HC Deb 17 February 1966 vol 724 cc1510-1
9. Mr. Edward M. Taylor

asked the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he has had with Scottish interests regarding the provision of alternative industries in areas affected by coal closures.

Mr. Darling

In addition to the discussions on this subject which my right hon. Friend held with the Board of Trade Principal Controller for Scotland and representatives of other Departments during his visit to Scotland on the 4th January, I have had discussions with Scottish industrialists, the Scottish T.U.C., Members of Parliament and representatives of the local Authorities of Fife and Lanarkshire county councils about alternative work for miners affected by pit closures.

Mr. Taylor

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that there is need for special and urgent action here, since Scotland has been singled out for savage treatment through coal mine closures, with only 28 of the 76 pits having a guaranteed future? Has he no definite news for the Scottish miners and clergy representatives who are here to complain about the virtual annihilation of the Scottish coalfields?

Mr. Darling

I do not think that any of the representatives I spoke to in Scotland would share the hon. Gentleman's views. But, in any case, we intend to carry on with the good work started by the Government. During 1965, as compared with 1964, the rate of unemployment was considerably brought down; we gave approvals for I.D.C.s amounting to 11 million sq.ft. of factory building as compared with 6 million sq.ft. in 1964; we have had a round of advance factories and additional areas of Scotland, including the coal mining districts of Ayrshire and Lanarkshire, have been added to the list of development districts. The new proposals of the White Paper on Investment Incentives will help—

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is getting too long.

Earl of Dalkeith

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Edinburgh would be well placed to provide additional employment for displaced miners from the Lowlands and the Fife coalfields but for its cruel and unjust exclusion from the scheme for investment incentives?

Mr. Darling

There is another Question on that subject.