House of Commons Hansard Debates for 24 May 1995

Oral Answers to Questions

SCOTLAND

Whisky Industry

1. Mrs. Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total number of people employed in the Scotch whisky industry currently; and how many were employed in 1990. [24221]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. George Kynoch): The Scotch Whisky Association, in its latest annual reviewstates that 13,804 people in 1994 were employed by its member companies in the Scottish whisky industry, compared with 16,376 in 1990.

Mrs. Ewing: Will the Minister confirm that the figures that he has just given are taken from the Scottish register of employment, which takes no account of establishments that employ 11 or fewer employees? In that context, does he accept that the rise in the excise duty on Scotch whisky since the Government came to power has been about 30 per cent. and that the decline in the home market has sent out the wrong message to foreign markets? Does he therefore agree that we have to take tender steps to ensure that the Scotch whisky industry is protected and that there will be no further mothballing as there has been at Tamnavulin, Tullibardine and Bruichladdich?

Mr. Kynoch: I think that the hon. Lady was, unfortunately, not listening to my reply. I said clearly that the Scotch Whisky Association gave those figures in its latest annual review. They were not from the source to which she referred. The hon. Lady might also be aware of the fact that, in the past 10 years, the real rate of duty on spirits has fallen by some 16 per cent. in real terms. I think that she is giving a slightly distorted story. In the industry in general, since 1980, exports have gone up from £746 million in 1980 to over £2 billion in 1994. I believe that the industry is attacking its markets very aggressively and successfully.

Mr. Bill Walker: Does my hon. Friend agree that it is not the Government's job to second-guess the Scotch whisky industry on how it should run its business but that it most certainly is the Government's job to create a tax environment at home, and to influence the tax environment in Europe, to enable the Scotch whisky industry to continue to be Scotland's greatest exporter, excluding oil and gas? That will continue, provided that we have a tax regime that encourages the industry to expand and not to contract.

Mr. Kynoch: My hon. Friend is right. It is not the Government's job to intervene in production scheduling in the industry. With regard to taxation, I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a speech in the House on 13 December last year, said that he was very sympathetic to the case for removing distortion of the duties charged on, for example, wine as opposed to spirits and to maintaining a freeze on alcohol duties for the benefit of the Scotch whisky industry. He reaffirmed his

Column 886

intention to continue along the road to revising duty differentials following the increase in the 1994 Budget that he had forced upon him by some hon. Members.

Mr. McKelvey: Is the Minister aware that Saturday the 27th of this month marks the quincentennial celebration of the discovery or the invention of Scotch whisky? To assist the Scotch whisky industry with all its magnificent efforts in exports, the Government should remind the Chancellor that he put the 25p apre s-Budget additional tax on whisky in a fit of pique because the House democratically voted not to allow him to put the second tranche of VAT on fuel.

Mr. Kynoch: I am glad that the hon. Gentleman referred to the 27th of this month because I gather that there will be an open day at many distilleries, and that the hon. Gentleman will be leading the visitations to some of them. He referred to taxation and to what the Chancellor had to do in his second run at the Budget. What he had to do was something that the Labour party is totally incapable of doing--balance the Budget. The Labour party has proposals for a tax-raising Scottish Parliament, which would mean that it would have to address the problem of balancing the Budget. If it could say clearly to Scottish business and to the Scottish people that they would definitely not face a taxation increase, the hon. Gentleman might address taxation issues in a more responsible manner.

Electricity and Gas Industries

2. Mr. Ingram: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give the numbers of jobs lost in Scotland in (a) the electricity supply industry and (b) the gas industry since privatisation; and if he will make a statement. [24223]

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Ian Lang): It is a matter for the private utility companies to structure their organisations and working practices in a way that best meets consumer and commercial interests.

Mr. Ingram: What the Secretary of State has not told us is that many hundreds of jobs have been lost as a result of the privatisation of the electricity and gas industries. If the Secretary of State had given those figures, they would have proven sufficient reason for those currently employed at Scottish Nuclear to fear its privatisation. Will the Secretary of State give one simple guarantee to the work force based at the headquarters of Scottish Nuclear in East Kilbride? Will he give them the same guarantee of a minimum of 10 years' future employment as has been given to the staff of the new corporate headquarters?

Mr. Lang: I think that the hon. Gentleman is already well aware that, as a result of the Government's proposals for the future of the nuclear electricity generating industry, there will be a net increase in jobs in Scotland arising from the various head office functions coming to Scotland. The nuclear industry, like the rest of the electricity industry, has, of course, been rationalising itself to get costs down, to be competitive and to be efficient. The benefit of that to the Scottish economy is considerable. Scottish Hydro-Electric has been increasing jobs, with a net increase of 94 jobs, which is so important in the Perthshire economy. For the rest of the industry,

Column 887

there has been a 120,000 net increase in employment over the past 10 years. That is the product of a more efficient economy, to which lower energy prices contribute.

Mrs. Lait: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that Scottish Nuclear was set up, after electricity privatisation, in the constituency of the hon. Member for East Kilbride (Mr. Ingram)? Is not it ungracious of him to complain when additional, high-tech engineering jobs will come into Scottish Nuclear after it, too, is privatised?

Mr. Lang: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is not just a matter of jobs coming into Scottish Nuclear--the nuclear electricity industry--in East Kilbride. It is the fact that a substantial number of new jobs in other industries are coming in. Unemployment in the constituency of the hon. Member for East Kilbride (Mr. Ingram) has fallen by 18 per cent. in the past year alone.

Mr. Wilson: Will the Secretary of State accept that the appointment of a two-day-a-week Tory, who is paid £100,000 and who continues to live in Surrey, is one job that we could all very well do without? Will he accept that, in my constituency, that is not accepted as any sort of substitute for the strong, successful public sector company that Scottish Nuclear is?

Mr. Lang: Under the Labour party, the Scottish nuclear industry would have disappeared with the loss of all jobs and of a major technology. We have given a future for that company and that industry which is full of promise and the prospect of growth and expansion--under a business leader of considerable distinction whose politics I know not but who, I am certain, will act as a very fine chairman of the industry.

Monklands Hospital Trust

3. Mr. Tom Clarke: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next intends to visit Monklands hospital trust; and if he will make a statement. [24224]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton): My right hon. Friend has no immediate plans to visit the Monklands and Bellshill hospitals NHS trust. However, my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State meets the chairmen of trusts regularly, when a range of issues are discussed.

Mr. Clarke: Does the Minister agree that the national health service staff in Monklands should continue to consider themselves as such, employed by a national health service trust and enjoying national terms and conditions within the national health service? Alternatively, are the Government planning to privatise such services in Monklands and elsewhere in Scotland, as they already plan to do at Stonehaven? Does the Minister agree that national health service Scotland funding should be on the basis of the British Government making resources available, based on national negotiations, and should not exploit people who offer themselves for employment in poor areas with great health problems? Finally, does the Minister accept that from Coatbridge to Kinross and from Perth to Peebles, people want the national health service that we once enjoyed, and that is being slowly destroyed by the present Government?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Some £4,000 million is being made available to the NHS in Scotland this year.

Column 888

That is a record figure, constituting an increase of £143 million. The hon. Gentleman will also be encouraged to learn that the new chairman of Monklands NHS trust is Mr. David Millan, the well-known former chief executive of Cumbernauld development corporation. I endorse what the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) said in January:

"We are not opposed to public/private partnerships--they bring in much needed money for the NHS".

The test must be the provision of a better standard of care for NHS patients. I can confirm that, with private sector involvement, as with all NHS projects, NHS providers will be asked to seek private finance to design, build and service any new facilities.

The hon. Gentleman will be glad to learn that Monklands and Bellshill NHS hospitals trust has made an offer of 3 per cent., subject to certain conditions.

Rural Roads

4. Mrs. Ray Michie: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the detrunking of roads in rural areas of Scotland. [24225]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Sir Hector Monro): My right hon. Friend has received a number of representations on the detrunking of roads in rural Scotland, particularly in response to the recent consultation exercise "Shaping the Trunk Road Network". The Government's response was published on 27 April.

Mrs. Michie: Has not the Minister rejected many of the representations made to him about roads in rural Scotland--in particular, those from Argyll and Bute and from

Strathclyde--concerning the determination to detrunk the road between Lochgilphead and Ballachuilish? The road serves the requirements set out in the Minister's document for the trunk road network relating to industry, commerce, agriculture and tourism. Will he assure us that the new Argyll and Bute council will have the funds that are required to maintain the road and to build along the long-awaited and long-promised Creagan bridge?

Sir Hector Monro: The hon. Lady has raised a number of points. The Creagan bridge project is still under consideration. Naturally, I expect the new council to have adequate funds to fulfil its responsibilities-- bearing in mind the Government's position at the time in relation to the block grant.

The hon. Lady mentioned the detrunking of a certain road in her constituency, particularly between Campbeltown and Ballachuilish. The main road from Lochgilphead is trunked to the national network, as are the roads to Oban and Fort William. We believe that the road linking those three towns independently should be the responsibility of the local authority. Councils are always wanting further responsibility, and this is a very good chance for them to undertake it.

Mr. Gallie: I welcome the Government's response to the most recent consultation paper on the trunk road system. I am especially pleased that, for the first time, the A70 southern route to the A74/M74 is shown as a real possibility. What progress has been made by the "access to Ayrshire" group, which is considering the matter? Will my hon. Friend also comment on the progress currently being made on the upgrading of the A77 to motorway standard?

Column 889

Sir Hector Monro: I assure my hon. Friend that we shall never forget the roads in Ayrshire while he is such an effective Member of Parliament for the Ayr constituency. Naturally, we are continuing the consultations on a link road to the M74. That will be an important decision when it comes, as will be the decision on further progress in upgrading the road from Glasgow to Ayrshire.

Scottish Homes Rents

5. Sir David Steel: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the increase in Scottish Homes rents in the borders; and for what reasons this increase is greater than the current notional rate of inflation indicated in the Government's guidelines. [24226]

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: In December 1994, the Scottish Homes board decided to increase its rents for 1995-96 throughout Scotland by an average of 4.2 per cent., but actual increases will vary in accordance with size, type and situation of house. Increases on this basis were applied to its stock in the borders as well as its stock in other parts of the country. It is for Scottish Homes to review rents, taking into consideration the resources required to manage and maintain its housing stock.

Sir David Steel: How can the Minister possibly justify rent increases in the public sector of almost 5 per cent. in my constituency when the Government are trying to hold down wage claims and offering nurses in my constituency an increase of 2.5 per cent.? Surely there must be some consistency in Government policy, or are we to await the arrival of the right hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Forsyth) for a change of policy?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: As the right hon. Gentleman knows, housing benefit to the extent of £900 million is being made payable this year to those tenants who need assistance. The actual average increase in rents in Scotland is 28.78p per week, which is certainly well below the English figure, which is almost £10 more per week. The real reason is that, if the relevant housing association wishes to spend sufficient funds on management and maintenance, it will put up rents accordingly. It is for the Scottish Homes board to decide what the level of rents should be for Scottish Homes stock. No direction is given by Ministers.

Rail Sleeper Services

6. Mr. Tyler: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the implications for the Scottish economy of the decisions taken to date on the continuation of rail sleeper services from other parts of the United Kingdom. [24227]

10. Mr. Galbraith: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met the directors of ScotRail to discuss rail closures. [24234]

Mr. Lang: Although responsibility for railway matters rests with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport, I have been taking a close interest in these matters. My right hon. Friend and I agree that the Scottish economy will continue to derive substantial benefit from the continuation of rail sleeper services to and from Scotland and that such sleeper services remain important. I met the director of ScotRail on 28 March 1995. We discussed a wide range of matters relating to rail services in Scotland.

Column 890

Mr. Tyler: If the Secretary of State has been taking such a close interest in the future of sleepers, will he consider the problem of the sleeper service between the west country and Scotland which, according to the timetable which we now have in our hands, is to disappear this weekend, yet which his colleagues in the Department of Transport have said carries 32,000 people a year, requires a minimal subsidy to maintain it and is of huge importance to the tourist industry at both ends of the line?

Can the Secretary of State explain why there has been minimum consultation with the tourist boards and why the economic effects of the closure have not been properly identified either by him or by his colleagues in the Department of Transport? Is it not a scandal that the service is to disappear this very weekend?

Mr. Lang: The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the subsidy on the Plymouth sleeper is about £44 per passenger per trip. That amounts to about £1.4 million per annum for a sleeper service that is roughly half occupied most of the time. However, he will be reassured to know that the London-Penzance sleeper is included in the public service requirement for the Great Western franchise.

Mr. Galbraith: The Secretary of State may have been taking a close interest in these matters, but he does not seem to be doing anything about them. Does he realise that not only the sleeper services but the overnight seating service to Scotland are being affected? Does he realise that there will be cuts in the west coast line, the highland line and the Kyle of Lochalsh line? Does he realise that privatisation means not only cuts but an increase in charges? When will he stand up for the railways and stop lying down in front of the privatisation express?

Mr. Lang: The hon. Gentleman will have the opportunity to put all those relevant points during the consultation process that is now in train. The hon. Gentleman talks about rising costs, but I have to point out that rail fares rose by 22 per cent. more than inflation in the past 10 years. As a result of the arrangements that are now being made for the future, they will fall in real terms in the years ahead.

Mr. Macdonald: Does the Secretary of State not realise that, unless he seizes the opportunity, which he now has, thanks to Highland regional council, to save and to develop the sleeper service to Fort William, he is really saying that he does not care if--

Madam Speaker: Order. I think that the hon. Gentleman and the House are aware that the hearing on this matter has been set down for 1 June. The matter is therefore sub judice. I just caution hon. Members as to the questions that they may put. Having given that caution, I will hear the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Macdonald: Is the Secretary of State aware that the message that he must give to the people of Scotland is that, in transport terms, all parts of Scotland, including in particular regions such as the highlands and far north-west Scotland, must be connected on equal terms with the rest of the UK? If he does not send that message, he is saying that he does not care about the highlands' social and economic future.

Mr. Lang: I care very much about the social and economic future of the highlands, as of the rest of Scotland. That is why I warmly welcome the decrease in

Column 891

unemployment, which is continuing after a fall for three consecutive years, and the growth in new employment and economic activity throughout the highlands and the rest of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman will, of course, have the opportunity to make the points that he has raised in the consultation process, but the announcement by the director of franchising underlines, for the first time, the continuing guarantee attached to the vast and overwhelming majority of rail services in Scotland. They have never had that before.

Mr. McFall: In Perth and Kinross, the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State have been banging on about the integrity of the Union. Does the Secretary of State accept that the logic of that statement means that there should be adequate rail access to all parts of the UK, including the highlands? Recent decisions threaten both day and overnight services, tourism and the economic prosperity and livelihood of the inhabitants of the region. Does he agree with the Scottish people that, if the Prime Minister is sincere in his desire to listen to people, he will do so and immediately abandon the folly of rail privatisation in Scotland?

Mr. Lang: The hon. Gentleman seems to be completely unaware that the decline in the quality of this country's rail services began when they were nationalised. Nationalised ownership and the starvation of resources undermined the quality of rail services. We are now creating not only a basic guarantee of almost all existing services, but the opportunity for new investment, new commercial management and an improved commitment to the delivery of a quality service. That should lead to a service that is not only cheaper, but better.

Hospital Wages and Service Provisions

7. Mr. Foulkes: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last met the chairs of NHS trusts in Scotland to discuss wages and service provision in Scottish hospitals. [24229]

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: My noble and learned Friend the Minister of State last met NHS trust chairmen on 20 January 1995 to discuss a range of issues.

Mr. Foulkes: Will the Minister admit that his written answer to me yesterday shows that the Government's claim that nurses across Scotland would be offered 3 per cent. is entirely bogus? The truth is total chaos and disarray, with only eight of 47 trusts offering 3 per cent. without strings, and all the others seeking to reduce nurses' conditions of service by removing statutory holidays or making other changes? Will he now reintroduce collective bargaining on a national basis, and give all nurses the increase that they richly deserve--without strings and without delay?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The answer is no, but the hon. Gentleman will be glad to hear that the three trusts in Ayrshire have said that they intend to offer 3 per cent., dependent on local negotiations. The great advantage of local negotiations is that local pay can be an important step towards making services more responsive to local needs. Local pay does not necessarily mean less pay; it means fair pay, taking local circumstances properly into account.

Mr. Ernie Ross: Once the actual pay round is settled, what evidence does the Minister have that national health

Column 892

service trusts will take account of service provision? The model used by the Scottish Office to get rid of acute beds is under severe strain, particularly in Dundee. We were originally given assurances that Kings Cross hospital would be used as a back-up if the economic model for acute beds did not work out. We are now told that Dundee Teaching Hospitals NHS trust has considered closing that hospital. What evidence does the Minister have that NHS trusts have taken account of the fact that the economic model used by the Scottish Office to get rid of acute beds may not work?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The principle is clear: no patient should be discharged from hospital unless there is a bed provided within the local community. Ministers are not entitled to play any part in clinical decisions which are necessarily matters for the health service. The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to see that Dundee Healthcare trust made an offer of 3 per cent. with conditions. The £143 million extra for the health service this year will provide considerable assistance towards settling these matters

satisfactorily.

Mr. George Robertson: When the Minister last met the chairmen of the health trusts, did he express any shame about the fact that his Department is now pushing the NHS towards privatisation in Scotland? Is not the evidence for that seen in what is happening in Stonehaven today, where Grampian health board is being obliged by the Scottish Office to offer any or all hospital services or even the entire new hospital to the private profit-making sector? When the Prime Minister told the Tory party conference in 1991 that there would be "no . . . privatisation of health care, neither piecemeal, nor in part, nor as a whole",

people listened to him. Now, they will concentrate on what is happening in Stonehaven. Has not the contrast between those words and the reality of privatisation in the health service led the Conservative party in Scotland into electoral freefall?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: If the hon. Gentleman feels like that, why did he say in January

"We are not opposed to public/private partnerships"?

That is precisely what we are talking about, together with improved services. The great advantage of introducing private sector finance is to make public sector funds go much further while providing improved services.

On Stonehaven, Grampian health board is consulting on the way forward. It intends to take the lead and to tender for the service. It is likely to involve local trusts and general practitioners, but there is the possibility of opening up the tender to private providers. That has not been ruled out. The decision as to who wins will depend upon the level of services and the provision of a better service for patients.

Skillseekers Training Programme

8. Mr. Connarty: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the budget estimate for the skillseekers training programme for 1995-96; and how many jobs with training the programme is expected to provide. [24231]

Mr. Kynoch: The 1995-96 budget for youth training in Scotland, which includes the skillseekers training programme, is over £98 million. It is estimated that, for

Column 893

1995-96, the percentage of young people training under skillseekers who will have employed status will be around 50 per cent.

Mr. Connarty: That is a very vague answer from the Minister. I was given better figures by Scottish Enterprise, which estimates that £70 million will go into the skillseekers programme, and it is looking for 30,000 jobs with training. Does the Minister share with me the concern of everyone to whom I have spoken in the past month that the vouchers-for- training scheme is just the beginning of Tory party dogma--the thin end of the wedge--of vouchers for nurseries and vouchers for education? Young people will be out in the market grasping their vouchers and those who will be taking them on will be thinking, "How can I get this person through this job with the least money coming from the employer?" Every person to whom I have spoken has said that there is no increase in money for monitoring. How do the Government expect young people to obtain decent training without anybody supporting them? Why is there no more money for monitoring to ensure that the skillseekers programme is not just another youth rip-off scheme?

Mr. Kynoch: The hon. Gentleman might be interested to know that between Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the total figure estimated for 1995-96, excluding modern apprenticeships, is 35,000. The hon. Gentleman is a little out of date with his figures.

I understand that, on Friday, the hon. Gentleman is due to visit his local enterprise company, Forth Valley Enterprise, which started the skillseekers programme in April. If the hon. Gentleman were to consult more widely, he would find that it has been widely accepted by employers around the country. Local enterprise companies have considerable flexibility in the way in which they can operate within specified guidelines.

Just the other day, I introduced a new pilot scheme in Fife. It is called fast track and trainees will be able to undertake full-time education as well. On monitoring, payment will be made only after very stringent checks against the stringent standards that will have been set by the enterprise companies.

Mr. Stewart: Does my hon. Friend agree that skillseekers, which started in Grampian in his area, has been a marked success throughout Scotland? Is it not significant that this, together with every other training initiative introduced by the Government, has been automatically opposed by the Labour party?

Mr. Kynoch: My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. The Opposition are full of words, but little action. My hon. Friend referred to skillseekers being piloted in Grampian. He would be interested to learn that in Grampian the number of young people with employed status has risen from 422 at the end of December 1991, under the youth training scheme, to 3,726 at the end of March 1995 under skillseekers. That speaks louder than words.

Farm Land

9. Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many acres of Scotland are currently farmed; how many farm acres are currently set aside; at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [24233]

Column 894

Sir Hector Monro: In 1994, there were just over 6 million hectares of agricultural land in Scotland. About 93,000 hectares were in set-aside. Payments amounted to £25.7 million.

Mr. Greenway: I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that farmers and farm workers in Perthshire are enjoying increasing prosperity? Would that not be put at risk by a tax-raising Scottish Assembly?

Sir Hector Monro: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to suggest that Scottish farm incomes have risen substantially. Last year, they increased by no less than 25 per cent. to £454 million, the highest figure for 17 years. As he said, Perth and Kinross is the sort of area that benefits substantially from the money going into both less-favoured areas and non- LFA areas. The future looks good, provided people make the right decision tomorrow.

Nuclear Waste

11. Mr. Khabra: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what assessment has been made of the safe disposal of nuclear waste generated in Scotland; its current and future costs; and if he will make a statement. [24235]

Sir Hector Monro: A White Paper which sets out the conclusions to the Government's review of radioactive waste management policy and covers wastes arising in Scotland is to be published in the summer.

Mr. Khabra: The Minister failed to identify radioactive waste disposal locations in his reply. Is it not utterly irresponsible of the Government to sell the nuclear industry to finance tax bribes, while neglecting the safety of the people of Scotland? Will he give an assurance that enough is being done for the people of Scotland?

Sir Hector Monro: The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question shows that he has been misinformed. His main question related to nuclear waste generated in Scotland, and there is no problem with that. Low-level waste from Hunterston, Torness and Chapelcross is taken to Drigg. High-level waste is retained on site for 50 years. There is no problem because, whoever is the owner or manager of Scottish Nuclear's output from its generating stations, the whole process is carried out extremely safely.

Unemployment, Perth and Kinross

12. Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the number of unemployed in Perth and Kinross; and what the figure was in December 1992. [24236]

Mr. Kynoch: Unadjusted claimant unemployment in the parliamentary constituency of Perth and Kinross stood at 2,647 in April 1995. In December 1992, the figure was 2,791.

Mr. Marshall: Does my hon. Friend agree that the most important employer in Perth is General Accident? Has that company not made it clear that a tax regime resulting from a tax-raising Scottish Assembly or the higher taxes of an independent Scotland would cause it to reconsider its employment policy in Perth?

Mr. Kynoch: My hon. Friend mentioned just one of the major employers in Perth and Kinross. He was right

Column 895

to imply that the people of Perth and Kinross have to decide clearly what they believe to be best for the future, not only for Perth and Kinross but for Scotland. There is no doubt that the proposals for a tax-raising Parliament and for an independent Scotland would severely jeopardise prospects not just for indigenous industry but for inward investment in both Scotland generally and Perth and Kinross in particular.

Mrs. Fyfe: There is no one more accident prone in Perth and Kinross than the Tory candidate. Has the Minister taken the trouble to read the House of Commons research paper that tells him that in April 1990 there were 2,143 claimants in Perth and Kinross and by April 1994 the number had risen to 2,647? A whole year later there is no change for the better. Does he realise that that is an increase of 24 per cent. and that today 11 people chase every job advertised in Perth town centre? Is that not why the Tories are in meltdown in Perth and Kinross?

Mr. Kynoch: The hon. Lady is in her usual negative mode. I had rather hoped that she might talk about some significant good news. For example, Monax Glass, the manufacturer of engineering and scientific glassware in Perth, announced an investment of £250,000 last month, creating 40 jobs in Perth. Indeed, Perth Fresh Meats Ltd., which I visited last week and which is part of the Beck Food group, announced that it was to create more than 110 new jobs in Perth. The hon. Lady is in her usual negative mode. If she were to talk Scotland and Perth and Kinross up, she might do a little better for Scotland.

Mr. Gallie: Does my hon. Friend agree that training for jobseekers is just as important in Perth and Kinross as it is in other parts of Scotland? Will my hon. Friend consider just what the minimum wage on offer from the Opposition would do to the Government's training programmes?

Mr. Kynoch: My hon. Friend is exactly right. The policies on the minimum wage and other employment characteristics, which are supported by all Opposition parties, would be severely detrimental to Scottish business and the Scottish economy as a whole.

Transport Network

13. Mr. Eric Clarke: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to meet the Scottish Trades Union Congress to discuss Scotland's transport network. [24237]

Mr. Lang: I meet the Scottish TUC from time to time to discuss a variety of issues relating to the Scottish economy, including transport matters.

Mr. Clarke: Is the Secretary of State aware that people in Scotland fear that the Government are opting out of the transport network in privatising British Rail? Will the subsidies and the guarantees of fares being kept down in the south of England be the same for the whole of Scotland?

Mr. Lang: The fares guarantee will apply to the whole of the United Kingdom. As to the Government opting out, on the contrary, we are privatising the rail network because we believe that there is need for improvement which can be provided only by the private sector. The past

Column 896

few years have not demonstrated that the public sector has the capacity to deliver the quality of rail service that this country needs.

Mr. McLoughlin: When my right hon. Friend next meets the TUC, will he point out the great advantages that are being brought about by air liberalisation and allowing competition to take place between British Midland and British Airways, to the benefit of all passengers in Scotland who use those routes?

Next Section

Home Page