§ 25. Miss Herbisonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the question of the crofter's house to which the hon. Member for Lanarkshire, North, has drawn his attention in correspondence.
§ Mr. MaclayAs I have already explained in correspondence, the Crofters Commission decided after consulting me as landlord and granting the crofter a hearing, that the croft house in question was required for the future occupation of the croft and should not be separated from the land. The dispossessed absentee crofter's request to retain ownership of the house was accordingly not approved by the Commission whose decision in these matters is final.
§ Miss HerbisonIs the Minister aware that in his latest letter to me on this case there was a number of statements which just were not true? What is he doing in the meantime to find out the exact truth about this matter? Is it not a serious matter that a house built by this man's father, with no help from anywhere financially—the local authority or the Government—should be taken from him and that he should be dispossessed?
§ Mr. MaclayThe hon. Lady is, I think, very well aware of the complexities of this whole crofting problem and the problems which the Crofters Commission finds itself up against. It should be borne in mind that in this case the former tenant has a house and a job and had never worked on the croft and that the new tenant, a married man with three children, has crofting experience and is urgently in need of a house.
§ Miss HerbisonIt is quite untrue to say that this man has done no work on the croft. The Minister has that information. Is he aware that there have been houses lying empty for ten years where the new crofter and his family could have lived?
§ Mr. MaclayIf the hon. Lady can say where the facts are wrong, I will, of course, follow them up and find out whether they are wrong.
§ Miss HerbisonBut I have given them to the right hon. Gentleman.