asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what financial assistance he is making available to the area of employment covered by British Leyland, Bathgate.

The Bathgate travel-to-work area is a development area, and assistance to industry there is at the highest available levels. Good progress is being made in giving effect to the special programme of measures recommended in 1984 by the Bathgate working party.

How is good progress defined? What new money and new initiatives are available?

The Scottish Development Agency has recently committed £7 million to the Bathgate area. That involves environmental improvements, business development and better communications through the new passenger rail link between Bathgate and Edinburgh, which was opened by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State on 24 March. That is a sign of our commitment to the area.

We saw the Secretary of State with his green flag waving the train away from Bathgate, just as during the past six years we have seen the Conservative Government wave away industry and employment from the Bathgate area. Does the Under-Secretary understand that the best thing that could happen to Bathgate, the entire Lothian region, Central region, Fife, Strathclyde and all the regions would be for the people of Scotland to vote in large numbers for Labour candidates next Thursday and get rid of every last vestige of Conservative administration, which has done so much damage to Bathgate and the Scottish economy?

My hon. Friends and I were wearily aware that we would hear that speech at some time during this week. A feature of the past six years is that the Labour party has waved away reality, the ability to face the facts and the ability to recognise the industrial successes that are increasingly obvious throughout Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is being done in Scotland to control the spread of acquired immune deficiency syndrome.

In the blood transfusion service we are screening all blood donations and are heat treating blood products needed by haemophiliacs. We are supporting epidemiological research, providing testing facilities, promoting a press publication campaign to advise people about the disease and what can be done to avoid infection.

Nevertheless, the Minister must be seriously worried about the spread of the AIDS virus among heroin addicts, especially in Edinburgh, and more recently, in Dundee. The habit of intravenous injections is creating the problem. Will the Minister seriously consider making brand new needles more readily available in the rest of Scotland so that we may stem the flow of AIDS?

I am afraid that there is no guarantee that making needles available to drug abusers would prevent drug misusers from sharing the needles in an even wider circle. There is evidence from some drug misusers that they would do that. My Department's chief medical officer has appointed a committee of experts to advise on this aspect and on other methods of controlling the spread of infection among drug misusers. However, the message is simple and clear: do not misuse drugs.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the best way to control drugs and the spread of AIDS would be to encourage more self-discipline and higher moral standards among the population at large? Is he surprised that he has not heard more from the Churches on this subject?

My hon. Friend has hit the nail on the head. AIDS is a totally self-inflicted illness, and it is so much more morally reprehensible when it is inflicted on children. It is wrong that some people are inflicting AIDS on their unborn children—[Interruption.] I agree with hon. Members that this is serious. It is a moral question, which comes down to people reviewing their living habits.

That is a most remarkable statement and a major condemnation of large numbers of people who just happen to have a life style different from that of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State. Will he ensure that the committee of investigation reconsiders the use of clean needles by drug users? If the Minister is so sure, will he say today that he will provide the Greater Glasgow health board with sufficient funds to ensure that there is no threat whatever to the Ruchill laboratory, which does the testing for the disease?

I made it quite clear in my initial answer that the committee of experts is considering the matter. I shall take advice from it. I find it quite amazing that the hon. Member has just condemned me for condemning certain life styles. Does that mean that he condones drug abuse?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he will next meet Strathclyde regional council to discuss the prospects for manufacturing industry.

My right hon. and learned Friend has no immediate plans to meet Strathclyde regional council specifically to discuss this issue.

Is the Minister aware—everybody else is—that there has been a drastic decline in manufacturing industry since the Government took office in 1979? Is he also aware that 57,000 people in Strathclyde region have been unemployed for two years or more and that there is 27 per cent. unemployment in the region? Will he do something drastic to get people back to work and give them what they are entitled to—the right to work and the right to live?

The hon. Gentleman must realise that manufacturing output in Scotland rose by 5·75 per cent. to the third quarter of 1985. Those are the most recent figures available. Opposition Members should recognise that manufacturing productivity in Scotland rose by more than 8 per cent. in 1984 and 6·8 per cent. to the third quarter of 1985. Both those figures are higher than the United Kingdom average. It is on the basis of such achievement that we can look forward to competitive and successful manufacturing industry in Scotland.

As low-cost energy is vital to manufacturing industry, will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to congratulate the South of Scotland Electricity Board on its excellent safety record at AGR power stations in Strathclyde and on completing the AGR at Torness on time and on budget?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. All hon. Members will recognise the outstanding safety record of the nuclear energy industry in Scotland. It is therefore astonishing that the Scottish Labour party is committed to closing Hunterston and refusing to open Torness. I notice that the Scottish Trades Union Congress, at least, had rather more sense than that at its recent congress.

Is the Minister aware that the implications of the figures that he gave my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell, North (Mr. Hamilton) is that, despite, and perhaps because of, the increase in productivity, the Government have taken out the benefits for themselves rather than allow them to help employment in Scotland? Is he aware that the implication of his figures is a further reduction in employment in manufacturing? Does he not intend to do anything about unemployment?

The implication of the figures that I gave is that Scottish manufacturing industry is becoming more productive and therefore more competitive. That is the only basis on which a secure future can be built. I must emphasise that the total number of jobs in Scotland has been rising steadily. It is true that in Scotland, as throughout the industrial world, most of those jobs are coming in expanding service industries.

As many of the hon. Members who represent Strathclyde are Labour Members, was my hon. Friend not surprised that none of them came forward when the Ministry of Defence announced the Harland and Wolff order, one third of the value of which is to be spent in Strathclyde? Is that not an excellent example of how employment in that area is being helped?

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that that order was a tribute to the design excellence of the Yarrow yard, which was involved with Harland and Wolff in that contract.

I would have thought that the Minister would be more concerned about Tory party policy, which will cost his councillors dearly at the elections next Thursday and will cost him dearly at the general election. When it comes to the nuclear industry, does the Minister not understand that there is debate in the country about the safety and future of nuclear energy? He seems to be the only person who is deaf to that debate. The best thing that he can do, without listening to his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State to prompt him in his reply, is to open his ears and listen to the debate on people's concern about the future of the nuclear industry.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that there is an absurd debate taking place within the Labour party on that issue. I suggest that he is doing nobody any good by failing to dissociate himself from the totally absurd statements that have been made about the real role of the nuclear energy industry in Scotland. It is estimated that Labour party policy towards that industry in Scotland would result in an increase of around 25 per cent. in electricity prices.

Order. It would be helpful to all concerned if we stuck to the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has for reducing the number of people unemployed in the west of Scotland.

The Government's strategy is keeping inflation down, stimulating enterprise and restoring competitiveness to industry. This is the best means of improving employment prospects in the west of Scotland. In addition, the full range of the Manpower Services Commission's special employment and training measures is available in the west of Scotland as elsewhere.

Is the Secretary of State aware that we have been hearing that answer for the past seven years? If he cannot change his policy, will he ask somebody in the office to change the words in the answer? We keep hearing from the Prime Minister and others about the number of new jobs being created throughout the country. All that we want to know is whether we in the Glasgow travel-to-work-area may have a wee shot at getting some of them too.

Over the past two and a half years there has been a net increase of 27,00 in the number of people employed in Scotland. Therefore, it would be right for the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues to acknowledge that the total number of those employed in Scotland over the past couple of years has been rising, not falling.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that in some non-assisted areas in the west of Scotland there are pockets of high male unemployment? Will he give an assurance that in such towns as Annan the Scottish Development Agency has the initiative to build advance factories and has enough resources to promote development in those circumstances?

My hon. Friend raises a fair point. Clearly, although significant parts of Scotland benefit from regional assistance, there are other localities, such as the kind to which my hon. Friend referred, which do not come within those regions. It is part of the responsibility of the Scottish Development Agency to take account of the needs, not just of those areas with regional status, but of any part of Scotland which can benefit from the facilities that it provides.

Does the Secretary of State agree that if the Highlands and Islands Development Board had more money it could create more long-term jobs at a lower cost than keeping people on the dole? Will he speak to his reactionary accountant friends in the Treasury about that.

The hon. Gentleman should realise that the Highlands and Islands Development Board already receives substantial resources, which are available for the benefit of the Highlands. The suggestion that one can somehow cure unemployment simply by pumping more resources into public expenditure may be a view held by the hon Gentleman, but it is not a view which even his party believes can solve the problem of unemployment in Scotland.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that he worst thing that Scots can do is to continue to talk down their country? Will he take this opportunity of reminding the Opposition of the recent optimistic business survey and of the hundreds of jobs which have come to my constituency so far this year, thanks to the Government's encouragement? Does he further agree that if the Labour party had its way and got rid of the nuclear deterrent, thousands of jobs in the west of Scotland would be destroyed?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct in saying that defence-related employment provides jobs for many tens of thousands of people in Scotland. Undoubtedly those jobs would be jeopardised if ever Labour policy were to be implemented. Indeed, whenever one is in a locality where there are either defence or nuclear-related employment prospects, one finds that sometimes that has an educational effect even on the local Labour party. One has only to look at the views of the Caithness Labour party on nuclear energy to see proof of that point.

Is the Secretary of State aware that British Oxygen recently announced 100 new jobs in my constituency? Is he further aware that in the town centre of Cumbernauld, 4,000 people queued to apply for those jobs? Does he understand that that was a queue of real people, not just a creation of Saatchi and Saatchi? What positive steps will he take to provide employment in Cumbernauld, which is faced with such a situation, where 4,000 people queue for 100 jobs?

I think that the hon. Gentleman would be the first to admit that Cumbernauld has been the recipient of several announcements bringing new jobs there over the past few months. For example, Isola will bring between 100 and 200 jobs to Cumbernauld. The hon. Gentleman should acknowledge that it is the work of the Government, both directly and through the Scottish Development Agency, which has helped to persuade such companies either to put new investment in Cumbernauld or to increase investment that they already have there.

Is the Secretary of State aware that if Edinburgh's multicultural centre closes, thanks to the maladministration of the Scottish Office, the employees will be forced to go to the west, thereby forcing up—

Order. I was hoping that the hon. Gentleman would say something about the west of Scotland.

I shall say something about the west of Scotland, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Douglas.

While addressing the issue of the west of Scotland, the Secretary of State gave statistics for Scotland as a whole for the increase in the numbers employed. How many of those jobs are in oil-related activities? Does he expect that level of activity to persist in the west of Scotland and in Scotland as a whole, in view of the decline in the oil price?

In Scotland as a whole, about 60,000 jobs have been provided as a result of oil-related activities. It is impossible to predict with any certainty what the effect will be of the recent fall in oil prices. One knows that certain oil companies are reconsidering their investment decisions. I hope that, in coming to a view on those matters, they will take into account the likely development in the oil price, not over the next six or 12 months, but over the next 10, 15 or 20 years. That is the likely length of any investment that they may contemplate. If they use that sensible time scale, there is a powerful case for substantial investment in future.

Mr. Foulkes.

I am grateful to you for calling me, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. Gentleman is aware that we are considering various ideas and proposals. Naturally, one is concerned about the high unemployment in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. He will be aware that regional assistance is available, given the nature of the unemployment level. We shall also be prepared to look at any other sensible and constructive ways in which those problems can be ameliorated. However, I cannot suggest, nor do I think that the hon. Gentleman would wish me to suggest, that somehow there is a magic formula that will solve the problem in the way which, theoretically, we would all like to see.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the provision of maternity services in the Greater Glasgow health board area.

Glasgow health board is currently reviewing its future plans for maternity services, including its earlier proposal to close the maternity unit at the Stobhill general hospital. Any such proposal would require the approval of my right hon. and learned Friend.

While I accept that in Glasgow there is over-provision of maternity beds, may I remind my hon. Friend of the concern among my constituents about the future of maternity services in their area, although they are greatly encouraged by talk of a new maternity unit for the north and north-east of Glasgow? Is my hon. Friend aware that there is an excellent green field site at Stobhill hospital where such a new unit could be sited? Can he hold out any prospect that that unit may come to Stobhill?

As my hon. Friend knows, the board has considered a number of responses received as a result of the consultative exercise, including his comments and observations. A final decision must be set in the context of the review of maternity services for the whole of the Greater Glasgow area, which is being undertaken by the board's general manager. One of the options may well be to build a new unit on a green field site at Stobhill, but that matter is principally for the board. If it decides to opt for closure, it will then have to come to me and my right hon. and learned Friend.

Why does the Minister not admit that the reason why the Greater Glasgow health board, is threatening Stobhill or any other hospital in Glasgow is simply that he has failed to provide proper financing for the Greater Glasgow health board, as this year he has left it with a minimum £6 million deficit which it must find? Will he come clean and give the Greater Glasgow health board the finance that it needs?

The Greater Glasgow health board is the best funded health board in Scotland. If it were to receive more resources, it would be at the expense of other Scottish health boards. Moreover, the simple fact is that there are more available staffed maternity beds in Greater Glasgow than are needed, even on the busiest day. It must make sense, even to the hon. Gentleman, that the Greater Glasgow health board should make the best use of its resources, and that does not mean keeping staffed beds which it knows will never be used.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to increase employment in the Scottish construction industry.

I am confident that the best prospects for increasing employment in the construction industry lie in the continuation of this Government's policies of reducing inflation and creating real economic growth. In addition, public expenditure which will benefit the construction industry in Scotland will be higher this year than in previous years.

Is the Secretary of State aware that since his Government took office there has been a drop in employment in the construction industry of 26·2 per cent. year on year, and that the number inexorably falls? Is he further aware that local authorities, especially regional councils, are having to watch our fundament and roads declining and becoming inadequate to support the industry that we seek to promote because of the stringent curbs on their capital expenditure? What will the Government do about that? The measure lies in their hands.

It is difficult to believe that the hon. Gentleman is a Member for a Highland constituency when he implies that during the past few years contruction on road development has been poor or inadequate. He need only travel on the A9 and compare his journey with a similar one a few years ago to find out how absurd that allegation is. He will also be aware of the proposal to build a bridge across the Dornoch firth in his constituency, and he might have taken that into account before making those rather silly remarks.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that there would be a great deal more work for the construction industry if many local authorities, especially Labour ones, would release more of their land banks to developers for houses and buildings? In that way many people would be employed directly in the construction industry.

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. Certain authorities have tended to hold on to land within their locality unnecessarily, and clearly that can be a needless curb on useful development for the construction industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what initiatives he proposes to take to deal with the social problems arising from unemployment in the Greenock and Port Glasgow parliamentary constituency.

The Government's policies are to build a strong competitive economy to tackle directly the root causes of unemployment. The hon. Gentleman's constituents will benefit from the expansion of the special employment measures announced in the Budget and from the Inverclyde initiative funded by the Government through the Scottish Development Agency. Indeed, £4 million has already been committed to an initial programme, with more to follow as suitable projects come forward.

Does the Minister agree that unemployment will worsen, especially in Port Glasgow, if Ferguson-Ailsa is not awarded the contract for the fisheries protection vessel to replace the Norna? Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind the recommendation of the Scottish Affairs Committee, which is contained in its report on the fisheries protection service, to the effect that that vessel should be built in Scotland? Will he give an assurance that the order will go to a Scottish yard, and more particularly, to Ferguson-Ailsa?

I am fully aware of the importance of orders for Ferguson-Ailsa. The hon. Gentleman mentioned that during the debate on shipbuilding on Monday. Six firms were asked to tender for the fisheries protection vessel. The tenders are currently being evaluated. The hon. Gentleman will realise that that is a technical process that will take some time.

Does the Minister realise that the problems facing the lower part of Renfrewshire are compounded by three major events that have occurred largely because of the Government's inadequacy? I refer to the collapse of Linwood, the collapse of the shipbuilding industry and the collapse of the textile industry. They are all the result of the Government's failures. When will the Minister tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer to stop his arrant nonsense about tax relief for the rich somehow giving employment to the poor? When will he take action, as he can do in the case of the fisheries protection vessel, and give some heart to an area that his Government have thoroughly devastated?

As an hon. Member who also represents part of Renfrew district, I can say that the hon. Gentleman has uttered a lot of nonsense, even by his standards. I know that he could not be at the meeting that the hon. Member for Paisley, North (Mr. Adams), my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde (Mrs. McCurley) and I had with Renfrew district council on the general position, but the consultant's report on a possible initiative for the district is being considered at a meeting tomorrow. I hope that that will be followed by positive initiatives. We are certainly committed to the development of Renfrew district. In my part of Renfrew district we have recently seen the announcement of 180 new jobs at Fine Fare and the expansion of English Sewing at Neilston in my constituency. The hon. Gentleman should portray a more balanced picture.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what reply he has sent to the correspondence he has received recently from the Scottish Motor Trade Association Ltd. on matters of consumer interest.

My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State will be replying shortly.

The Minister must be aware that recent figures show that it is 18p more expensive to buy petrol in Scotland than it is to buy it in some parts of England. Did he see the recent STV programme which showed that there was a gross difference of between 40p and 50p per gallon between the price of petrol in parts of Scotland and England? As the Scottish Motor Association has written to me saying that it does not accept the Government's policy that market forces will resolve the problem of the consumer being exploited, what does the Minister intend to do so that the consumer can be protected from the exploitation of oil companies?

I read the recent article in the Petroleum Times. As the hon. Gentleman may know, that journal regularly publishes a report on local prices. The article showed that the average price for four star petrol was 177·7p in Edinburgh and 177·3p in London. I understand that the edition coming out later this week will show further reductions. The areas of greatest demand inevitably experience the greatest competition, and that is reflected in a relatively speedy reduction in prices. It is clear that that process invariably takes longer in less populated areas, where competition is not at the same level. The figures do not substantiate the hon. Gentleman's generalisation.

Has my hon. Friend had a discussion with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport about the changed date for the vehicle registration letter next year? Is he aware that almost every motoring association in Scotland and motor dealer has written to say that the change to October is wrong and will have a serious and detrimental effect, not only on the sale of motor cars, but on the secondhand value that the public would expect? Will my hon. Friend hold discussions on this matter, because at present everything is being done purely for the benefit of the DVLC in Swansea?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport gave a written answer on 28 April which stated that on 24 April he told the Motor Agents Association that he would be prepared to consider an alternative if the weight of opinion in the motor industry as a whole changed, and provided it was acceptable to the police. If that is not the case, the change will go ahead as planned in October 1987.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the anger in Scotland about high petrol prices? Is he aware also that the Director General of Fair Trading has stated that one problem may be that too few petrol forecourts are owned by independents and too many are owned by big combines? In those circumstances, will the hon. Gentleman ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to instruct the Monopolies and Mergers Commission to conduct an inquiry into the matter?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the MMC prepared a report on the industry in 1979. The OFT conducts an annual review of the petrol retail industry. I have no doubt that, in the course of that review, it will pay special attention to the degree of competition.

I urge the hon. Gentleman not to be complacent about this matter, because there is serious disquiet not only in Scotland but in other parts of Great Britain. Evidence is emerging that the oil companies, the suppliers, are selecting certain areas in Great Britain to subsidise at a much higher level than other areas, especially in Scotland. There is clear evidence that there is a difference of about 50p a gallon in the price of petrol in one area compared with another. That evidence has been put forward by the Scottish Motor Trade Association. Based on the hon. Gentleman's figures, I can produce evidence showing that there is an 18p a gallon difference between the price in Edinburgh and the price in parts of my constituency.

Prices vary considerably. I can tell the hon. Gentleman exactly where the biggest price differential occurs, according to the figures that are available. The price is as low as 154.7p in south Wales and as high as 205p in London. That does not suggest any bias against Scotland.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that in the Highlands and Islands there have been persisent problems of differential regarding petrol pices? Car and haulage travel there is not a luxury but an absolute necessity to the whole of the economy because of the way of life. The Highlands and Islands are suffering badly, as I know the hon. Gentleman appreciates, through falling oil prices following the contraction of the North sea exploration market. Will we see some advantage from falling oil prices, such as cheaper costs of derv, haulage costs and prices at the petrol pumps? At the moment we are seeing nothing. We are getting the worst of both worlds.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are very conscious of the price variations. We have vigorously reminded the oil companies of the need to ensure that rural areas, such as the Highlands, derive adequate benefit from lower oil prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what has been the total expenditure by the Scottish Development Agency since its inception.

The Scottish Development Agency has spent a total of over £940 million in the period since it was formed in 1975 up to 31 March 1986.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend say what the agency has spent, a year on average, under the Government and how it compares with the average spent each year under the Labour Government?

The average annual spend of the SDA under the present Government is £109 million, against a figure of £44 million under the previous Government.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman take this opportunity to correct the impression, which seems to be prevalent in many parts of Scotland, that other worthwhile projects are being abandoned because of expenditure on the Glasgow garden festival? Is it not true that the SDA's allocation is not adequate to enable it to take up all the worthwhile projects put to it? That problem has nothing to do with the festival. An increased allocation is needed for the SDA.

The right hon. Gentleman is half right and half wrong. He is correct in that the SDA has emphasised that the garden festival is in no way interfering with its allocation of expenditure. The SDA has expressed that view more than once. This year the agency will be able to spend more than £136 million, which is more than in any previous year.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend realise that a substantial part of the vast sums which the SDA has been authorised to spend have been spent in the Dundee area? Is he aware that one of my constituents, who runs a large timber, haulage and carpentry business, recently advertised twice in the Dundee Courier and Advertiser for joiners but was unable to get a single applicant?

My hon. Friend is correct to say that the remit of the Scottish Development Agency extends throughout Scotland and includes Dundee and rural areas, both in my hon. Friend's constituency and elsewhere.

Why have the Government rejected the call by COSLA and the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs for an SDA rural development fund? Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the urgent need for the development of jobs and services in rural areas in Scotland? As the Tory Government evidently know little and care less about the rural areas in Scotland, I take this opportunity to give the Secretary of State a copy of Labour's new charter for rural areas.

We did not accept the proposal for a rural fund for the simple reason that we already spend in Scottish rural areas over 10 times more than the size of the proposed rural fund. Frankly, although it is easy to talk in terms of funds, the resources available to the farming community and those elsewhere in the rural areas are much more important. The hon. Gentleman should be the first to appreciate how well farmers do as a result of the Government's decisions.

I should like to ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman essentially the same question that was asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Cromarty and Skye (Mr. Kennedy) about the Highlands and Islands Development Board, which he failed to answer. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give us a clear yes or no? Is he, or is he not, in favour of expanding the activities of the state funding of enterprise through the SDA and the HIDB?

I have already pointed out that the SDA has received more funds under this Government than under their predecessors. The HIDB has also received substantial resources. The hon. Gentleman should draw his own conclusion from the facts.

Given my right hon. and learned Friend's confidence in the SDA's success, is he prepared to recommend to his Cabinet colleagues that we set up similar bodies in the rest of the United Kingdom, starting, I hope, with the west midlands? Is he prepared to recommend that resources similar to those given to the SDA are given to all such similar bodies, to give every region a fair crack of the whip?

The SDA's successful achievements have been recognised not simply by Scottish Members but by the former Secretary of State for Trade and Industry—my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Brittan)—and other hon. Members. It is for Members representing other constituencies to put the views that they think appropriate.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has any plans to provide further financial relief for the livestock sector of the agriculture industry in Scotland.

In the six months to the end of April, Scotland's 20,000 beef and sheep producers have received direct Government support in adverse weather aid and headage and variable premiums of over £95 million, compared to £72 million in the equivalent six months of 1984–85. A further £10 million in hill subsidies will be paid out by the end of June.

Is the Minister aware that from the Scottish borders, and indeed from the whole of the south of Scotland, reports are coming through that this year's lambings are substantially down on previous years because of the mortality rate of the lambs? Is he aware of that taking place in other parts of the country? Will he take steps to see that the people who are suffering these losses receive more support, bearing in mind the difficulties that they experienced last summer and the bad lambing conditions this year?

The lambings this spring will be one of the factors taken into account in the autumn in the annual review of farming in relation to HLCAs and the like. As the hon. Gentleman knows, this year HLCAs were increased by 14 per cent. on average and by no less than 22 per cent. on hill cows. The right time to review the livestock position for the year is at the annual review in the autumn.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that, as a result of the welcome news of the extension of the Highland and Islands Development Board boundaries into the Forres and Tomintoul areas of my constituency, livestock there will qualify for enhanced rates of payment of HLCAs? That will represent significant support for those hard-pressed sectors.

I can confirm to my hon. Friend that the extension of the boundary of the Highland and Islands Development Board's area into parts of his constituency will mean that the people there, whether they are farmers or small business men, will have available to them the same payments as are available in the rest of the board's area.

Will the Minister confirm that the Government's contribution to the European development programme proposed for the islands of Scotland—which has a certain potential to help the livestock industry in the islands—will be new money?

If my memory serves me right, on all these proposals, the current one for the Western Isles and the one proposed for other islands, 60 per cent. of the input comes from the Government and 40 per cent. from the European Community.

While my hon. Friend is looking at the possibility of extra money for Scotland, will he tell his right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture where Cleveland is, so that it can have some money?

I shall draw to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what my hon. Friend has said.

Will the Minister accept that it would be intolerable if the Government were to use the House of Lords to introduce an amendment into the Agriculture Bill that would penalise Scottish tenant dairy farmers, on the same basis as has been done in England and Wales over milk quotas? Will he give an undertaking that any decision on that matter that affects livestock farmers in Scotland will be taken in this elected House of Commons?

Although the hon. Gentleman is a farmer, I am not sure whether he understands the livestock and milk sector of the industry. If the Government do not take action on this front, tenants will remain in the position that they are at the moment, which is that they have no right to any money or compensation.

Will my hon. Friend take account of the problems arising in the rural areas about the less-favoured area designation? In a considerable number of cases one farmer is designated as being in a less-favoured area for livestock while the next farmer is not. That causes considerable anxiety as well as problems for the farmer who does not happen to be in the less-favoured rural area.

I fully appreciate my hon. Friend's point. There is a well-rehearsed procedure for reviewing the position of a farm where the farmer feels he ought to be in the less-favoured area and is not. If any of my hon. Friend's constituents feel so aggrieved, they should make the necessary application for a review.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider continuing the Glasgow eastern area renewal project in Glasgow for another three to five-year period beyond 31 March 1987 to enable it to complete the final one third of the job which it was set up to do.

The present phase of the project will come to an end in March 1987. Discussions are now under way on the future management arrangements for a continuing commitment to the east end of Glasgow after that date.

As usual, the Minister has dodged the question. Is he not aware that unless this project is extended everything will go tragically wrong? Has he not been in the area recently to see for himself how much has still to be done and how far from completion the project is? Does he want to see much of the investment already made going to waste, or will he reconsider the position and agree to extend the project to enable it to be completed for the benefit of everyone involved, not least his own Government?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I have made several visits to the area in the past two or three years and I am well aware of the kind of work that has been done. He should not underestimate the gains that have been made so far in the area, or the achievements of GEAR since its launch in 1976, which have often been very considerable and clearly evident in the progress that has been made towards tackling the problems that exist in the east end of Glasgow. The project has lasted 10 years and it is right that now, at the end of 10 years, the project should be ended and that there should be an evaluation of its successes so that similar projects may be used in other parts of Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the increase in numbers of unemployed persons in the Paisley travel-to-work area in the first quarter of 1986, compared with the first quarter of 1985.

On 9 January and 6 March 1986 the numbers of unemployed people claiming benefit in the Paisley, North parliamentary constituency—there is no Paisley travel-to-work area as such—were respectively 5,854 and 5,596. On 10 January and 14 March 1985 the corresponding figures were 5,695 and 5,571. The figures for March 1986 are not comparable with earlier figures because of the change in the compilation of the unemployment statistics announced on 19 February.

Is the Minister aware of the real anger and dismay that is felt in the Paisley and Renfrew areas over the Government's failure to provide jobs since the closure of Talbot? Can he name a single major employer that he has attracted into the Renfrew district in the past five years? Will he speak to the Scottish Development Agency and take along with him a map of west Scotland to show the agency where Renfrew and Paisley are, as the SDA does not appear to know?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman was able to ask his question. Unfortunately, he was not listening earlier during Question Time when I said that there would be a meeting tomorrow involving the SDA about a possible initiative for Renfrew. I also named earlier two companies in my part of Renfrew district which have expanded under the Government's policy. I know that the SDA is committed to ensuring that Renfrew district gets its share of the resources that are available.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland in what sectors he has instituted prosecutions against local authorities in relation to failure to achieve a statutory defined level or standard of service or provision.

I do not entirely understand what the hon. Gentleman means by "sectors" in this context, but so far as I am aware no such prosecutions have been instructed recently.

I am surprised that there are no prosecutions, in view of the cuts that are taking place. The regional councils in a number of areas are failing to carry out their statutory duties for children, the disabled, the elderly and young offenders under the social work and education legislation. Will the Solicitor-General and his colleague, the Lord Advocate, have another look at this and decide whether some prosecutions could be instituted? Instead of instituting prosecutions against local authorities, should they not be instituted against the real villain, the man behind it all, the Secretary of State for Scotland?

In common with the rest of the House, I enjoyed the hon. Gentleman's question. However, if there is a sector where he believes that prosecutions should be taken against local authorities, which was the basis of his original question, I hope that he will tell me where he believes abuses are taking place.

Will my hon. and learned Friend accept that it would assist decisions about prosecutions if local authorities were required to keep separately their expenditure on statutory duties as opposed to their expenditure on other matters? For example, Fife regional council has spent more per head on education than any other education authority in Scotland and it claims that it is short of money for desirable projects within its statutory responsibilities, yet it has spent a lot of money on other things, such as giving holiday meals to striking miners' families.

I understand my hon. Friend's point. However, all that I am asked to do is to look at those circumstances where prosecutions might be moved against local authorities. It might be that in certain circumstances authorities are in breach of the duties imposed on them by the House of Commons, but there is a clear distinction between that and having the opportunity to mount a prosecution. However, if there are specific areas where that is necessary, I hope that they will be brought to my attention.

In order to get some balance into the question and answer, instead of considering the possibility of prosecuting some local authorities, will the Solicitor-General consider an alternative form of treatment by holding up as an example of a good council the Angus district council, which is SNP-controlled, and puts the rents up and cuts public spending when it is told to do so by the Secretary of State? Indeed, it does everything that it is told to do by the Conservative Secretary of State for Scotland and has never been in any danger of falling foul of the law in order to defend its ratepayers.

With an eye to next Thursday, the hon. Gentleman has made his point well.

Would Grampian regional council be open to prosecution, given that within Aberdeen 45 per cent. of eligible children can go to nursery school, whereas within Gordon district fewer than 5 per cent. can go to nursery school? Should not such a wide variation within the same local authority area lead to a prosecution for under-provision in part of the area for which the authority is responsible?

If the hon. Gentleman feels that there is some failing there, that is a matter for local control and discretion. Again, I think that that is what the hon. Gentleman has his eye to rather than any particular prosecution which he seriously thinks I might mount.

Are local authorities ever at risk from prosecution as a result of strikes by their employees?

So far as I am aware, no.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he will instruct regional procurators fiscal to give more comprehensive replies to people who have formally submitted a complaint about criminal misconduct by the police.

I do not consider it necessary to give any such instruction. All persons who make a complaint of criminal conduct by a police officer are precognosced by the procurator fiscal. With the request to attend for precognition there is sent a note which explains in detail the procedures followed and the considerations taken into account in deciding whether criminal proceedings should be instituted.

What advice would the Solicitor-General give to somebody who lodges such a complaint, has to resist considerable police pressure to withdraw the complaint and spends considerable time and effort obtaining legal advice to pursue the complaint, getting the names and addresses of witnesses and being cross-examined by a senior police officer and the procurator fiscal, only to receive a curt, two-sentence letter months later from the regional procurator fiscal saying that no action is to be taken? If the regional procurator fiscal cannot even be bothered to try to give an explanation of why no action has been taken, is it any wonder that many people consider that it is almost a complete waste of time lodging a complaint against the police because the system is biased in favour of the establishment and against the complainant?

Anyone who makes a complaint against the police, as I have already said, is given a full explanation of the procedures that will be followed through and what might have happened if at the end of the day there are to be no proceedings. One reason, which the hon. Gentleman might appreciate, why that note is, as he describes it, curt, is that it might be that in the circumstances, as in other cases, the procurator fiscal has given a warning to the person involved. As the hon. Gentleman may well recall from a debate that we had some time ago in the Scottish Grand Committee, it was clearly his view and that of his hon. Friends that where a warning was to be given by a procurator fiscal it should not be widely divulged.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland if he will list the subjects about which he has transferred questions for oral answer from himself to the Secretary of State for Scotland in the current Session of Parliament.

I have transferred questions on legal aid; tape recording of police interviews; the reprimand of a sheriff; private legislation procedures; justice of the peace courts; fisheries offences; and statistics on drunk-driving and orders made under section 18(2) of the Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act 1937.

I am sure the House thinks that that is disgraceful. Does the Solicitor-General not realise that the Secretary of State has enough troubles in Scotland at the moment without the hon. and learned Gentleman passing the buck and transferring those questions? Why does the hon. and learned Gentleman not stand at the Dispatch Box, stop passing the buck and answer those questions himself?

Simply because my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has not entrusted those responsibilities to me.

To whom should I address a question brought to my notice by a constituent in Yorkshire about the standard of service in a sheriff court in Scotland?

It depends on whether the right hon. Gentleman's complaint has to do with criminal proceedings or civil proceedings. If he would care to write to me, I shall make sure that if I cannot answer it myself I shall transfer it.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland how many prosecutions for firearms offences have been instituted in the last convenient year; and how many alleged offenders held firearms certificates.

Five hundred and fifty four prosecutions in respect of offences involving firearms took place in 1984. The provisional figure for 1985 is 555. Statistics relating to the number of those prosecuted who held firearms certificates are not held centrally.

Since the security of firearms is of first importance, does not the fact that my hon. and learned Friend does not keep statistics for those who hold firearms certificates show that additional pressure for the imposition of greater restrictions on those who hold firearms certificates may be misplaced?

I understand why my hon. Friend is concerned about this, and I may take the opportunity to discuss it with him further. All I can say at the moment is that I do not know the figures for offences by those who hold firearms certificates, but if my hon. Friend feels that there is a particular abuse, or that a particular identification is necessary in the classification of these offences, I shall certainly look at that.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether the Crown Office follows any special procedures in prosecuting serious cases of fraud in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

In June 1984 a fraud unit, comprising both legal staff and precognition officers, was established in the Crown Office in coordination with the police to investigate and prepare major fraud cases referred to it by procurators fiscal. The unit, with direct access to Crown counsel, has brought about a concentration of effort on and expertise to such cases and already has a number of very successful prosecutions to its credit. It is the intention of my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate to reinforce it.

I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend for his reply. Bearing in mind the complexity of major fraud cases and the inevitable problems confronting juries in trying to assess the evidence, does my hon. and learned Friend agree that it might be preferable to have a skilled assessor to assist the judge, rather than entrust this matter to a jury?

This is a matter that was suggested by Lord Roskill. However, our experience in Scotland to date has not made me want to question the jury system for fraud trials. I have considerable sympathy with juries who have to sit through such trials for anything up to six or eight weeks. I am not aware of any major fraud cases in Scotland where it could be said, as a matter of objective assessment, that the jury had come to the wrong verdict.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Arising out of questions?

Yes, Mr. Speaker. During the answer that he gave to me on question No. 2, concerning AIDS in Scotland, the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Argyll and Bute (Mr. MacKay) made the accusation that I was condoning a criminal offence, in that I was condoning drug misuse. That is a very serious accusation which I hope the hon. Member will take the opportunity to withdraw, because when he reads the answer that he gave me—or, rather, the answer that he gave to the question put by the hon. Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Henderson)—he will appreciate that he was not condemning drug misuse, he was condemning people who were at risk from AIDS.

Order. That is going into the question again. I am sure that the point has been well taken by the Minister. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw."] Order. If the Minister made that accusation, I am sure that he would wish to withdraw it—but I did not hear that.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I shall read carefully the record of what I said, but my recollection is that I did not suggest that the hon. Member was condoning illegal activities. I did suggest that he was condoning drug abuse. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw."] I hope that the hon. Member will also read what he said, because I suspect that he went a great deal further than he intended.

Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Minister has just compounded the felony by admitting that he had accused my hon. Friend of condoning drug misuse. In its widest possible sense, drug misuse is a criminal offence and the Minister ought to be man enough to withdraw. Perhaps we are expecting far too much of the Minister in expecting him to rise above his usual standards, but he has an obligation to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the House at least to accept the standards of the House of Commons and to withdraw that very serious and scurrilous allegation.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. As the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, the hon. Member for Argyll and Bute (Mr. MacKay), has the advantage of sitting beside his hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General for Scotland, perhaps the Solicitor-General could advise him whether there are any drug abuses that are not illegal. What he said appeared to imply that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) condones illegality.

Order. Let me deal with this matter. May I say that in the House of Commons very rough things are occasionally said in answer to questions. I am perfectly certain that if the Minister made an accusation against the honour of any Member, on whatever side of the House, he would wish to withdraw it.

Withdraw!

Order. That is a matter for the Minister.

I have made it quite clear that I shall check the record. If I said anything that I ought not to have said, I shall withdraw it. [Interruption.]

Order.

rose—

Order. I have not had an opportunity to check the record, either. The best thing for the House to do in a situation like this, as the Minister has said that he will check the record—indeed, I shall read these exchanges carefully—is to do that and see what happens tomorrow.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that the record is now to be checked, may we have an assurance that the record will remain as it was when the Minister made his allegations?

Withdraw.

Order. [Interruption.] Order. That will be a matter for me. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would not make that accusation against me.

I accept that the Minister may wish to check the record, but may I have his assurance that if he finds that what I have said is correct he will come to the House tomorrow afternoon and ask to withdraw his statement?

Order. I think that that is what the Minister said.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. During the statement and the exchanges on it. I reflected on the comments I made during points of order at the end of Scottish Question Time. I realise that what I said about the possible alteration of the record in relation to the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland may well be taken as a reflection on you, Mr. Speaker. Under no circumstances would I want that to remain on the record. I unreservedly withdraw my remarks and apologise for my intemperate comments.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his typically generous correction. I did not take his comments as a reflection on me. However, I am responsible for Hansard, and I would not allow anything like that to happen.