HC Deb 30 April 1964 vol 694 cc573-5
17. Mr. W. Hamilton

asked the Secretary of State for Industry, Trade and Regional Development what protests he has received from local authorities and other bodies in Scotland concerning the proposed development plan for South-East England so far as these affect his department.

Mr. Heath

I have had no representations from local authorities, but I had useful discussions about the South-East Study and White Paper with the Scottish Board for Industry and the Scottish Trades Union Congress when I visited Scotland on 17th April. The Scottish Council's Economic Development Committee has also made its views known to my Department.

Mr. Hamilton

The right hon. Gentleman must pt up to date. Is he aware that I received a letter from the Lochgelly Town Council this morning—and it indicated that a copy had been sent to the right hon. Gentleman—complaining about the South-East Study and its effects on Scotland? Is he aware that confirmation of these fears is contained in a speech made by the Minister of Housing and Local Government recently, when he said that 270,000 workers from Scotland and the North-East would emigrate to the South-East between now and 1981? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think, in view of that, that the fears of Scotland are justified; that is, unless and until the Government modify the existing policies which they are pursuing?

Mr. Heath

When I receive a copy of the letter to which the hon. Member has referred I will give it my full attention. I have stated the position as it is now, to my knowledge. On the first part of his supplementary question, I have explained to the Scottish Board for Industry and to the Scottish T.U.C. that I do not believe that these fears are justified. Of course, there will always be some movement between the regions. Naturally that will happen, hut the figures on which the South-East Study is based are those set out in the White Paper on Central Scotland and the movement from Scotland as a result of the success of the Government's policies.

In the South-East Study there are most definite safeguards for Scotland and for the North-East of England. These are that the industrial development certificate policy will remain as it is now, that Scotland and North-East England will continue to get priority in investment and that they have had the assurances which we have given about the inducements remaining in the growth areas and public investment also remaining there.

What is more, there will be several years—it will take us into the 'seventies—before the South-East Study requires industrial development. This, therefore, means that Central Scotland and North-East England will have the advantage of several years in this respect, and I hope that they will take the utmost advantage of it.

Mr. Jay

Has the right hon. Gentle-man noticed that the South-East Study assumes that the rate of net immigration into the South-East per year over the next 20 years will be greater than it was over the last 10 years, and is not this an extremely bleak outlook for the other areas?

Mr. Heath

The right hon. Gentleman is overlooking the fact that of the 1 million who will be moving into the South-East area, a considerable number of them will have retired and will have come from other parts of the country. They will not, therefore, be requiring work. Further, a considerable proportion will have been immigrants from the Commonwealth and foreign countries—and the figures for migration from the rest of the country are based on the White Papers for Scotland and North-East England.

Mr. Jay

But does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that both factors are allowed for in the figures of immigration over the last 10 years, and that, despite that, the rate will increase, according to the White Paper, in the next 20 years?

Mr. Heath

I will check up on the White Paper, but I think the right hon. Gentleman is not taking those factors into account.

Back to