HC Deb 20 November 1974 vol 881 cc1300-4
9. Mr. MacCormick

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will seek powers to postpone the reorganisation of local government in Scotland.

27. Mr. Alexander Fletcher

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will review the operation of the new regional authorities in the light of the commitment to establish a directly-elected assembly.

30. Mr. Corrie

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if, in view of the intention to set up a directly-elected assembly in Scotland, he will seek powers to hold up the present changes in local government in Scotland till the whole situation has been reconsidered.

Mr. William Ross

I apologise for the shortness of the Answer. No, Sir. To halt reorganisation now would cause serious dislocation to Scottish local government.

Mr. MacCormick

Does the Secretary of State appreciate that the action of his Government in proposing to bring forward soon a Scottish Assembly makes his answer quite unsatisfactory? Even if he is not prepared to look at the whole field of Scottish local government, will be consider the position of Strathclyde, which is a monster, with which the people are getting fed up already, even though it has not come into being?

Mr. Ross

If there were any difficulty regarding the size of Strathclyde it would be the same whether it were administered by the Scottish Office or by a Scottish assembly. We discussed this during the passing of the Bill relating to this question, and I can provide quotes on what was said at that time if any hon. Member wishes. I see the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Younger), who made those remarks, now sitting opposite. He advised us to concentrate on getting local government right. It was the Conservatives' decision. I am no great lover of Strathclyde, but I recognise the practical fact that we have had elections and that the changes are now fairly well in train. It would be a recipe for chaos to make any different statement on the matter now.

Mr. Fletcher

Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that I wrote to him in March this year suggesting that at least the setting up of the regions should be postponed until more was known about a Scottish assembly? Will he also acknowledge that since then he and his colleagues have decided that there shall be an assembly in Scotland? Is not the right hon. Gentleman adopting his usual inflexible habit of not recognising the chaos, conflict and, indeed, contradiction, to say nothing of the expense, of putting a directly elected assembly on top of the regions in Scotland?

Mr. Ross

It was the hon. Gentleman's purpose also at that time to have an elected assembly, and we drew the matter to the attention of the Minister in an amendment to delay implementation for another year to give more time for consideration. The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that we cannot simply take the regions and do something about them and forget that they are all of a piece with the division of the various functions of the existing local authorities between regions and districts. It is just not possible to do what the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Mr. Sillars

Does not the Secretary of State agree that the Government's commitment to create a Scottish development agency knocks into a cocked hat the argument that Strathclyde must be created for strategic and economic reasons? Secondly, will my right hon. Friend take into account the extreme difficulty some of us have in arguing with Scottish working people and asking them to stick to the social contract, when some of the highest paid salaried staff in local government are getting enormous wage increases, some of them for doing less work?

Mr. Ross

I am equally concerned about any empire-building that may be going on under the new set-up. We have some experience of that elsewhere. I hope some of these lessons will be learnt. I do not agree with what my hon. Friend says about the Scottish development agency making Strathclyde unnecessary. We have already had meetings about the Scottish development agency—some are in progress now—and about the way in which the two authorities will fit in. I think that we shall be able to help Strathclyde with the Scottish development agency, and certainly not hinder it.

Mr. Corrie

Is the Secretary of State aware of the strong feeling that exists among the people that Bute County and Ayrshire should be a region and should not be part of the Strathclyde monster? By how much will the rates rise for the people in those counties because they are part of Strathclyde and attached to Glasgow?

Mr. Ross

I would have welcomed the presence of the hon. Gentleman when we debated this matter. His predecessor did not take exactly that attitude. My attitude on Strathclyde at that time was fairly well known.

Mr. Dalyell

To return to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Sillars), and without trespassing on Question 31, what reply has the Scottish Office had to its departmental circular on the question of excessive salary increases and the expansion of local authority staffs?

Mr. Ross

My hon. Friend has tabled a Question on that subject. I suggest that he waits for the answer.

Mr. Buchanan-Smith

I appreciate that the Secretary of State does not want to put back local government in Scotland, but will he assure us that once we know more about the powers and mechanics of the assembly he will look at the consequences for local government in Scotland and in due course be prepared to consider whether any changes are necessary, once we know the form it is all taking?

Mr. Ross

Once we know the form it is all taking, it may not be for us to make the change. It may be for the assembly to make the change. We must appreciate that we do not make changes in relation to functions and give new responsibilities, only to usurp them before we have handed them over.

Mr. Grimond

I appreciate the Secretary of State's difficulties, but is he aware that many people of all walks of life, including the Moderator—that turbulent priest—have been criticising the dangers of the situation? We are reluctant to have the local authorities upset again, but it might be unwise to leave a completed organisation for the assembly to have to unscramble. Will the right hon. Gentleman give thought to whether there are any means of postponing the full reconstruction?

Mr. Ross

I do not think that there are. We have already had the elections, and the people who have been elected are already doing part of their work. What the right hon. Gentleman suggests would be a recipe for chaos. Once we come to consider the assembly and discuss the relationship between the assembly and local government it may become clear what should be done. These things cannot be rushed.