§ 16. Mr. David Steelasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he proposes to take following publication of the Forestry Policy Review recently published by the Forestry Commission.
§ 30. Mr. Maclennanasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement about the future of forestry in Scotland.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithMy right hon. Friends the Secretary of State, the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretary of State for Wales await the views of interested bodies on the consultative document which they published on 28th June.
§ Mr. SteelCan the hon. Gentleman say how soon it will be before the new scheme of private grants is settled and introduced, because in my constituency some applications have been hanging fire since the cessation of the old scheme? Does he agree that, in tying grants to employment, it is extremely important that the employment should be, as far as possible, rural residential employment rather than gang employment within a development area?
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI cannot give the hon. Gentleman a precise time when we shall announce our conclusions, but consultations are starting. On Friday this week my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and myself will be meeting private growers to discuss the matter. We are aware of the urgency of the matter and the concern that planting plans by private industry should not be held up. I will take into account the view expressed in the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question.
§ Mr. BrewisCan my hon. Friend tell me how much the saving is likely to be in the private sector as a result of a reduction in the dedication scheme?
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithIt is impossible to say whether there will be a saving and, if so, what it will be, because no alternative scheme has been brought forward to replace it. The purpose of the consultations is not to take grants from private woodland owners but to replace the existing dedication scheme with a more up-to-date scheme, because the present scheme was based on wartime conditions?.
§ Mr. MaclennanThe Government's proposal to cut back forestry planting from the Labour Government's target of 60,000 acres by 1976 to 50,000 acres is 1569 unacceptable throughout Scotland. Does the hon. Gentleman accept that there is widespread concern that the revised target of a 3 per cent. return on capital per annum may lead to the acquisition of areas which are not as socially desirable for planting purposes as some of the less profitable areas near the tops of the hills? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the Government, in giving consideration to this question, should note the concern which has been widely expressed that the proposals do not make adequate provision for the apportionment of land between agriculture and forestry?
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithWhether the proposals in the consultative document are acceptable to the commission depends primarily on whether land is available for it to plant. The commission would have had to come to us to seek to be relieved of the task of meeting the target set before because the land has not been available. We propose something very much more realistic in the consultative document and it is understood by the commission to be so. I agree with the last point made by the hon. Gentleman. I should like to see far better integration between agriculture and forestry because they are not in conflict and, properly managed, they can work together to improve the countryside and the economy of the countryside.