§ Q5. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister if, in view of the heavy legislative programme, he will now increase the number of Ministers at the Scottish Office.
§ Q24. Mr. Liptonasked the Prime Minister if, in the interests of economy, he will reduce the number of Ministers at the Scottish Office.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir.
§ Mr. HamiltonDoes not the Prime Minister recognise that the Scottish Ministers are among the most hardest-worked in the Government and probably the most incompetent? In view of the fact that there is a considerable legislative programme in front of the Scottish Grand 1187 Committee, will not the right hon. Gentleman consider appointing a Minister at least for the night shift?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree that my right hon. and hon. Friends are extremely hard working. They are also immensely able. If the hon. Gentleman is referring to the Scottish Education Bill—
§ Mr. HamiltonNo, the Housing Bill which puts up the rents.
§ The Prime MinisterAs the hon. Gentleman is dealing with the problems of legislation, the problems arose over the Scottish Education Bill. The plain fact was that the Committee took 24 sittings and 76 hours as a result of the hon. Gentleman's filibuster. The Bill has only three Clauses. That compares with the Scottish Education Bill in 1969 which had 30 Clauses and which took only four sittings—10 fewer than the hon. Gentleman insisted upon.
§ Mr. LiptonIs it not quite ridiculous that a place with a population of 5.2 million should require five Ministers and two Law Officers to look after it, whereas London, with a population of 7.7 million, has not got a single Minister allocated to it to look after its interests? Does not this show a grotesque lack of proportion? Will the Prime Minister just get on with this?
§ The Prime MinisterI am well aware of the hon. Gentleman's views, because I see that he was quoted in the Glasgow Herald today as saying that if London, with 8 million people, can manage without a Minister of its own, is it not ridiculous that this little enclave in Scotland should have this terrific Ministerial superstructure? I see that the Glasgow Herald also commented that the hon. Gentleman was not now confining his activities to Soho nightclubs and other dark places, but had turned his attention to Scotland. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman will endear himself to his colleagues in Scotland or the Scottish people, and I do not share his views.
§ Mr. JenningsIf, instead of accepting the advice of the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton), my hon. Friend appointed a Sassenach to guide the Scotsmen, would that not be much better?
§ Mr. JenningsIn view of experience on the Education (Scotland) Bill, is my right hon. Friend aware that that was no filibuster, that I should have been sacrificing my rights as Chairman if I had allowed it, that it was a highly skilful political exercise, all within the bounds of order, and that if he wishes to appoint a Sassenach to guide the Scots, in view of my experience on that Committee I am quite prepared to extend my activities at his invitation?
§ The Prime MinisterI say to my hon. Friend that to describe a political action in our debating chambers as a filibuster is no reflection on the Chair; nor does it exclude a very capable political operation. In fact, if it succeeds, it usually combines skill with determination.
Concerning my hon. Friend's offer as a Sassenach to go North of the Border, from the experience which both he and I have shared, I think that he is probably welcome to that appointment.
§ Mr. RossIs the Prime Minister aware that when he spoke about the filibuster of my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) the Chairman of the Committee assured him that it was no filibuster? Might I further point out that my hon. Friend was not a member of the Committee, and that may have had something to do with the fact that we got through the Bill in a very moderate time indeed.
If the Prime Minister wants to get expedition on Scottish matters, first, will he try to get a majority of Scottish Members instead of being in such a complete minority? Secondly, will the Prime Minister try to show that his Ministers are not so incompetent as the one who was in charge of the Education (Scotland) Bill?
§ The Prime MinisterI was going to say that I thought that the right hon. Gentleman had been worn out by his hon. Friend, but I gather that it was the right hon. Gentleman who did the delaying, not his hon. Friend.
In the Scottish Grand Committee we are following the perfectly normal drill in this House, and we shall succeed with it.