asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total cell accommodation in Scottish prisons; how many are currently out of use; for what reasons; and when he expects additional cells to come into use.

The total design capacity of accommodation in Scottish penal establishments is 5,398 places. Of these, 395 cells are currently out of use as a result of damage in recent incidents. Four hundred and sixty eight additional places will become available when phase 2 of Shotts prison is brought into use this year.

During the recent disturbance in Barlinnie the Secretary of State repeatedly stated that overcrowding was not a problem. When is the inspector's report on Peterhead expected? Will the Secretary of State comment on the leaked report by the prison working group? Everybody in Scotland seems to know about that report except us. What proposals does he have in mind to reduce the prison population rather than to reshuffle places and prisoners?

The hon. Gentleman has raised many points. My comments on overcrowding related to B hall of Barlinnie, where the incident took place, and indeed to Peterhead. In neither case has there been overcrowding. I have said that I shall consider publishing the working party's report when its draft report is finally determined. It might be a useful contribution to public debate on this matter.

How much have the Government expended in capital expenditure in Scottish prisons in recent years? How does it compare with the record of the previous Government to improve accommodation in Scottish prisons?

The standard figure is approximately £40 million since 1979. Indeed, the opening of the new phase of Shotts prison will provide a substantial improvement in the quality of the infrastructure for those incarcerated within prisons. We attach importance to a proper prison programme to ensure that the standard of facilities in Scottish prisons is commensurate with what modern circumstances suggest is appropriate.

Although the, Secretary of State and the Opposition may disagree on what is meant by overcrowding, he will surely accept that too many people are in Scottish prisons and that not all of them are in prison because they have not paid fines. Is it not depressing that the best that the Scottish prisons group can come up with is some reshuffling of numbers? It should look at finding better ways of treating prisoners by means of halfway houses and more imaginative sentencing policies, and that is the Secretary of State's responsibility.

I ask the hon. Gentleman to appreciate that the question of who gets sent to prison is a matter not for the working group or, indeed, for the Government, but for the courts to determine when convicted individuals are sentenced. Therefore, penal policy relates to other issues.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the recent disruption in prisons and the consequent damage to prison buildings have merely compounded the overcrowding problem in certain prisons? At the same time, will he place on record his admiraton for the work of officer John Kearney, one of my constituents, who was held hostage for over 100 hours? Finally, with a view to dealing with any possible future disruption, will my right hon. and learned Friend invite the media to ensure that, in future, demonstrations are not covered by television, newspaper and radio people, because that has the unfortunate habit of encouraging demonstrations to continue for longer.

When the new phase 2 of Shotts prison is open, the total capacity of the Scottish prison system will be slightly greater than the total number of individual prisoners. However, there may still be a mismatch in individual establishments. We are considering ways of ensuring that the establishments that are available are properly utilised so that there is not under-utilisation of capacity in one establishment and overcrowding in another. As for the latter part of my hon. Friend's question, I do indeed pay tribute to the courage of all prison officers, who are constantly required to undertake very difficult and serious responsibilities that are often not perceived by the general public. The role that the media might play in covering incidents in prisons is a separate issue, but I know that all who are interested in the public interest will wish to ensure that nothing is done to inflame or aggravate any delicate situation, particularly when the physical safety of individual prison officers may be affected.

Why does the right hon. and learned Gentleman ignore the fact that under this Government the crime rate has risen by 80 per cent. in Scotland since 1979? Why has he failed to address himself today to the problem of prisoners on remand? Is he not worried about untried prisoners? Is he not worried that those who have been found guilty of nothing are being put into overcrowded cells? Does he accept that since Scotland sends to prison four times as many people as do most other European countries, the problem calls for resources? Above all, will he respond to the low morale among the personnel in Scottish prisons by holding an urgent public inquiry?

The hon. Gentleman's question illustrates a certain degree of confusion. Those who have been found not guilty are not incarcerated in prison. The remand prisoners to whom the hon. Gentleman referred are those who have been charged with crimes and who are awaiting trial, but to whom the courts have concluded that it would not be appropriate to grant bail. I accept that those who have not yet been convicted of an offence but who are detained in prison awaiting trial are in a different category and that we must ensure that they are given proper care and consideration. I should also emphasise that under the Scottish system those who are awaiting trial do not have to suffer a period of detention before trial of the kind that one finds in many other countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has any plans to review the assisted area status of the Blairgowrie Pitlochry Aberfeldy travel-towork area.

My right hon. and learned Friend has no plans to do so.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, if it is to be accepted, regional policy must be seen to be fair and sensible? Does my hon. Friend think that it is sensible to describe Aberfeldy, Pitlochry and Blairgowrie as a travel-to-work area when it is neither viable nor sensible to travel on those roads in the winter every day? It cannot be done. Since male unemployment in Blairgowrie has been around and over 20 per cent. since 1978, which is higher than the unemployment in Dundee, will my hon. Friend tell me why that can be said to be fair? What does he propose to do about it?

My hon. Friend campaigns on this matter with commendable persistence. I am sure he will be aware that a number of possible arrangements were considered when the travel-to-work areas were established. As the system is only two years old, I think he will accept that there is a need for a period of stability before undertaking changes to the system.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on progress on an extension of the integrated development programme in the Western Isles.

The European Commission considers that there is no need for a full-scale extension of the integrated development programme. We have asked the Commission to consider how best to wind up the IDP in order to protect the significant achievements made. We await the Commission's response.

I thank the Minister for his reply. Is he aware that when the programme was inaugurated there were suggestions that there would be a follow-on extension? A number of the projects that have shown excellent results might be in danger if that extension is not arranged. Will he put pressure on the EEC to bring matters to a head as quickly as possible?

I appreciate the point that the right hon. Gentleman is making. The ball is in the Commission's court, and I have recently written to remind it of that fact. We shall have to wait to see what proposals it makes, but that must he before May 1987 in order that any proposals can be rolled over from the current integrated development programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps have been taken to ensure that all necessary provisions have been made to assist the Scottish medical profession in its assessment and containment of AIDS.

In addition to the issue of extensive guidance to doctors, dentists and nurses about the disease, the Government have to date allocated £1·4 million centrally to fund measures to control the spread of AIDS in Scotland.

May I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on that reply and on the excellent booklet that has been produced for educational establishments in Scotland to be used mainly by teachers? Is it possible that in the future a similar booklet may be produced for young people within these establishments to be distributed and discussed within those establishments?

The guidance booklet that we issued last week essentially dealt with the need for a range of sensible, hygienic precautions in schools to stop AIDS being passed on accidentally. My colleagues and I will be issuing in a few weeks time a question and answer leaflet on AIDS for teachers to use in response to children's questions. Schools have a positive role to play in that respect, and we have asked bodies such as the Consultative Committee on the Curriculum and the Scottish Health Education Group to consider what further guidance and materials should be provided.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, as a result of the University Grants Committee's reductions at Aberdeen university, the department of microbiology is to lose clinical and teaching staff and that, combined with the difficulties in the Grampian health board, laboratory staff will be seriously reduced, with repercussions not only for the AIDS programme but for research into meningitis? How does the Secretary of State justify that?

The hon. Gentleman is well aware that I have no departmental responsibility for the University Grants Committee, therefore I shall confine myself to the specific point about research on AIDS in Scotland. The Scottish Office is providing just under £250,000 for research on AIDS in Scotland. Other research proposals have been put forward to the Government, which will be considered in due course.

With regard to the need to contain AIDS, will the Secretary of State explain why it has taken so long to inaugurate the proposed needle exchange system? Is it the case that it is not due to come into effect until April, and thus about three to four months will elapse, with the danger of AIDS being spread by contaminated needles continuing?

On 18 December we announced our intention to set up small-scale trials under medical supervision, including the counselling of drug misusers and the exchange of clean for used equipment on a onefor-one basis. That requires close co-operation with the medical profession and others in the three likely localities of Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee. That cannot be arranged overnight. We are equally anxious to ensure that the trials begin at the earliest possible date. It seems likely that April will be the commencement date, but that will depend on the conclusion of the detailed discussions with the medical profession and others who will be involved in the trials.

Young Tories in Scotland have called for brothels to be taken into public ownership to curb the spread of AIDS and improve health standards. Will the Secretary of State accept that nationalisation is of more benefit to the community than privatisation?

We have no early intention of taking brothels or any other comparable establishments into public ownership. I recall that it was once remarked that Socialists disapprove of sin because it is a form of private enterprise.

I hope the Secretary of State will bear in mind, when considering the pilot projects on free exchange of needles, the case that can be made for needles to be issued free to diabetics. May I use that as an example of the need for an advisory committee at central level to co-ordinate some of these difficult questions? I accept that the Government will have to confront everything, including troops returning from the Horn of Africa, and the difficulties that they create locally, when they return. I was questioned in my own constituency about when the Minister asked me whether I thought he should advise people who were proposing to get married in church to take AIDS tests beforehand. Does he accept that these questions need some strategic overall view by a central advisory committee?

We must try to ensure that we respond to this serious problem in a serious and responsible fashion. Some somewhat exotic suggestions about how the problem can be dealt with have often been made, but we are trying to identify ways in which the Government and the community can make a meaningful contribution to reducing the incidence of this serious disease.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there will be considerable anger among diabetics in Scotland as a result of that answer? May we have an assurance that none of the money that is being used for the advertising campaign on AIDS will come from the Scottish health education group's budget and thus damage its excellent work? May we also be assured that the increased number of hospital places and the doctors and nursing staff required to deal with AIDS as its incidence increases will be paid for by extra money from the Government and not represent a burden on the health boards?

From the hon. Gentleman's original comment, one would have thought that there were no diabetics before 1979. He should be reminded that the Labour Government saw no need to provide free syringes to diabetics, so it is somewhat hypocritical for him to suggest that there has been a fundamental change.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what support he intends to give to maintain the provision of extra-mural studies and adult education classes in the north of Scotland.

Education authorities are responsible for the provision of education in their areas. In addition, the Scottish Education Department gives grant to a number of voluntary organisations active in community education.

I trust that the Minister does not need any lessons about how valuable is the provision of extra-mural classes, especially in rural parts of Scotland and the islands. Those who administer the system— certainly those in the north of Scotland—feel that withdrawal of the administration grant by the Scottish Office poses a threat to the continuation of those classes. As the Minister has accepted in correspondence with me that a very small amount of money is involved, why are the Government being so mean in withdrawing it?

It is indeed a small amount when compared with university budgets, but the total of £53,000 for the whole of Scotland is significant when compared with the alternative priority on which we think the money should be spent— getting a Scottish version of the PICKUP scheme off the ground to give people in mid career the advantage of retraining in new skills.

Does the Miniser agree that the PICKUP scheme in Engand and Wales has been funded by additional money, whereas in Scotland the money is coming from the same budget? Why will he not do the same as England and ensure that we get extra money for this valuable scheme?

The hon. Gentleman must recall from his time in government that one has to order priorities in some way. When we considered the PICKUP scheme and studied the Scottish Tertiary Education Advisory Committee's report, which said that limited pump priming finance by Government could provide an important stimulus, we decided that it was right to do that and to find the money to enable us to fund a limited project.

Will the Minister acknowledge that the two projects address themselves to different markets and that it is wrong to take away funding for a service that affects small communities throughout the north-east and the north of Scotland and the islands in favour of a scheme that will simply not make the same provision for those people? Will he recognise that, for the small amount of money involved, he is causing grave hardship and indeed outrage among rural communities?

I do not believe for a moment that I am causing hardship or outrage, other than in the mind of the hon. Gentleman. It is fair to point out that my Department pays grant-aid amounting to about £423,000 for the administrative costs of national voluntary organisations that provide educational activities, including encouraging adult participation, in the north of Scotland.

Does the Minister not agree that these problems in the north of Scotland and elsewhere suggest that the Government place a low priority on adult education? Does that not therefore re-emphasise the need for proper funding for the Workers Educational Association? Will the Minister bear that in mind when I meet him to discuss the matter tomorrow morning?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I shall think about nothing other than the Workers Educational Association and his visit between now and tomorrow morning, but it is fair to say, as I shall point out to him, that the grant to the WEA in 1986–87 came to £184,500, which is a significant amount of money.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to ensure that the Forestry Commission acts upon the conclusions of the National Audit Office regarding the marginal cost-effectiveness of planting conifers on high ground in the north of Scotland, by switching its emphasis to broadleaf plantings in agricultural land further south; and if he will make a statement.

The National Audit Office review of Forestry Commission objectives and achievements is being considered by the Public Accounts Committee, which will report to Parliament in due course. My right hon. and learned Friend is therefore not at present in a position to make any detailed statement.

I note that reply, but does not my hon. Friend agree that it is, in any event, a virtue to plant woodlands on less productive farmland, or even to develop golf courses there? Would that not lend a new meaning to green keeping? Does that not help to sustain the rural character of that land and a habitat for wildlife?

I completely agree with my hon. Friend. It is important that against the background of surplus agricultural production we look at all the means of maintaining economic activity and rural life in our countryside. That is what my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food had in mind when he made his statement on Monday in the House.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the initiative taken by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food this week to help promote the rural economy is extremely good news? Does he accept that if we are to increase broadleaved planting, as opposed to conifers, there must be an extra incentive but, at the same time, does he also accept that if we are to encourage tourism in Scotland we must be careful about blanket coniferous planting throughout the scenic areas?

I thank my hon. Friend for his support for our policy. He will recall that the policy statement that we made as far back as July 1985, which introduced the broadleaved woodland grant scheme, was widely welcomed, and the Forestry Commission tells me that the scheme has got off to an encouraging start. My hon. Friend makes a valid point, which everyone who is interested in the countryside and in the forestry industry fully appreciates, that we need to look at both conifers and broadleaved trees as the way forward for the forestry industry and the countryside.

Is the Minister aware that the decision by Caledonian Papers to build a paper mill in Irvine in my constituency, which is an inward investment of £250 million and will involve up to 1,500 jobs during the construction period, and 900 permanent jobs, depends on adequate supplies of timber from the public and private sectors in Scotland? Will the Minister give encouragement to the Forestry Commission to extend its activities in the highlands and southern uplands of Scotland to ensure the continuation of those timber supplies in the future?

The hon. Gentleman shows a realistic appreciation of the importance of forestry for Scotland. I only wish that it was shared by a few other Labour Members. I add to the hon. Gentleman's valid point about the importance of this development in job terms. The plant at Irvine will require sitka spruce, which is often a species much maligned by the environmental conservation lobby. That is the species that the industry wants. It is because of that species that the company is coming to Scotland and to Irvine.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that he recently visited the plant of Highland Forest Products near Inverness? Does he agree that that is a welcome addition, in a modern framework, to the forestry enterprise, substantially relying as it does on locally grown products and bringing a welcome infusion of new jobs to the area'? In short, is that not the sort of development in rural areas that we wish to encourage, and will the Scottish Office do precisely that?

I am happy to respond positively to my hon. Friend, just as I did to the hon. Member for Cunninghame, South (Mr. Lambie). Highland Forest Products has a factory employing about 100 people in the plant and about 300 to 400 people throughout the countryside in the north-east of Scotland. Once again, the plant requires pine trees, the coniferous trees that some of the critics rail against so much. Again, that underlines the point that we need these trees if we are to have a proper forest industry.

Given the enormous dependency on imported timber products and the hugh cereal surpluses that the Government will fail to tackle by their recently announced policy, is it not desirable to transfer some of the rich grade 1 and grade 2 low level arable areas in England to forestry purposes to meet the need—

Order. This question is about Scotland.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

This question is about Scotland.

No, forestry.

No, it is about Scotland.

I support what the hon. Member for Cunninghame, South (Mr. Lambie) has said. Could not many areas in Scotland be planted with coniferous trees without spoiling the environment? I support any move to put in hardwood trees, but if land is set aside for such trees, should not agriculture have some compensation for the output of that land?

I agree with my hon. Friend, who has a major constituency interest in the plant at Irvine. I also agree about the need for a balance between broadleaf and conifer. It is important that farmers take advantage of the scheme announced on Monday to plant conifers and deciduous trees in land, which, up to now, has not been considered for tree planting.

Will the Minister give us an assurance that the changes announced this week by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in England will not prejudice the Scottish Office's lead on forestry'? Will he also give us an assurance that the Forestry Commission will play an integral part in the expansion of forestry and that the Government's plans to privatise have been shelved for ever?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Scottish Office will continue to play the lead role in forestry. The Forestry Commission has an important role to play. It will be called upon to administer the farm forestry scheme, as it does the scheme on private planting, and its important role in the forestry industry has greatly helped projects such as Kaukas and Highland Forest Products get off the ground in Scotland.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the announcement made earlier this week, which will help ordinary farmers, as opposed to pop stars, to plant woodlands. Will he confirm that the cost to public funds of the 40 jobs created by Fountain Forestry in the flow country is in excess of £300,000 per job? Is this a useful way to use public money, especially when more jobs could be created elsewhere from the same resources?

I am afraid that my hon. Friend will have to put down a specific question before I can answer about the exact figure that he mentions. I believe that there is room for both forestry and the open land for which many of the environmentalists and conservationists ask. The committee that we have set up in the Scottish Office to look into the interaction between wildlife and planting in the north of Scotland will help us to find a reasonable solution that will be in the interest of the countryside in that part of Scotland.

Is the Minister aware that one of the many clangers dropped by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food came when he said:

"The growing of trees under these proposals will be much more attractive to people in the marginal areas".—[Official Report, 9 February 1987; Vol. 110, c. 72.]

One of the ways in which that can be achieved is to act on the decision that was announced a few months ago that we would take a more relaxed view to planting on land further down the hill. That view has been made perfectly clear to the forestry industry.

That is not economic.

I do not agree with the comments made from a sedentary position by the hon. Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson). Both large-scale forestry— I prefer to use that phrase rather than blanket-forestry—and farm forestry have an important role to play. I would have preferred to hear from the hon. Gentleman that he supported the development of the forestry industry and the jobs that are coming to Scotland as a result.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the hundreds of square miles of forestry in my constituency contribute handsomely to the local economy? Does he further agree that it is important that a balance is retained between the needs of tourism and forestry and that that balance has been substantially retained in many areas? Does he accept that the welcome given by the vice-president of the National Farmers Union of Scotland to the Government's proposals show that we are moving along the right lines?

I can certainly confirm to my hon. Friend that the National Farmers Union of Scotland has made a positive response to the statement made by my right hon. Friend last Monday. The Scottish Farmers Union has warmly welcomed the statement, and Opposition Members would be well advised to heed its words. My hon. Friend is equally correct when he said that we have to strike a sensible balance between planting and the needs of conservation interests and the needs of tourism. That can be achieved, and in many parts of Scotland, including the area that I represent, that has been achieved.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what additional financial help he intends to give local authorities as a consequence of extra expenditure incurred during the exceptional cold snap in January.

Rate support grant is paid in aid of local authority services generally. The grant paid to authorities this year, and promised for next, is generous. Prudent authorities make provision for contingencies such as bad winter weather, and in the case of road maintenance the incidence of snow is specifically taken into account, on an authority-by-authority basis, in assessing expenditure need. I therefore see no reason for any special arrangements in this case.

Is the Minister aware that that is a dusty and unsatisfactory answer? He must be aware that because of the cold snap local authorities incurred additional expenditure in their roads, social works and housing departments because of burst pipes. Is he further aware that yesterday the Department of Energy said that there were 15,000 extra calls on the Monergy hot line as a consequence of the cold snap? Is the Minister really saying to local authorities "You're getting nowt" bearing in mind that the winter has only just started?

I want to take this opportunity first to congratulate local authorities and their workers on the great efforts that they have made to keep our roads clear. Although the severe weather did not last long, it made life difficult for a time and the authorities responded quickly and efficiently. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's point, I must tell him that snowfall and snow lying are not new occurrences this year. That has happened during many winters in Scotland. The figures for 1982–83, 1983–84 and 1984–85 reveal that in Lothian the average number of days when snow was lying were 13·2, 22·2, and 19·8 respectively. That is not a new occurrence and authorities are well able to deal with it. With regard to social work, my right hon. and learned Friend made provision of more than £300 million for social work in 1986–87. There is ample room for sensible management for unexpected costs within that total.

While I agree with my hon. Friend that rate support grant was a little more generous this year, especially in Grampian and Banff and Buchan, will he accept that there are cold snaps and cold snaps, and that in the north-east of Scotland in my constituency we had a very severe cold snap this winter? We certainly require some additional assistance towards the problems that have been created, because the local authority direct labour department was called out on many occasions in excess of the normal procedure.

I note my hon. Friend's comments and I appreciate the reasons why he has made them. However, in the time that I have held my present responsibilities, this is not the first time that Grampian has suffered from cold weather during the winter. It is for that reason that the client group assessments in their secondary indicators make provision on a historical basis for road maintenance in particular, which is the expenditure most affected by cold weather.

Does the Minister agree that cold snaps not only make life difficult for people but cause severe danger, especially to the elderly? Does he know that in my constituency two people died during the cold snap and many elderly people could not get out of their houses, because my constituency covers one of the highest points in the city? Should not more assistance be given to the social work department and the roads department to make conditions safer, especially for the elderly?

The hon. Gentleman referred spcifically to elderly people. The Government have shown their willingness to respond flexibly to the needs of the elderly and other vulnerable groups with the £5 weekly allowance. In Scotland more than 82,000 claimants have already received two payments, with 32,000 cases still in the pipeline, which is a much higher figure than some of our critics suggested. It comes ill from the hon. Gentleman to suggest that cold weather was invented by this Government. It is worth remembering that under the Labour Government expenditure on heating additions amounted to only £90 million, as opposed to more than £400 million under this Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the relative prosperity of Scotland compared with the rest of Great Britain.

The standard of living of most Scots compares favourably with most of the rest of Great Britain. In terms of average male weekly earnings, the latest figures for 1985 show that only the south-east fared better.

Does this not show that a Conservative Government are good for the Scots, especially since, under this Government, those who depend upon health, social and other vital services such as education receive more per head of the population in Scotland than they do south of the border?

My hon. Friend is right as regards identifiable public expenditure. He may also wish to know that in terms of gross domestic product per head and personal disposable income, Scotland lies third in the list of regions in the United Kingdom.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that since the new year statement by the Secretary of State for Scotland on the potential boom in Scotland the Caterpillar tractor company has decided to draw stumps and close the factory en bloc. Since then there have been further redundancies in my constituency. Is it not about time that we had a statement from the Minister or from the Secretary of State as to the Government's intentions in respect of Caterpillar?

My right hon. and learned Friend's views about Caterpillar are well know. However, I am glad to say that what happened with Caterpillar does not reflect the general view of overseas companies with regard to investment in Scotland. During the past seven years about £1·8 billion of inward investment has been attracted to Scotland.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that last year identifiable public expenditure per head was 27 per cent. higher in Scotland than it was in England and that housing expenditure per head was about 90 per cent. higher? Is it not time that this tartan featherbedding was subject to an independent audit?

Identifiable public expenditure has been higher in Scotland in several areas, reflecting the special needs of Scotland which my hon. Friend, as a Member of the United Kingdom Parliament, would wish to support.

Will the Minister reflect on the fact that in the 1960s we were worried that Scotland had too large a share of the old and declining industries and not enough of the new dynamic industries, but that under the Conservative Government there has been a huge diminution in the older established industries such as coal, steel and shipbuilding and not enough growth, even with all the advantages of North sea oil, in the new dynamic industries? There is also an absence in Scotland of decision-making headquarters of companies. Does the Minister concede that a regional policy which suits the south-east of England does not necessarily suit Scotland, which should have a more independent view of its economic future?

I am glad to assure the hon. Gentleman that the number of people self-employed in Scotland has increased by about a quarter during the past seven years. Although there has been a loss of jobs in manufacturing industry, it is significant that output has been almost hack at the 1979 levels, with many fewer workers, thus reflecting the dramatic increase in productivity, which is the best guarantee of secure jobs in the future.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the recent announcement of a multi-million pound investment at Mearns Cross in my constituency? Is he further aware that that follows a major investment announced by English Sewing in manufacturing industry at Neilston and Newton Mearns in my constituency? Do not those practical examples give the lie to the nonsense talked by Opposition Members about the Scottish economy?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The quality of the Scottish work force and the other attractions of locating in Scotland are manifest and are reflected in the number of companies coming to Scotland.

Does the Minister realise that Scottish Unionists will not be voting for Conservative candidates at the next election, not simply because they supported the Anglo-Irish Agreement, but because Scottish Ministers—

Order. I must stop the hon. Member from going wide of the question. Will he relate his question to Scottish prosperity?

It is very much related to the Scottish economy. I am giving the second reason why Scottish Unionists will not be voting. It is because Scottish Ministers have clearly put London policies before the interests of the Scots.

I had hoped that the right hon. Gentleman, in this United Kingdom Parliament, would pay tribute to the very generous help that has gone to Northern Ireland from the British Government.

Bearing in mind that Scotland has more Members of Parliament per head than England, does my hon. Friend believe that this public expenditure results in more, or less, prosperity for Scotland?

I shall answer my hon. Friend by pointing out that productivity on the Government side of the House is very much greater than on the Opposition side.

Many people in my constituency are emphatically denied a share in this so-called prosperity. Will the Secretary of State for Scotland now respond to the request that I made to him some three weeks ago for a feasibility study into potential projects in the lower Clyde area to be conducted by, say, Planning Industrial Economic Development Advisers or some other such consultancy firm? Such a study is desperately needed.

I certainly recognise the special difficulties in the Inverclyde area. As the hon. Gentleman will know, the Inverclyde initiative is giving close attention to this. My right hon. and learned Friend is also considering what further measures may be brought to bear in that area.

Does my hon. Friend realise that those of us who live in the midlands look north with envy to Scotland, in appreciating the levels of income, as he has mentioned, and of public expenditure? Will my hon. Friend tell us the secret of his success?

I would advise my hon. Friend to return to Scotland, where he will find that average earnings are up threefold over the past 10 years and the gross domestic product has doubled since 1977.

Will the Minister note that on the Opposition side, at least, we do not regard the news of a shopping development in Newton Mearns as the yardstick against which we ought to measure national success? Can he perhaps comment on his extraordinary boast that after eight years of Conservative success he can only say that we have almost got industrial investment back to 1979 levels?

If the hon. Gentleman has read the statement that I made yesterday, he will be well aware of the Government's continuing commitment to finding alternative employment for the work force at the Caterpillar plant. As regards manufacturing jobs, if he had listened to the answer that I gave earlier he would have realised that the point I was making was not so much about output as about productivity. The very demonstration of the increased productivity that has resulted over the past few years is the best guarantee of continuing employment provision in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to sustain the rural economy in the light of policies aimed at reducing agricultural production.

The Government are committed to maintaining a healthy rural economy in Scotland and my right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food announced a number of measures to the House on Monday 9 February.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend, in acknowledging the welcome given by the Scottish National Farmers Union to the proposals announced this week, also take time to read my article in the Glasgow Herald, if he can find it in the Library, from which place somebody seems to have nicked it? That article proposes that we should be given special grants in Scotland to save the steadlings and farm buildings and set up a rural population to sustain a rural economy.

My hon. and learned Friend is a source of many new ideas that could be of value in dealing with the problem. We are prepared to consider constructively any proposals for the diversification of the rural economy in order to ensure that the income base for the farming community and for the rural community is as broad as possible.

Is it not the case that in Scotland, as in England, no additional expenditure is to be incurred on these rural initiatives?

As the hon. Gentleman is well aware, one of the Government's objectives is to reduce the structural surpluses in the European Community. That itself would lead to savings on current expenditure. The proposal announced by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture would indeed involve substantial expenditure of a kind that he himself described to the House.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he has any plans to review the resources available to the procurator fiscal service; and if he will make a statement.

The resources of the Crown Office and procurator fiscal service have recently been reviewed and, subject to parliamentary approval, the 1986–87 cash limit for Class XX, Vote 20 will be increased by £180,000. Class XX, Vote 21 provision will be increased by £150,000.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. In view of the current pressures on the procurator fiscal's office in Glasgow, why was it necessary for the procurator fiscal to be involved in the obtaining of a search warrant recently for the BBC offices in Glasgow?

It was in accordance with both proper and accepted practice and procedure in Scotland in such circumstances for the police to make a request to the procurator fiscal to make application on their behalf to the sheriff. In deciding whether it was proper to present such an application, the procurator fiscal had to be satisfied as to the legal justification for the application. In that regard he would consider the information to be sworn to by the police and the known attitude of the BBC to the requirement of due legal process. He sought to ensure that the warrant was sufficient to meet its purpose and did not go beyond what was required. With his legal experience, I hope my hon. Friend will recognise that the course followed there and the relationship between the police and the procurator fiscal were appropriate in the circumstances.

Was Professor Bradley right, or wrong, in suggesting—[HON. MEMBERS: "Wrong."] If he is wrong, let it be said where he is wrong. Was he right, or wrong, in suggesting that the procurator fiscal and the Lord Advocate, in the mode and style of their investigation, had to take into account the interests and the feelings of the victim? In this case was not the major victim the Foreign Office? When did the Crown Office first approach or talk to the Foreign Office, or when did the Foreign Office first approach or talk to the Crown Office?

To answer the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question first, in no circumstances and at no time did the Crown Office contact the Foreign Office, nor indeed was there any pressure or approach from the Foreign Office to the Crown Office. Although I studied under Professor Bradley, I regret to say that I do not consider that his statement of the law, as I saw it reported in The Independent today, is wholly correct. I would not dissent in any way from what he has to say with regard to consideration of the public interest where there is—

Is he wrong?

If the hon. Gentleman would give me half a moment I shall try to answer his question. I do not dissent from what Professor Bradley has to say about the consideration of the public interest once a stage of consideration of prosecution is reached. However, I do not agree, nor would my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate agree, that it would be his practice to consult any other Minister when considering applications for search warrants in the course of a criminal investigation.

In considering the resources in Glasgow, is my hon. and learned Friend still satisfied that the attitude of the BBC at the highest level was such that the police had no alternative but to obtain a search warrant and raid the Glasgow premises? Can he assure the House that every reasonable possibility was covered by the police before this drastic action was taken?

The BBC was perfectly within its legal rights in insisting that if any action was to be taken against it in relation to material that it held, due legal process should be carried through. As I said in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Moray (Mr. Pollock), one of the known factors at the time when the application was considered by the procurator fiscal was that at a senior level the BBC took the view that if those investigating this matter wanted material from the BBC, it was for them to follow due legal process. The BBC had a right to insist on that and, clearly if it did insist, that excluded the possibility of such material being handed over to the investigating authorities without the necessity for a search warrant, as is sometimes the case in some circumstances.

It has been said on a number of occasions by some people that the showing of the Zircon film last week in Edinburgh and Glasgow could put those who saw it in breach of the Official Secrets Act. Does the Solicitor-General think that the procurator fiscal's office has sufficient resources to deal with such a vast number of cases? Given that the Government and the Leader of the Opposition think that it endangers national security, why did the Government not seek to take out an interim interdict against the showing of these films?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that, following the New Statesman article, information was already in the public domain, as it were, and the prospects of obtaining an interim interdict or an interdict in perpetuity in Scotland were thereby limited. I am certainly not answerable for the views of the Leader of the Opposition, and I am even loss answerable for the disagreements that have opened between him and his Back Benchers.

Is my hon. and learned Friend satisfied that sufficient resources are available to the procurator fiscal? If they are riot, will he look at those resources and recruit people of the highest calibre so that we may have the best possible people prosecuting when we want to bring prosecutions in cases such as the BBC case? That will ensure that we can make the charges stick.

I shall resist the temptation to make any observations about the last point made by my hon. Friend. I know that he has a continuing interest in the affairs of the procurator fiscal service. I am encouraged by the fact that there is some agreement to increase the Vote, and I hope that the House will approve the Vote. I share my hon. Friend's view that, through the procurator fiscal service in Scotland, we probably enjoy the finest prosecution system in the world.

I am sure the Solicitor-General will agree that he was aware that a warrant was in existence in England at the time when he considered the Scottish process. Did he think about restricting and narrowing the scope of the warrant in Scotland, in the way that it was done in England? Does he agree that that might well have stopped some of the controversy and damage that has flowed from this lamentable incident?

I shall start by answering the hon. Gentleman's last point. I confirm yet again that in the drawing up of the petition and the warrant, in considering whether such an application should be made to the sheriff and in arranging for its execution there was no pressure and nothing was done in relation to any other Ministers, least of all, as the hon. Gentleman's hon. Friends seem to think, with No. 10 Downing street or with any other office.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland on how many days the north and south courts in Glasgow were used for High Court prosecutions in 1956, 1966, 1976 and 1986; and if he will estimate trends over the next 10 years.

The figures are 55, 143, 250 and 425 days respectively. In addition, in 1986 the High Court sat in other courts in Glasgow on 190 days. It is not practicable to make detailed estimates of trends over the next 10 years.

In view of the escalating figures that my hon. and learned Friend has given to the House, does he recall that when we have both been prosecuting or defending major cases in the High Court in Glasgow, we sometimes had to be unnecessarily close to one another? Will he use his influence with the Secretary of State, who may have a more distant recollection of those matters, and suggest that if we go for option 1 for the High Court we would foreclose the possibility of enlarging those courts, and persuade him to go for option 2, so that he and I will never have to be so close together that we fall out?

I am aware of the views that my hon. and learned Friend has expressed about the redevelopment of the judiciary buildings in Glasgow. He clearly appreciates that it is essential) y a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State, who, as he knows, has consulted on plans to increase the number of court rooms. I and my right hon. and learned Friend are aware of my hon. and learned Friend's views.