how these bed down.

Let me press the Solicitor-General for Scotland a little further on that last point. There is now a general acceptance that recent court decisions have removed some of the worries about the way in which these exclusion orders are interpreted in the courts. However, a number of agencies connected with the Matrimonial Homes Act—the fiscals, the police, local authorities and social work departments—need guidance and perhaps help in operating the new rules. Will the hon. and learned Gentleman, in consultation with the Secretary of State, consider whether there is not a case for a code of guidance—perhaps along the lines of that issue in connection with the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act—to help increase the use of the provisions and to ensure that the Act achieves the purposes for which it was designed?

I want to make sure that the operation of the Act is fully understood. As I have already said, I hope that the police and fiscals have clear guidelines. As I told the hon. Member for Dundee, West, where the police have arrested a person for a breach of the matrimonial interdict to which a power of arrest has been added, this should be reported to the procurator fiscal, and I hope that that is now being done throughout Scotland.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many prosecutions there have been for illegal drift netting for salmon in the sea for the latest available year.

In the year ending 29 February 1984, 25 prosecutions were commenced in respect of offences involving illegal drift netting for salmon.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that if we are to stamp out poaching and stop salmon becoming an endangered species there will have to be many more prosecutions and the use of the protection vessels and aircraft? Will he consult his hon. Friends about the banning of drift netting off the English coast, where half the trouble begins?

My hon. Friend's latter point is not for me. In 1982 there were only two such cases. As I have said, in 1983 the number increased to 30, which led to 25 prosecutions. He may be interested to know that, as a result of these detections, no fewer than 71 illegal nets measuring 12·5 miles were seized. I hope that my hon. Friend will accept that the scale of the problem is well and truly understood. The Department for Agriculture and Fisheries in Scotland is heavily involved in ensuring proper enforcement of the law against illegal drift netting.

Will the Solicitor-General for Scotland respond more positively to the hon. Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro)? Will he consult his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and look at the annual report of the Tweed commissioners, which points out that only 32,000 fish were caught in the Tweed basin last year as against 70,000 officially recorded by drift netting and heaven knows how many unrecorded? Will they take joint action to reduce the scale of deprivation of salmon stocks in the sea when we ought to be supplementing the river stocks?

With regard to drift netting being illegal in Scottish waters, I hope that effective action will be taken to ensure that poaching does not continue to deplete vital salmon stocks. Obviously, the position south of the border is different and, together with the right hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Steel), I am very much aware of the views expressed on the matter by salmon fishing interests in Scotland.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many people are employed by the Crown Office at the old Royal High school building in Edinburgh.

The total number of persons employed in the Crown Office, Scotland, is 93.

Does that include the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor-General for Scotland, who are squatting in a building which was earmarked for the Scottish Assembly, which is being denied to the people of Scotland despite the fact that over 70 per cent. of Scottish voters voted for pro-Assembly parties at the last general election?

The building does, indeed, include both the Lord Advocate and myself. The Royal High school building in Edinburgh was originally consecrated for the study of polite learning. When I listen to the hon. Member for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan), I see that there is a continuing need for it in Scotland.