asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has had with the Manpower Services Commission in Scotland about its plans to close skillcentres and cut staff at jobcentres; and if he will make a statement.

I attended the meeting of the Manpower Services Committee for Scotland on 10 September at which the development of the employment service was among the matters discussed and joined my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment and other ministerial colleagues in meeting members of the Manpower Services Commission in London on 6 December on this subject. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment announced the Government's acceptance of the commission's final recommendations on 9 January in his reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Mr. Fallon). The commission has not yet completed its consideration of the Skillcentre Training Agency's latest business plan.

Is it not outrageous that, when hundreds of thousands of Scots are unemployed through no fault of their own and the Government should be providing more training and help, they are planning to close two skillcentres and three skillcentre annexes and to cut 70 jobcentre staff whose job it is to help the unemployed find work?

No, not at all. We are expanding the number of jobcentres in Scotland by a total of seven, including two in Edinburgh, in Corstorphine and Lady road. I emphasise that by tailoring provision to employment need, the Manpower Services Commission will assist more people. The figure this year of 9,600 will be increased to 17,000 in 1985–86.

Will the Minister ensure that no decision is taken by the MSC or Ministers to close skillcentres before the Select Committee on Employment reports and before there is a debate in the House? Will he also ensure that the MSC does not pre-empt any decision, as it has for example in Govan, by running down courses and selling off machinery at knock-down prices? Does the Minister agree that what is happening there and elsewhere is a scandal?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, debates in the House are not for me to decide. Unquestionably, there is over-capacity in the provision of the skillcentre network in the west of Scotland. I am, of course, aware of the Select Committee's investigation.

When considering the future of skillcentres, will my hon. Friend take into account whether jobs are available in the skills for which training is given? Surely it is nonsense to train people in skills for which jobs are not available. Will my hon. Friend also take into account the facilities and spare capacity in private companies and Government-owned bodies which could be used to train people? Is the MSC directing its attention to that aspect?

Yes, my hon. Friend is right. It is sensible for skillcentre courses to reflect what industry wants. That is my hon. Friend's point. My hon. Friend is also right to say that the MSC believes that there should be a variety of providers of relevant, cost-effective courses.

Will Scotland's industry Minister tell us how, with almost 350,000 unemployed, he can meekly sit back and allow skillcentres to close, especially when the Scottish CBI says that there are shortages in skilled labour? Moreover, does the Minister think it satisfactory that the jobless in Scotland should be left to rely mostly on self-selection procedures? Is that not really the nature of the new schemes resulting from the cut in jobcentre staff?

No, not at all. As I have already explained, there will be more jobcentres and the level of service will be maintained by travelling staff, the streamlining of procedures and modern technology.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the progress of discussions in relation to teachers' pay in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement on teachers' pay.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a further statement on teachers' pay.

I wrote again on 8 January to the teachers' side of the Scottish joint negotiating committee for teaching staff in school education inviting it to give further thought to my earlier proposal that the SJNC should undertake a detailed examination of salaries and conditions of service together. I understand that the SJNC decided yesterday to make a joint approach to me for a meeting. Although I have not yet received this letter, I shall, of course, be glad to meet its representatives.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the mantle with which he seeks to cloak himself — that of generous George — is wholly misplaced? Is it not true that under the Conservative Administration teachers' pay in Scotland has fallen far below the level that they would expect? Is it not a farce to suggest that the Government have no responsibility for ensuring that teachers' pay keeps up with rather than falls behind the level of inflation? Is he aware that he has managed to unite all the teaching forces in Scotland against his Government?

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's calculation and figures. However, I fully appreciate that teachers feel very strongly about what they perceive to be injustices, and about which they are currently complaining. By far the most reasonable way to deal with the problem is to ask the body set up for the precise purpose of considering pay and conditions of teachers to investigate the complaints.

Why is the Secretary of State surprised by the action of the Scottish teachers after 10 years' erosion of their salary levels and what they have found to be the futility of dealing with Scottish Office Ministers? Is he aware that, far from playing the role of generous George, he is playing the role of General Jaruzelski in making the teachers dance to the tune of another country? The surprising factor is the forbearance of the teaching profession in Scotland.

I cannot agree with the right hon. Gentleman. When comparing teachers' salaries since 1979 with other grades—something that they purport to do—they have had similar rates of increase to other local authority employees and civil servants. Therefore, the right hon. Gentleman does not have a strong point.

The Secretary of State says that he has not turned down the teachers' claim out of hand. In his letter of 11 December he said that he would consider the proposals

"on their merits and in the framework of the Government's existing public expenditure plans"?

I suppose that the teachers' employers are in exactly the same position as every other employer throughtout the country. If they are considering what they can give in wage increases to their employees, they must consider the resources that they have available. I do not see anything unusual about that.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some teachers have made comparisons between increases in their pay and the pay of Members of Parliament? I have obtained from the Library the comparative figures for the 10 years from 1974. They show that, compared with the increase in the retail prices index, teachers's salaries have risen by 7 per cent. while the salaries of Members of Parliament have declined by 20 per cent. Does my right hon. Friend agree that a more realistic comparison would be with teachers' pay south of the border? Does he recognise that the responsible settlement made last year by Scottish teachers should be fully taken into account, especially as the militancy in England achieved a slightly larger settlement? Should we not reward those who take a responsible attitude, rather than the militants?

I am interested in my hon. Friend's comparisons, to which I shall not add, except to say that it might be interesting to discover the reaction of teachers to trying hon. Members' hours of work.

Does the Secretary of State remember that on television just before Christmas he said that to give an independent inquiry into teachers's pay would be to give a blank cheque to the Educational Institute of Scotland? Was that not an admission that the teachers' case is recognised fully by him and that is why he will not have such an inquiry?

Not at all. A blank cheque can have any figure, high or low, put on it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is concern about whether re-sits in 0-grade mathematics and English will take place in future? Will this point be borne in mind in any discussions?

I appreciate the point that my hon. Friend makes. It is an important matter, which is under consideration, and I hope to announce a decision shortly.

It is no good Ministers deploring the damage that may come from industrial action when the right hon. Gentleman's obstinacy lies at the root of the problem. Leaving aside the curious comparison with so unrepresentative a grouping as Members of this House, does the right hon. Gentleman agree that his refusal to accept an independent pay review is, in a sense, a tacit acceptance that teachers' salaries have fallen behind comparable groupings and do not measure up to the responsibilities of the job?

I am glad to hear the hon. Gentleman say critical things today about the damaging of the service, because that seems to be an absolutely deplorable development — [Interruption.] I hope that, as we all have the interests of schoolchildren in mind, now that I have agreed to have the meeting which the Scottish joint negotiating committee has requested, I can take it that disruption of schools will stop, at least until after that meeting has taken place.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he has taken since the begining of the mining dispute to ensure adequate supplies of coal for schools and hospitals in Ayrshire.

Throughout the strike the National Coal Board and the coal trade have worked in close cooperation with Strathclyde regional council and Ayrshire and Arran health board to provide adequate supplies of coal for schools and hospitals in Ayrshire. Towards the end of last year action by pickets interrupted the movement of coal in Ayrshire and this irresponsible action led to some school closures. At no time were Ayrshire hospitals affected.

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. Is he aware that, because I telephoned Mr. MacGregor, chairman of the NCB, on this issue, I was telephoned early in the morning by the Scottish director of the NCB to complain at my having had the audacity to phone the chairman? Quite apart from any question of privilege — there may well be one — do not serious doubts arise about the management structure when the director of the Coal Board in Scotland can say to me that he does not accept instructions from his chairman? Does that not underline our call that there is a need for an inquiry into the way in which Wheeler is running the Coal Board in Scotland, which is like that of a tinpot dictator?

The hon. Gentleman was floundering to a remarkable extent, even for him. It was surprising to hear some of his comments in the light of his advocacy on devolution in other contexts. I was not privy to any of the telephone calls to which he has referred, but I am sure that many people will have read press reports about the hon. Gentleman's praise for the chairman of the NCB.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the best way to ensure adequate supplies for Ayrshire schools and hospitals is to exhort Scottish miners to return to work and end this futile strike?

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. I can tell her that 850 more Scottish miners have done precisely that since the recent holidays.

Is the Minister aware that the coal was prevented from being moved to the hospitals and schools by the pickets because the administrator of the Coal Board in Scotland, Mr. Wheeler, instructed the coal to be moved by scab lorry drivers, which was unnecessary and provocative? It was only when the local and agreed lorry drivers were allowed to move the coal that things returned to normal. Throughout the whole of the disagreement and strike, the miners, by agreement, have allowed coal to go to Ayrshire hospitals and schools.

It is hypocrisy to criticise the NCB and its workers for wanting to do their normal jobs and to excuse pickets who seek to prevent that from taking place.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received about his decision not to set up an independent review of teachers' pay.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many representations he has received on teachers' pay since his decision not to set up an independent inquiry into teachers' pay and conditions.

Since my right hon. Friend responded on 11 December to the request by the teachers' side of the Scottish joint negotiating committee for an independent pay review, he has received some 450 representations.

Will the Minister confirm that he has received a set of eminently reasonable representations from my constituent, Mr. John Pollock? Is he aware that I have received a substantial number of representations from parents and teachers in every part of my constituency and that every one of them has supported the EIS claim for a fair and independent review of teachers' pay and conditions?

I am interested to learn that Mr. Pollock is a constituent of the hon. Gentleman, but I do not think that that is a matter on which I should comment either way. In replying to the representations that my right hon. Friend has received, he has said that the SJNC could undertake a detailed review of pay and conditions of service. It has been established for about three years and its remit would include such a review, which has not yet been undertaken. That is a reasonable position for the Government to take.

As the Minister's reply confirms that there is no public support for the decision that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has taken — there is no support among the profession or by parents for his own much-vaunted initiative in this matter — does he agree that he has no case and that he should give instructions for an independent inquiry to take place without further delay, and thereby end any prospect of disrupton in the schools?

Teachers' pay has increased broadly in line with that of other local authority employees. During the four years from 1979 teachers' pay increased by 74 per cent. while social workers' pay increased by 63 per cent. I am surprised at the hon. Gentleman's statement. His former colleagues in NALGO would be surprised to hear him argue that teachers merit special and unique treatment not available to other local authority employees.

Does my hon. Friend accept that it is important for this issue to be resolved as soon as possible? Will he confirm that the joint negotiating committee will be able to consider all the issues relating to teachers' pay and conditions of service? We hope that that body will report quickly to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, who can then reach a conclusion.

I confirm that the SJNC's remit covers pay and conditions of service. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State told the House in answer to an earlier question, he is prepared to meet the SJNC in the near future to discuss this matter.

Is the Minister aware that it is still difficult to understand why the Secretary of State has refused to set up an independent pay review? Obviously, such a review would not be mandatory. Clearly, an objective analysis would allow a fair solution to be found more easily. Such an analysis would avoid the inflaming of feeling—suoh as we have seen already—the bust up that the Secretary of State has just criticised, and gratuitous damage to our children's education.

It would not be right to pass the job of making recommendations to an ad hoc group which had no responsibility for implementing them. Established machinery can undertake such a review, and I believe that that is a perfectly sensible proposition.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that, apart from the purely financial aspects of a strike, the Minister's intransigence is jeopardising the valuable work that has been done in developing the standard grade? That work has been done without extra salaries being paid to the teachers involved. The teachers are now saying that enough is enough and they want to be paid for the work they have done. They feel that they, as opposed to the other professions in Scotland, are entitled to be rewarded for that work.

My right hon. Friend has made provision for the extra work load carried in developing the standard grade. Last week we announced further extra assistance for the teachers involved in phase one. I deplore the disruption that has occurred during the introduction of the standard grade. It is ironic that the EIS asked the Government to speed up the implementation of the standard grade, and that the teachers are now disrupting reforms which are widely agreed to be desirable in the interests of Scottish people.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it is desirable that pay and conditions should be linked in any negotiations? Is it not therefore disgraceful that the EIS has rejected out of hand an offer to discuss conditions? Will my hon. Friend clear up a misconception felt by many of my constituents—a misconception that appears to be shared by the hon. Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson)—namely that the EIS wants an independent review of pay and conditions? The EIS is interested only in pay.

My hon. Friend is right to say that EIS has asked for an independent review solely of pay. That request constrasts with the early-day motion tabled by some Opposition Members which relates to pay and conditions of service. I believe that it is perfectly reasonable to link pay and conditions of service and to conduct a detailed review of both within the existing collective bargaining machinery.

Is it not a fact that the Under-Secretary of State wants to review pay and conditions in the context of the Government's pay policy — in other words, to get the best out of teachers' conditions and to give the worst return to teachers in the form of salaries? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the blame for the disruption in Scottish education lies firmly at his door and the door of the Secretary of State? In view of that, will the Minister confirm that when the Secretary of State goes to the SJNC meeting he will go to negotiate and not, yet again, to dictate?

My right hon. Friend will, of course, listen carefully, as he always does, to the points that the SJNC put to him. Disruption in Scottish schools lies firmly at the door—

Of the hon. Gentleman.

—of those who are causing the disruption. I hope that Scottish teachers will realise that that disruption does not just cause damage to the education of Scottish pupils, but it cannot possibly do the teachers case any good.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will meet the chairman of British Steel to discuss the recent announcement on the future of Glengarnock steelworks.

I met the chairman of the British Steel Corporation on 29 November, when we had a wideranging discussion of the corporation's activities in Scotland. I have no plans for a further meeting in the near future.

I appeal to the Secretary of State to meet the chairman of the British Steel Corporation again to discuss the case for retention. It will be supported at a meeting tomorrow with his hon. Friend the Under- Secretary of State, the Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart), by the steel workers' acting committee and councillors from Strathclyde and the regional council. It will show that Glengarnock steelworks can be viable, competitive and profitable if given a chance.

As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, I am worried about this matter. I am glad that my hon. Friend is meeting those representatives tomorrow. I know that he is looking forward to hearing the case that they put forward.

If my right hon. Friend meets the chairman of the British Steel Corporation again, will he point out that it will cost more to close the works than to keep them open? Is my right hon. Friend further aware that with its new proposals the work force is pricing itself into jobs by cutting costs in line with Government policy, to its own detriment? If the British Steel Corporation is determined to close these works and get rid of Glengarnock, will he suggest that they should be kept open to give a private buyer a chance to see whether the firstclass work force can keep its jobs?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for keeping me so closely informed of his constituents' anxiety about this matter. The decision to close, which I greatly regret, is one entirely to be made as an operational matter by the British Steel Corporation. There is no doubt about the commitment of the work force. I am sure that the facts and figures that it will produce will be listened to with the greatest of interest by my hon. Friend and the British Steel Corporation.

May I take up strongly with the right hon. Gentleman the point that he made about it being an operational decision for the British Steel Corporation? If that is the Government's final view, I fear that the works may have a short future, because the British Steel Corporation seems determined, despite the far-reaching and imaginative proposals which will eliminate the current deficit in the plant, to continue with its closure plans. Will the Secretary of State try to persuade his colleagues and himself, sadly, in view of what he has just said, that the Government cannot shelter behind the concept that it is a bold management decision by the British Steel Corporation, given the impact that the loss of a further 200 key jobs will have on an area of high unemployment? I hope that he will reconsider the matter, because if he does not the outlook is black.

I sympathise with the whole position, of course. I do not accept, and nor would his own Government, the hon. Gentleman's point that this is anything other than an operational decision for the British Steel Corporation. That has always been the way that such matters have worked. We cannot appoint people to manage an industry and then second-guess them on everything that they do. For that reason the representations should be made to the British Steel Corporation, and I know that that is where they will be made.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will seek to accelerate the construction of the Dornoch Firth crossing and the improvement of the A9 through Caithness and Sutherland.

My Department is already proceeding as quickly as possible with preparations for the Dornoch Firth crossing and other improvements on the A9 through Caithness and Sutherland. Progress will depend upon the resolution of objections to published proposals and on the extent to which funds can be made available within the Scottish trunk road programme.

Is the Minister aware that today the unemployment levels in Sutherland are higher than anywhere in Scotland? Is he also aware that the A9 road north of Tain is a woefully inadequate arterial road which needs capital expenditure urgently, that almost no spending is planned for it in the next financial year? Does he realise that by starting the Dornoch Firth building works he could cut unemployment in Sutherland and Caithness by 10 per cent. and give a filip to the long-term future of the local economy?

I do not know where the hon. Gentleman got his information about no projected spending on the A9. In the years 1985 to 1989 there are seven improvements planned for the A9 north of Dornoch, at a cost of about £11 million, and six improvements planned for the road south of Dornoch, also at a cost of £11 million. Obviously, the bridges will be of benefit, not only to travellers on the A9 but to local people. I hope that the hon. Gentleman accepts that it is a large and costly scheme requiring extensive design work, and that it will make a very big claim on the resources available.

Does my hon. Friend, in considering improvements to the A9, ensure that priority resources are given to the Dunblane bypass? Will he be in a position shortly to announce the line of route?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on using the opportunity to press, as he does so assiduously, the interests of his own constituency with regard to that bypass. As he appreciates, we have said that that bypass will be built in due course. Obviously, we are not yet in a position to announce the line.

Does the Minister agree that the interest of the hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth) in improving the bypass from Dunblane is to allow him to make a quick getaway?

I think that my hon. Friend's concern is to see communications improved right across Scotland. I know that that has never been of particular interest to the hon. Member for Falkirk, East (Mr. Ewing).

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the implications for Scotland of the privatisation of Scottish airports.

The Government's aim is to ensure adequate airport capacity, provided as efficiently and costeffectively as possible, to meet Scotland' s needs. Particular proposals for privatisation will be pursued with this objective in mind.

Will the Minister acknowledge that the management of the four main airports in Scotland by the British Airports Authority has been of considerable benefit, and that the retention of that management group and the link with the BAA will continue to be of benefit to Scottish people? Is the Minister aware that, in the particular case of Aberdeen airport, Grampian regional council — which, as the Minister knows, is Conservative-controlled—has expressed doubts as to the case for privatisation?

The hon. Member must be aware that no decisions have yet been taken concerning privatisation of the BAA airports in Scotland, and at this time it would be improper for me to speculate on how that might happen.

Is the Minister aware that there is no case whatever for privatising the airports'. Will he further accept that the majority opinion is that the four major airports in Scotland should not be sold off as an entity but as a group which contains Heathrow, otherwise business will be very seriously disrupted?

The hon. Member is obviously trying to get me to speculate in a way that I have just said I will not do. I remind him that privatisation often creates greater efficiency and savings for those who use the services.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the Sottish airports run by the CAA in the Highlands and Islands and by my constituents in the CAA headquarters in Edinburgh, West and elsewhere in Scotland are run very economically, bearing in mind the essential lifeline service that they provide, and that it is extremely unlikely that any other body could run them as economically in the circumstances?

My hon. Friend is also pre-empting decisions that have yet to be taken. Obviously, we shall be testing, and are indeed testing, the market for the proposition at the moment.

The Minister will be well aware that in a written answer given to me by the Department of Transport earlier this week it was indicated that the Scottish Office, along with others, was considering proposals for six airports in the Highlands and Islands. Is there a distinction between the proposals and firm offers for sale, which were due in by 31 December last? If so, what is that distinction?

A number of offers and inquiries have been received and are being considered. Obviously, those offers and inquiries differ one from the other.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on his latest discussions on the future of British Leyland, Bathgate.

As the hon. Member will be aware from the answer that I gave him last month, my right hon. Friend and I are doing everything that we can to find a successor enterprise for the British Leyland plant at Bathgate, and to create new job opportunities for the West Lothian area.

Is Mr. Charles Nickerson getting every encouragement from the Scottish Office?

I can confirm that my officials keep in regular touch with both of the companies that have been mentioned, and have been in contact within the past few days.

When the Minister examines what he can do for job opportunities in West Lothian, will he bear in mind the fact that in 1980 West Lothian received £7 million in housing and rate support grants, and in 1986 it will receive the grand total of £700,000 from both sources? Does the hon. Gentleman not realise that that sharp drop in outside support will gravely hinder the district council in responding to the tragedy of Bathgate and mean fewer jobs in West Lothian?

I am a firm supporter of the Government's housing policies. I thought that the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) would mention one of the most important factors in the West Lothian situation, which has been the outstanding success of the new town in attracting a wide range of new companies and providing job opportunities for people not just in Livingston but from elsewhere in West Lothian.

Does the Minister agree that it is absurd that there should be any doubt about the future of the plant, in view of the demand for those vehicles in Third world countries? Does he accept that there is an urgent need for a meeting between his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Minister for Overseas Development so that a conclusion can be reached that would be helpful to the workers of Bathgate as well as those who are starving in developing countries?

The point is that the overseas demand for Leyland's products has declined sharply in recent years. It is true that there has been a marginal improvement in demand recently, but British Leyland has more than enough capacity at its Leyland plant to accommodate even substantially increased demand for trucks.

Is the Minister aware that the Nickerson proposals have the full support of the shop stewards at the British Leyland Bathgate plant? Will he give the House an assurance that the matter will be brought to a conclusion as speedily as possible to remove the uncertainty, not only from the British Leyland plant at Bathgate, but from the whole of that local authority area, which is suffering badly as a result?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are as anxious as anybody else to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I can confirm that my Department is in close touch with Mr. Nickerson.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the effect of planned Government legislation on Scottish rural bus services.

Under existing policies many services have been curtailed or withdrawn. Our proposals offer the prospect of better services by removing outdated restrictions and encouraging operators to offer new ways of meeting needs. To overcome any transitional difficulties a rural bus grant will be available to all operators of rural services for a four-year period and an innovation grant scheme will encourage the development of new initiatives.

Is the Under-Secretary of State aware that officials in his Department revealed recently that an internal departmental study shows that, whereas there might be savings in subsidies in the Lothians and Strathclyde, in the rural areas of Scotland local authorities will eventually have to pay more in subsidies? I challenge the hon. Gentleman to publish that survey so that we can look at the facts. Can he give the House an assurance that if, eventually, that transpires to be the case and rural regional authorities in Scotland have to pay more in subsidies, he will make sure that the finance is made available rather than allow routes to contract further?

The hon. Gentleman sounds as if he believes that the bus industry and the use of buses in Scotland, particularly in the rural areas, is increasing. Perhaps some of his comments on the matter would stand in a better light if that were so, but we are working against a history of decline in bus usage and in the whole bus industry in Scotland, particularly in the rural areas. I believe that by putting the subsidised routes out to tender efficiency will be increased and a better service will be provided at a better cost.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there has long been anxiety about the quality of rural bus services and that the announcements that he has made will be very welcome to those who live in rural areas? Is he aware that the result of an experiment in deregulation in Herefordshire was to reduce subsidy, to increase services and to reduce fares, which is surely what we want?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing that example to the notice of the House. If subsidised routes are put out to tender, and if they are efficiently run at present and are as cost-effective as possible, obviously those same operators will continue, but if there is a better and cheaper way of running them, tendering will provide that.

Before the Secretary of State comes to any final conclusions on the matter, will he undertake to examine the financing of the two community bus services that exist in Scotland, one in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood), and one in my constituency, recognise what a cost-effective and inexpensive way this is of providing a service, and Consider the assistance that he could give with replacement vehicles?

The right hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and it is certainly a point that was part of the White Paper published by the Government, that innovation and new ideas, particularly in rural areas, are important. Indeed, he has examples in his own constituency and in his own area of such ideas providing improved services. It is for that reason, as I have already said, that we shall be introducing an innovation grant scheme to try to encourage further such ideas.

Does my hon. Friend agree that in Scotland in particular the rural bus service has been in savage decline for 25 years? Many parts of my constituency are not served by any public transport. Therefore, to continue with the status quo could only mean fewer and fewer services being made available to my Highland constituents. The proposals that the Government are making are therefore an attempt to reverse this declining situation.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point so strongly. It is precisely because we have been faced with a history of decline in the bus services—and as constituency Members most of us will know from the complaints we receive that people are not satisfied with the bus services they have at present—that we believe that our proposals offer the one opportunity of reversing that trend. It has been noticeable that in all the criticism that has been made of the White Paper not one alternative idea for improving bus services has been put forward.

The Minister said that it is his belief that the proposals will lead to an improvement in bus services. However, the fact is that neither the Minister nor his officials have ever run a bus service. It is impossible to find anyone in Scotland who has run a bus service who believes other than that these proposals will be disastrous, not only for rural bus services, but for many other bus services as well.

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will remember that almost precisely the same criticisms were made of the express coach services before deregulation. The use of those coaches has proved how wrong that criticism was.

What guarantee will the Minister give to the rural communities that he will save their buses? He keeps telling the House about the money that he has allocated for innovation grants. Why is it that COSLA views as an insult the amount of money that he is making available to Scotland to retain rural bus services?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I met the transport sub-committee of COSLA on Monday. I made it clear to the sub-committee that throughout the United Kingdom a grant will be paid in the rural areas within the transition period of four years. That will start at a rate of £20 million, reducing on a graduated scale to £5 million in the last of those four years. When the hon. Gentleman talks of saving buses, he speaks as if that is what is happening in the rural areas. The rural areas in particular have suffered from reducing bus services. These proposals at last give them a chance of seeing the sort of services that they want.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he is taking to protect police officers, ambulance personnel, doctors and nurses from the risk of catching hepatitis B virus.

Guidance was issued by the Scottish Home and Health Department on 3 December 1984 on precautions to be taken to protect health care personnel from the risk of contracting hepatitis B in the course of their work. We are at present considering whether guidance should be given to the police service on this matter.

Does not the serious increase in cases of the deadly hepatitis B show that the increasing drug epidemic is spreading its effects to the people employed in the police, ambulance and hospital services who are obliged to deal with addicts? Is it not a fact that there is genuine concern in these services that complacency in high places has been shown because such instructions came so late in the day? Is the Minister convinced that the steps now taken will give the appropriate protection to those who come into contact with drug addicts?

It is indeed a serious problem, and it is worth stressing that an increase in the incidence of hepatitis B is one of the consequences of drug addiction. We are following the advice of the expert joint committee on vaccination and immunisation. We are also considering the point about police officers, in consultation with the Association of Police Officers. There is a very successful immunisation against hepatitis B which can be carried out on anyone who thinks that he has been in contact with sufferers in such a way as to be in danger of contracting the disease.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about his proposals with regard to trunk roads in Midlothian, and especially the A7 and A68.

The major schemes planned for possible starts in the period 1986–89 are the A7 Dalkeith by pass and Middleton bypass, the A68 Dalkeith bypass, and the A702 Hillend improvement. A minor improvement to the A68-A6137 junction is planned for this year.

Is the Minister aware that the A7 bypass is essential for industrial development in Midlothian and that the A68 bypass is urgently needed for Dalkeith? Members of Midlothian council have been told that the A7 bypass is subject of reassessment because the previous assessments were incompetently handled. How does that square with the Minister's answer? Is it not time that this bungling incompetence ceased so that the bypasses can be built?

For the A7 project, the last economic assessment produced a negative result. Lothian regional council, the agent authority, has been asked to carry out a reassessment using different traffic assignments to see whether an economic and viable scheme can be produced. I understand that this is because in past assessments insufficient account was taken of the future effects of the Edinburgh outer city bypass on traffic flows at Eskbank. If all the work is completed we would still hope to start the scheme before 1989.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether, in the light of the case of Sergeant Jamieson of Bo'ness, he will discuss with procurators fiscal the use of tape recordings as evidence in Scottish courts.

I understand that the hon. Member's question relates to the tape recording of evidence given in summary trials in Scottish courts for use in appeals. I have no plans at present to discuss such tape recordings with procurators fiscal in the light of the case to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

Is the objection based on cost?

The hon. Gentleman may recall that when he first raised this with the previous Lord Advocate he suggested changes in the way in which adjustments to stated cases were put before the Appeal Court. He will also recall that those very changes were introduced in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act. I am satisfied that in that respect the appeal procedure is now working very much better.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland when he will meet procurators fiscal to discuss the use of tape recordings as evidence in Scottish courts.

I have no plans at present to do so. After evaluation of the experiment carried out on behalf of the Scottish Home and Health Department between 1980 and 1983 in Falkirk and Dundee, and latterly also in Aberdeen and part of Glasgow, it will be for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to decide whether tape recordings of police interviews should be introduced in Scotland on a formal basis. Thereafter it may be appropriate for my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate and myself to meet procurators fiscal or to issue guidance to them.

Is the Minister aware that promises were made in Committee on the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill to the effect that the use of tape recordings would be introduced as soon as possible to provide some safeguard against the wrongful use of detention? When will that take place, or is the delay to continue indefinitely?

I well recall the considerable debate that took place on tape recording and the subsequent agreement that an experiment should take place, which was then carried out. The hon. Gentleman will also be aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has already told the House that the Government intend to publish the results of the experiment in the form of a consultation paper before any final decisions are taken about the future of tape recording of police interviews in Scotland.

Does my hon. and learned Friend appreciate that tape recording has resulted in grave difficulties in the proper presentation of evidence for the conviction of those who are guilty and that if it were introduced it would result in an impossible situation—

The hon. and learned Gentleman was down there on the Front Bench making the promises.

Order.

—in which the police would never know what evidence was acceptable or admissible or what questions were allowable but not admissible. The result would be that many guilty people would be acquitted, and the innovation would be of no benefit to the innocent.

I am bound to accept that, after the introduction of the tape recording of police interviews, a number of cases came before the courts that probably made it more difficult for police officers to understand how far they could go in the examination of suspects. However, following the first reference by the Lord Advocate to the Court of Appeal, the situation has been clarified for police officers. After what was said by the Lord Justice General, I hope that police officers understand just how far they can go, what questions would be fair for them to put to suspects at the police station and which, on the other hand, would be improper.

Why has so much time elapsed since the conclusion of the experiment without the Government letting us know their own views?

The results of the experiment are being collated. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has made it clear that those results will be published for wider public consultation in the form of a consultation paper. The experiment was first set up in two places and subsequently extended to Aberdeen and Glasgow. This is a difficult matter and the Government are proceeding in a sensible and cautious way in considering the introduction of such changes.

The Solicitor-General for Scotland must accept that, even by the standards of this place, and bearing in mind the movement of Governments, the time lag has been quite noticeable. Will he study the written answer in the Official Report of 10 January giving details of the favourable experiences in Leicester and, I believe, five other areas of England, where experiments have been conducted? After five or six years, we should have at least have reached the stage of formal consultation. When will the consultation paper be published?

That is a matter for the Secretary of State for Scotland. As I have already made clear to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Perth and Kinross (Mr. Fairbairn), it has taken sometime for cases to come before the appeal courts that clarify the rights and duties of police officers in conducting interviews. That being so, I do not consider that there has been undue delay in carrying out a difficult and important experiment.

Order. In fairness to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Brown), whom I did not see rise, I will, exceptionally, call him now.

Will the Solicitor-General for Scotland apologise to Mr. David Hamilton and pay him the appropriate sum of compensation for the period that he spent in gaol?

Mr. Hamilton was brought before the court in Edinburgh shortly before Christmas. He was allowed the opportunity of a fair trial before a sheriff and a jury, and he was acquitted. I believe that justice was done in the normal way, and that the hon. Gentleman should be satisfied.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many people charged with offences arising out of the mining dispute have been refused unconditional bail; and, of these, how many had previous criminal convictions.

As at 9 January 1985, 20 persons had been remanded in custody after appearing in court charged with offences arising out of the mining dispute. Of the 20 persons, two were subsequently released on appeal and one immediately changed his plea to that of guilty. As some persons still await trial, it would be inappropriate to release information about previous convictions. Information on the imposition of any special conditions of bail is not available centrally.

Will the Solicitor-General for Scotland confirm that it is not normal to refuse unconditional bail for first offenders and that, by doing so, the courts—especially the sheriffs courts at Dunfermline and Kilmarnock — are acting in a political manner that is quite unacceptable and are deliberately trying to intimidate pickets and limit their activities? Will he confirm that such behaviour is improper, and say what action he intends to take?

The only thing that I should have thought improper is the hon. Gentleman's attempt to attack sheriffs—

I am protecting my constituents from them, and the Solicitor-General should be as well.

Order.

The hon. Gentleman knows that that is not the case. If people believe that their applications for bail should not have been refused, there is a clear and speedy appeal procedure to enable them to have the bail decision reviewed by a High Court judge. As I said in my original answer, on the two occasions when that has been done, the appeals have been sustained.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many prosecutions related to the coal dispute have been dealt with by Kilmarnock courts to date.

As at 9 January 1985, 92 prosecutions for offences arising out of the mining dispute had been dealt with in Kilmarnock courts.

Notwithstanding the answer that the hon. and learned Gentleman gave my hon. Friend the Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes), does he share the anxiety that many of us feel that there is a hint in some press reports that there has been some political collusion in regard to miners arriving at courts and being tried? There should be some form of inquiry into police activities in Ayrshire during the strike and how matters have been dealt with in court.

If the hon. Gentleman is making allegations about the conduct of judges in Scotland concerning political interference in the administration of justice, he should do so through a substantive motion to be presented to the House, rather than rely on repeating broad and unfounded allegations without giving any detail of the circumstances in which such political motivation is said to have occurred.