§ "The Board of the Scottish Development Agency shall, as soon as is practicable, examine the means whereby the activities of the Scottish Development Agency shall be decentralised to local offices in the major centres on Scotland and at the same lime to arrange for the provision of a fixed annual level of spending autonomy to these local offices'.—[Mr. Crawford.]
§ Brought up and read the First time.
§ Mr. Douglas Crawford (Perth and East Perthshire)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Myer Galpern)
With this we shall take new Clause 7—Internationalism of the Scottish Development Agency—'The Board of the Scottish Development Agency should as soon as is practicable, examine means whereby the Scottish Development Agency can establish permanent bureaux in major world trade centres and to thereby arrange for the immediate technological transfer of new industrial thinking and developments to the Scottish Development Agency's headquarters in Scotland.'
§ Mr. Crawford
These clauses are aimed at decentralising the activities of the Scottish Development Agency within Scotland and internationalising its activities beyond Scotland. It is no use substituting for centralisation in London centralisation in Glasgow or Edinburgh. The Highlands and Islands, the Borders, the North-East and the South-West of Scotland often feel as remote from Glasgow or Edinburgh as they do from London.
One of the dangers of our time is the personal alienation that individuals experience in our society. We see it today in the new regions of Scotland—a monstrous bureaucratic growth imposed on local government in Scotland, conceived by the last Labour Government and brought to birth by the Conservative Government. We do not want industry and employees in various parts of Scotland to feel as remote and distant from the Agency as thousands of Scots are already beginning to feel from regional government in Scotland.
In Committee, the Government moved an amendment to promote industrial democracy, which I supported. I do not 326 think that it would be easy to promote industrial democracy in Scotland from remote and centralised offices in Glasgow or Edinburgh. The creation of local offices throughout Scotland might help the more efficient promotion of industrial democracy. It is essential to take the Agency to all parts of Scotland and to see it operating on the ground.
This is not a matter of increased bureaucracy; it is the exact opposite. If there were a small but highly directional group of offices in about half a dozen major centres in Scotland, fewer people would need to be employed at head office. The existence of local offices will imply a smaller travelling budget than if executives are based at Edinburgh or Glasgow. Moreover, there will be a less top heavy bureaucracy at headquarters.
The last line of the new clause refers toa fixed annual level of spending autonomy".This means that each year local offices will be given a fixed amount to spend on a given project without reference to headquarters. This will encourage more local enterprise in the offices. This is not directed to Strathclyde. Thanks to Westminster's neglect of Scotland as a whole and to the fact that Glasgow and much of the rest of Strathclyde have almost uninterruptedly, for the last half century, been under the care and control of the Labour Party, Strathclyde has 115 of the 121 worst areas of urban and social deprivation in the United Kingdom. For that reason a major job has to be carried out by the Agency in Strathclyde—but not to the detriment of other parts of Scotland. The Minister said in Committee that the Agency is for the whole of Scotland, and not for any one part. If that is so, its activities should be decentralised by way of local offices throughout Scotland.
I turn to new Clause 7, which leads on from the decentralisation of the Agency within Scotland to its internationalisation beyond Scotland and overseas. We envisage that the Agency should act as an interface between all parts of Scotland and the international trade centres of the world. There are many international and multinational companies in Scotland, and we welcome their presence. They are there because of the excellent work carried out by the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) and 327 other more localised agencies. Part of the reason for the Scottish Council's success in this matter has been that it has had, from time to time, representatives in overseas countries and at major trade centres. It has always maintained fairly close links and friendship with business interests overseas.
The new clause seeks to make the Scottish Council-type of arrangement more formal, more permanent and also more answerable.
Technology is nothing if it is not international. Technological developments throughout the world have to be developed. Their implications must be transmitted with speed to Scotland if Scotland is to benefit from them and from technological investment, and if jobs are to be created. It is essential to have these technological developments monitored on the ground where they are taking place and to have joint ventures and licensing as well as export opportunities which can increase employment if they are transferred to Scotland from international offices overseas. If they are transmitted quickly back to Scotland, they must go from the Scottish Development Agency to the local offices throughout Scotland.
The Scottish National Party does not accept that United Kingdom embassies and consulates overseas represent Scotland's interests as well as specific Agency representation abroad. Let us take, as an example the United States. Various states or even parts of states, have commercial offices in London seeking to sing the industrial and investment praises of those areas or States. It is the view of my party that Scotland has a far greater international status than the states of the United States.
What exists overseas should be more than mirrored by the activities of the Scottish Development Agency overseas. That does not mean a lot of offices. I am talking in terms of a few—probably fewer than 10—bureaux overseas. Scotland has a great level of friendship overseas. If we are to promote Scotland's commercial advantage overseas, it is essential that we have these international bureaux and that they transmit what they discover and, we hope, translate it into job terms, not in one part of Scotland but throughout Scotland, in a decentralised way, via the local offices.
§ 7.45 p.m.
§ Mr. Grimond
The Bill will inevitably greatly increase the already serious top heavy bureaucracy in Scotland, but there is no way out of that. That is a serious argument against the Bill.
The hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. Crawford) is optimistic in thinking that if the Agency has local offices this will necessarily lead to less bureaucracy. I hope that it will, but there is the danger that we shall have an enormous central office and big local offices as well. If I were certain that that would not happen—I am very far from being anything like certain—I should support the plea that it should operate, as far as possible, on a decentralised basis.
I believe that we should look at the experience of the Highlands and Islands Development Board. It found that it was getting much too centralised in Inverness, and too far away from the businesses and areas which it was supposed to be serving. To do it justice, I must point out that it has tried to decentralise by appointing local representatives all over the Highlands. Therefore, I should have a lot of sympathy if this Agency could decentralise its activities, although I do not believe that it will be able to decentralise all of them. I take this view so long as it does not mean a still further increase in its non-productive staff.
I am seriously concerned about the number of people and the amount of resources given to the bureaucracy—resources spent on energy; indeed, resources of every sort—which are unproductively employed. That is a major factor in our economic distress, inflation and unemployment.
I turn to new Clause 7. I am glad to hear that what I first of all gathered was an exercise in modern witchcraft in the drafting of the clause was a mistake. As originally drafted, it appeared that the headquarters were to be removed by technological transfer to an area of new industrial thinking. This conjured up visions of a marvel of modern technology. I am still surprised that so much stress is put upon new industrial thinking and development. Those features are important, but they can probably be attracted.
I support the idea that smaller Scottish industries, such as the fish processing and 329 textile industries, need to be kept in touch with overseas markets. A great deal of processed fish is sold in the United States. The fish is processed in small factories, by small firms. They are having difficulty in keeping in touch with the market, finding out about developments, and undertaking the right sort of packaging. Scotland has many of these small industries, especially in the rural areas.
I hope that the Agency will look at the promotion of Scottish products both at home and, as new Clause 7 indicates, abroad, and ensure that they are properly advertised, presented, packaged and assisted in transport and the whole process of marketing. Whether it is necessary to write that into a new clause is a matter for discussion. I have no doubt that the Government will say that the Agency can do all these things if it wants to, and will therefore ask why we should seek to put them in specifically.
It is important to draw attention to the need to keep in touch with local development and small industries in Scotland and not to become fixed on Glasgow and Edinburgh, which are regarded, in many ways, as just as remote as London. It is important to emphasise that in many ways smaller industries in Scotland need assistance, admittedly over capital, but primarily over marketing.
§ Mr. MacCormick
I agree with the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) on the question of bureaucracy, and whether, in relation to new Clause 6, by creating local offices the amount of bureaucracy involved is multiplied. I think not, because the new clause would give autonomy to local offices. Rather than having a large monolithic body based in Edinburgh, with one overlord making all the decisions, under our suggested framework there would be people in different areas of Scotland with authority to take decisions.
The right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland appositely mentioned the Highlands and Islands Development Board. The present Secretary of State is to be congratulated on setting up that board. One of his main reasons for doing so was, presumably, that that part of Scotland had had particular problems which could best be tackled by an office located in the Highlands. I agree that the more that the board can decentralise 330 its activities the better. However, even accepting that, and if one accepts that the board should continue when the Agency is established, it is logical to accept that the activities of the Agency, too, should be split up and proper consideration devoted to all parts of Scotland.
The whole lesson of life in all Scottish rural areas for the past 50 or 60 years has been that the tremendous centralisation of decision-making—this applies not only to parts of Scotland, but to Scotland in relation to the rest of the United Kingdom—has led to a diminution of initiative and economic activity in the more far-flung parts. For that reason, I wholeheartedly support the new clause.
§ Mr. George Thompson (Galloway)
There has been mention of the North and of the Islands. I want to point out how we in the South expect the new clause to affect us.
The clause is crucially important to the more remote and more peripheral areas. It would appear from looking at a map of the United Kingdom that the South of Scotland is not a peripheral area, yet within England and within Scotland it seems to be just that.
§ Mr. Thompson
I mean that when studied on the map it will be seen that because the North of England is south of the border, the area north of the border is peripheral inside Scotland. I hope that I have now made the geographical position sufficiently clear.
The remote and peripheral areas are largely rural areas. We in the rural areas have the right to expect that the Agency will do great and good things for us. The clause seeks to ensure decentralisation. We want decentralisation, not to weaken the Agency but to ensure that its attention is not totally directed to the Glasgow-Aberdeen-Edinburgh triangle and to ensure that it can act positively in areas such as the South of Scotland or in the Highlands and the Islands.
Decentralisation to local offices in the major centres does not necessarily mean decentralising to major towns. A relatively small town can be a major centre in relation to a large area of the country. In the South of Scotland it might mean 331 a local office in Dumfries and one in the Border regions. It might prove desirable to have even greater decentralisation. An office in Dumfries and one on the eastern borders would make good sense, because the local office would be in close, frequent and personal contact with the regional council. I consider this to be eminently desirable.
In my area of Galloway we are looking to the Agency to continue the good work that has been begun by the development commission and the regional council in preparing the ground for new factories. We are looking to the Agency to continue the good work of the Small Industries Council in negotiating small nursery factories in the area. These efforts can be best prosecuted if we have local offices of the Agency right there in the midst of the developments.
The development commission started on the first phase of its work last year. It has paid a return visit to Galloway. I should say "Dumfries and Galloway". I must not allow my chauvinistic Gallovidianism to take away my knowledge of reality. On this visit it started work on the second phase. The Agency will be responsible for carrying that work forward. It is up to the House to ensure that the Agency has the best means available to achieve its goal in Dumfries and Galloway and in the South of Scotland in general. I believe that the goal can be nothing less than the rejuvenation of the old province of Galloway so that there will be a proper balance of population, and not more and more retired people coming in and a flood of young folk going out because there are no jobs for them.
§ Mr. John Robertson (Paisley)
Does the hon. Gentleman have it in mind to get rid of the real influence which prevents development in Galloway? Galloway is probably the most feudalistic part of the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. Thompson
I think that I might be treated as being the first blast of the trumpet against feudalism in Galloway.
§ Mr. Thompson
I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for enabling me to proclaim myself as the first blast of the trumpet against feudalism in Galloway. 332 I hope that for many years Galloway will continue to blast the trumpet in the same direction. These are interesting sidelines, but I am sure that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, would call me to order were I to go further.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
A more appropriate instrument would be the bagpipes. The hon. Gentleman could blow them.
§ Mr. Thompson
I take your point, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
We also hope to have more jobs available in Galloway for young people who wish to stay in their own countryside. Many of our people like to return to their own countryside to live and to work. We should make this possible for them. This means a reversal of the depopulation from which we have suffered. The Agency, if it carries out these functions properly, will not only improve the industrial life of Galloway. It will contribute extensively to an enhanced social, cultural and intellectual life in the area.
I have mentioned Galloway not because I think that it is the only area worthy of the consideration of the House but because I think it can be taken as a sort of paradigm case which might be taken as an example of what could be expected in other areas. The achievement of this goal will require a great deal of effort and money.
I come finally to the second point that we seek to make in the clause. It would be most valuable if we introduced a certain amount of local autonomy in spending by local offices of the Agency. In Galloway and the rural areas of Scotland we are expecting great and good things from the Agency, and it is up to us to support these ideas. I commend the new clauses most heartily to the House.
§ Mr. Millan
I agree that we want the Agency to have genuine all-Scotland functions and not to neglect any part of Scotland. I have made clear previously that this will be the position and I have equally made clear on numerous occasions that the main industrial and environmental problems are located in West Central Scotland, particularly in the Strathclyde region, and they must be the first priority for the Agency. It is not intended that more rural areas should be 333 neglected. Co-operation within the Scottish Development Agency and the Small Industries Council for Rural Areas of Scotland, which is provided for later in the Bill, will mean that right from the start the Agency will have staff who are well versed in the problems of rural areas and small towns and who have a creditable record of success in dealing with these problems over many years. This expertise will go straight into the Agency and it will start with a staff familiar with these problems before it gets staff familiar and competent to deal with the major industrial problems of West Scotland. There is no question of rural areas being negected in any way.
We have already made arrangements for the Development Commission's activities in the South-West and, more recently, in the Grampians area to be continued. There will be a handing-over date to the Agency to ensure that there is no question of these activities slowing down. I have met the chairman of the Development Commission, who is, incidentally, based in London, to discuss these matters. The kind of visit to which the hon. Member for Galloway (Mr. Thompson) referred was not a visit by a local office but a visit by Donald Chapman from London, It was not necessary to have a local office to deal with the difficult problem in South-West Scotland.
While we recognise that there should be all-Scotland activity, we are not anxious or willing to write such an organisational matter into the Bill. This is an area in which the Agency must decide for itself. Depending on its attitude towards this matter and the expertise it achieves in dealing with problems, it may want offices in other parts of Scotland. It will start with offices in Glasgow and Edinburgh. The Scottish Industrial Estates Corporation is based in Glasgow and the Small Industries Council for Rural Areas of Scotland is based in Edinburgh. The Agency may wish to have local offices elsewhere in Scotland and no doubt it will be willing to listen to representations made by hon. Members and others, but we should not write into the Bill that the Agency must have local offices in the so-called major centres of Scotland. I say "so-called" because it was clear from the description of the new clause by at least one hon. Member that the term "major centres" could cover a very large 334 number of individual localities in Scotland.
To lay an obligation on the Agency to establish a whole series of offices in different parts of Scotland as one of its first obligations would be getting our priorities out of joint. I could not possibly recommend that to the House.
The second part of the new clause provides for fixed annual levels of spending autonomy, and this again is a matter to be decided by the Agency. Whatever happens, it is unlikely that local offices will be able to go on their way without reference to headquarters. As the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) rightly said, if one spreads activities too thinly one can create bureaucracy and delay decision-making rather than improve it. One thing worse than having no one on the spot is having someone on the spot who has no authority and has to keep referring back to headquarters.
The same kind of principle applies in the case of overseas representation by the Agency. There is nothing in the Bill to prevent the Agency from doing that in the best way it thinks would suit its activities, whether by permanent representation, agents or any other means. The Bill includes powers to promote Scottish industry, and there is a specific provision allowing the Agency to operate outside Scotland in any way it thinks is calculated to facilitate the discharge of its functions under the Bill. Everything is provided for in the Bill.
The Agency would be able to operate in other parts of the world and have representation abroad to take advantage of developments of benefit to Scotland, but we should not write this in as an obligation, as it would be if new Clause 7 were accepted. That would be a misdirection of effort and we would be asking the Agency to direct its attention in early days in misdirected ways instead of getting on with the real job that needs to be done. Later, this would be a matter on which the Agency could make up its own mind.
Without going into the merits of these clauses in any great detail, because the merits are less important than the principle behind them, I cannot recommend the House to accept them.
§ Mr. Rifkind
While expressing my general agreement at what the Minister has said on both these new clauses, I have to say that the House is clearly grateful to the hon. Member for Perth and East Perthshire (Mr. Crawford) for introducing them. The wording of his new Clause 7 was corrected, and I was surprised that he did not find it necessary to clarify the wording of new Clause 6 also. It reads:The Board of the Scottish Development Agency shall, as soon as is practicable, examine the means whereby the activities of the Scottish Development Agency shall be decentralised to local offices in the major centres on Scotland…".I know that the Scottish National Party sees itself as a separatist party, but I did not realise that it regarded Scotland as an island on its own.
§ Mr. Crawford
That is a printer's error, and there is another in new Clause 3 where one of the hon. Member's colleagues has been given a new Christian name.
§ Mr. Rifkind
I was not sure whether it was a printer's error or not. In its present form it is equally consistent with the policy of the hon. Member's party. I am surprised that he should wish to dissociate himself from the present wording. The Table Office clearly realised the true intentions behind the new clause and simply wished to fit in with his objectives. I accept his clarification on that point.
It is important to stress that although the hon. Member has put forward a superficially attractive proposition with which at first glance no reasonable man could reasonably disagree, we have to go further and examine whether in practice his suggestion would produce benefits for Scotland that would justify the substantial expense involved. The clause looks innocuous. It simply refers to decentralising to local offices in the major centres of Scotland. The Minister has pointed out that nothing in the Bill would prevent the Agency decentralising if it wished. By putting a statutory obligation upon the Agency to decentralise to the major centres, we should be left to decide what was meant by "major centres". The hon. Member for Argyll (Mr. MacCormick) took the view that his constituency was a major centre and the hon. Member for Galloway (Mr. Thompson) seemed to feel the same.
§ Mr. MacCormick
I hope that the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind) will check Hansard, because there he will see that I did not mention Argyll as being a major centre. I merely said that the Highlands and Islands Development Board was a useful analogy.
§ Mr. Rifkind
I regret if I misunderstood the hon. Member, but when he said that an Agency with headquarters in Glasgow could not deal with matters in Argyll as efficiently as an office located in Argyll I assumed that he must be regarding Argyll as a major centre. He has not bothered to rise to answer that point, and I can only assume that he accepts what I have said to be true. No doubt he and his hon. Friends would regard Dumfries, Galloway and East and West Dundee and other areas as major centres.
Clearly, if we were to accept the clause we should be incurring substantial expenditure. It is not simply a question of establishing an office, buying property and employing staff. We have to consider the duties that the sponsors of the clause wish to give these offices. They do not intend to ask the offices only to find out what is locally required or to advise the head office what might be desirable. They want to provide a fixed annual level of spending autonomy for the offices throughout Scotland. That is a terrifying suggestion because it would mean that anyone who approached the Agency for financial help for any industrial purpose might encounter totally different criteria in, say, Argyll than in Dumfriesshire.
§ Mr. Robertson
Ten minutes ago I was convinced of the Government's case on this matter, but having heard the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind) I have grown to the opinion that locating the office anywhere away from Edinburgh would be satisfactory.
§ Mr. Rifkind
The hon. Member for Paisley (Mr. Robertson) should bear in mind where the headquarters of the Agency will be. They will be closer to his constituency than mine, and on that basis it is I, not he, who should be calling for decentralisation. If he thinks that Glasgow's interests are totally contrary to those of Paisley, he will no doubt inform his right hon. Friend of that fact and 337 perhaps a special exemption will be made to benefit his constituents.
If there are to be large numbers of offices, each with autonomous power to decide on applications for financial help, that must mean that different criteria will be applied in different parts of Scotland, not necessarily because of differing needs but because of the views of the officials as to what the suitable criteria should be. This will make a mockery not merely of parliamentary supervision of the Agency but of any overall comprehensive effort to ensure that the work of the Agency is relevant to Scottish needs. Hon. Members cannot escape from the fact that what they are suggesting is an irresponsible solution which will be enormously expensive and for which there will be very little to show.
I turn now to new Clause 7 which appears in its new manifestation. We have to consider whether the expense involved will justify the very sparse benefits that the sponsors of the clause appear to be conceding would arise from the clause if it were accepted. From the wording, it would appear that the only, or certainly the major, reason for establishing permanent bureaux in major world trade centres is that they wouldthereby arrange for the immediate technological transfer of the Scottish Development Agency's headquarters in Scotland to new industrial thinking and developments.The purpose is therefore to have information collected overseas to ensure that the Agency is aware of those developments.
When there is already a whole collection of embassies throughout the world, even if they were, according to the dream of the Scottish National Party, Scottish embassies, it would be a duplication of effort also to have permanent bureaux and would impose a massive burden upon the Agency simply for the accumulation of information. The Scottish National Party might want to improve the services offered by the Scottish Council or by private means, or even by the British embassies, but to suggest that the limited funds available should be squandered on expensive bureaux is quite wrong. After all, if these offices are to be set up overseas they cannot be in shanty huts in the back streets of London, New York or 338 Tokyo. Presumably the hon. Member who moved the clause envisages offices that would give an impression of dignity and importance, and that would mean expenditure. If the hon. Member thinks it is worth spending millions merely to accumulate information which could be easily acquired by a British embassy or the Scottish Council, he is doing Scotland and his constituents a disservice.
§ Mr. Gordon Wilson
I was disappointed by the speech by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind). He showed signs of having closed his mind to the reception of new ideas. There is nothing particularly political in these suggestions. If he cared to study the terms of the clauses, he would see that they do not impose a strict direction upon the Agency. The Government have been much more open-minded in their approach. Nevertheless, I am disappointed that the Minister could not see his way to accepting the clauses, which, as he says, set out a principle.
The first point to be borne in mind is that the clause provides that the board shallas soon as is practicable, examine the means whereby"—and so on. In other words, at the outset the indication is given to the Agency that Parliament does not wish to see a tightly-centralised organisation. The clause does not lay down specific conditions affecting the Agency, and how is should proceed; it allows it a timetable by which it may consider the proposition, and it gives the Agency the right to consider how the various activities should be arranged, both at home and abroad.
New Clause 7, contrary to what was said by the hon. Member for Pentlands, does not involve great expense. The equivalent Irish organisation has six offices throughout the world, in major centres. If Ireland, which is much smaller than Scotland, can accept the proposition that it is useful and worth while to have offices of this kind, there is no reason why we should not do the same.
Developments abroad concerning employment which might arise from new technology would constitute essential information for the Agency, which could key in quickly on new developments. One of the successes of the Scottish Council resulted from an early understanding of 339 the developments taking place, many years ago, in electronics and the opportunities that they would give to Scotland in particular.
Leaving aside the external operations of the Agency—on which I understand, from what the Minister said, there is no restriction anyway—and passing on to its more important domestic activities, I think that certain points can be made, First, the clause would not necessarily involve huge operations in the centres referred to; indeed, many of the advisory functions—the giving of advice on what sort of suitable expenditure might be made by way of loans or development grants—could be carried out through voluntary committees of those who are knowledgeable about the locality, with the expertise, managerial ability and knowledge of what is available coming from the officer of the Agency on the spot. To cut down duplication of offices, there is no reason why the Highlands and Islands Development Board should not undertake agency activities on the Agency's behalf. That may be one of the things the Government have in mind, because there will be these two organisations in any event.
There is a plethora of development agencies in Scotland. One of our problems is that they sometimes trip over one another. An advantage of the Agency is that we shall be able to benefit from coordination of activities, but we must see that that co-ordination does not become rooted in centralisation, which could nip off true knowledge of what is happening in other areas of Scotland. If, at the outset, we build into the structure measures to prevent that, the Agency will be in a stronger position.
As reference was made to my area, I should like to give one example of the way in which savings may be made. A political dog fight is going on between the Tayside Regional Authority and the Dundee District Council. They have two separate industrial development opera-
§ tions neither of which is at present satisfactory, in my opinion. When I wrote to a foreign firm which wanted information about Dundee, I had to give seven separate addresses and telephone numbers of those who specialise in different matters.
§ There is no reason why the office of the SDA in the Tayside area should not be much more acceptable than the un-co-ordinated activity now going on, because it is not involved in local politics to that degree. That is one example of the way in which we might even prevent the existence of two offices by having one which is organised or aided by the Agency. Similar arrangements could be entered into with certain local authorities which have their own organisations.
§ There is advantage in decentralisation. The principle was accepted by the formation of the Highlands and Islands Development Board, which is responsible for some spending. It should be made clear that there would be ceilings, so that major projects would have to go to the head office of the Agency for consideration of the amount that could be spent and the desirability of the project. That would key into the national economic pattern which might be developing.
§ Another example is the Offshore Supplies Office, which has recently felt it necessary to open a small outpost in Aberdeen, as the Under-Secretary of State for Energy specified. There was obviously a need for that. Why should not similar action be extended to the operations of the Scottish Development Agency?
§ I warmly recommend the House to support the new clauses.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 13, Noes 229.341
|Division No. 347.]||AYES||[8.23 p.m.|
|Bain, Mrs Margaret||Penhaligon, David||Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E)|
|Crawford, Douglas||Reid, George|
|Evans, Gwynfor (Carmarthen)||Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Grimond, Rt Hon J.||Watt, Hamish||Mr. Douglas Henderson and|
|Howells, Geraint (Cardigan)||Welsh, Andrew||Mr. George Thompson.|
|MacCormick, Iain||Wigley, Dafydd|
|Abse, Leo||Graham, Ted||Ogden, Eric|
|Allaun, Frank||Grant, George (Morpeth)||O'Malley, Rt Hon Brian|
|Anderson, Donald||Grocott, Bruce||Orbach, Maurice|
|Archer, Peter||Hamilton, James (Bothwell)||Ovenden, John|
|Armstrong, Ernest||Harrison, Walter (Wakefield)||Padley, Walter|
|Ashley, Jack||Hart, Rt Hon Judith||Park, George|
|Atkins, Ronald (Preston N)||Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy||Parker, John|
|Atkinson, Norman||Hatton, Frank||Parry, Robert|
|Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (Heywood)||Hayman, Mrs Helene||Pavitt, Laurie|
|Bean, R. E.||Heffer, Eric S.||Peart, Rt Hon Fred|
|Bennett, Andrew (Stockport N)||Horam, John||Perry, Ernest|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Howell, Denis (B'ham, Sm H)||Phipps, Dr Colin|
|Bishop, E. S.||Hoyle, Doug (Nelson)||Price, C. (Lewisham W)|
|Blenkinsop, Arthur||Hughes, Rt Hon C. (Anglesey)||Price, William (Rugby)|
|Boardman, H.||Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen, N)||Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn (Leeds S)|
|Booth, Albert||Hughes, Roy (Newport)||Richardson, Miss Jo|
|Boyden, James (Bish Auck)||Hunter, Adam||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)|
|Bray, Dr Jeremy||Irvine, Rt Hon Sir A. (Edge Hill)||Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock)|
|Brown, Hugh D. (Provan)||Irving, Rt Hon S. (Dartford)||Robertson, John (Paisley)|
|Brown, Robert C. (Newcastle W)||Jackson, Miss Margaret (Lincoln)||Roderick, Caerwyn|
|Buchanan, Richard||Janner, Greville||Rodgers, George (Chorley)|
|Butler, Mrs Joyce (Wood Green)||Jay, Rt Hon Douglas||Rodgers, William (Stockton)|
|Campbell, Ian||Jeger, Mrs Lena||Rooker, J. W.|
|Canavan, Dennis||Jenkins, Hugh (Putney)||Rose, Paul B.|
|Cant, R. B.||Jenkins, Rt Hon Roy (Stechford)||Ross, Rt Hon W. (Kilmarnock)|
|Carmichael Neil||John, Brynmor||Sandelson, Neville|
|Carter, Ray||Johnson, James (Hull West)||Sedgemore, Brian|
|Carter-Jones, Lewis||Johnson, Walter (Derby S)||Shaw, Arnold (Ilford South)|
|Cartwright, John||Jones, Alec (Rhondda)||Sheldon, Robert (Ashton-u-Lyne)|
|Clemitson, Ivor||Jones, Barry (East Flint)||Short, Rt Hon E. (Newcastle C)|
|Cocks, Michael (Bristol S)||Jones, Dan (Burnley)||Short, Mrs Renée (Wolv NE)|
|Cohen, Stanley||Kaufman, Gerald||Silkin, Rt Hon John (Deptford)|
|Coleman, Donald||Kelley, Richard||Sillars, James|
|Colquhoun, Mrs Maureen||Kilroy-Silk, Robert||Silverman, Julius|
|Conlan, Bernard||Kinnock, Neil||Skinner, Dennis|
|Cook, Robin F. (Edin C)||Lambie, David||Small, William|
|Corbett, Robin||Lamborn, Harry||Snape, Peter|
|Craigen, J. M. (Maryhill)||Lamond, James||Spriggs, Leslie|
|Crawshaw, Richard||Lestor, Miss Joan (Eton & Slough)||Sproat, Iain|
|Crosland, Rt Hon Anthony||Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)||Stallard, A. W.|
|Cryer, Bob||Lipton, Marcus||Stoddart, David|
|Cunningham, G. (Islington S)||Litterick, Tom||Stott, Roger|
|Davidson, Arthur||Lomas, Kenneth||Strang, Gavin|
|Davies, Bryan (Enfield N)||Loyden, Eddie||Strauss, Rt Hon G. R.|
|Davies, Denzil (Llanelli)||Luard, Evan||Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley|
|Davis, Clinton (Hackney C)||Lyons, Edward (Bradford W)||Swain, Thomas|
|Dean, Joseph (Leeds West)||McCartney, Hugh||Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton W)|
|Delargy, Hugh||McElhone, Frank||Thomas, Ron (Bristol NW)|
|Dempsey, James||MacFarquhar, Roderick||Thorne, Stan (Preston South)|
|Doig, Peter||McGuire, Michael (Ince)||Tierney, Sydney|
|Dormand, J. D.||Maclennan, Robert||Tinn, James|
|Douglas-Mann, Bruce||McMillan, Tom (Glasgow C)||Tomlinson, John|
|Dunn, James A.||McNamara, Kevin||Tomney, Frank|
|Dunnett, Jack||Madden, Max||Torney, Tom|
|Dunwoody, Mrs Gwyneth||Magee, Bryan||Varley, Rt Hon Eric G.|
|Eadie, Alex||Mallalieu, J. P. W.||Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne V)|
|Edelman, Maurice||Marquand, David||Walden, Brian (B'ham, L'dyw'd)|
|Edge, Geoff||Marshall, Dr. Edmund (Goole)||Walker, Terry (Kingswood)|
|Edwards, Robert (Wolv SE)||Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)||Ward, Michael|
|English, Michael||Maynard, Miss Joan||Watkins, David|
|Ennals, David||Meacher, Michael||Watkinson, John|
|Evans, Ioan (Aberdare)||Mellish, Rt Hon Robert||Weetch, Ken|
|Ewing, Harry (Stirling)||Mikardo, Ian||Weitzman, David|
|Fernyhough, Rt Hon E.||Millan, Bruce||Wellbeloved, James|
|Fitch, Alan (Wigan)||Miller, Dr M. S. (E. Kilbride)||White, James (Pollok)|
|Fitt, Gerard (Belfast W)||Miller, Mrs Millie (Ilford N)||Whitlock, William|
|Flannery, Martin||Molloy, William||Willey, Rt Hon Frederick|
|Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)||Moonman, Eric||Williams, Alan Lee (Hornch'ch)|
|Foot, Rt Hon Michael||Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)||Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton)|
|Forrester, John||Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)||Wise, Mrs. Audrey|
|Fowler, Gerald (The Wrekin)||Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)||Woof, Robert|
|Fraser, John (Lambeth, N'w'd)||Moyle, Roland||Wrigglesworth, Ian|
|Freeson, Reginald||Mulley, Rt Hon Frederick||Young, David (Bolton E)|
|George, Bruce||Murray, Rt Hon Ronald King|
|Gilbert, Dr John||Newens, Stanley||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Ginsburg, David||Noble, Mike||Mr. Thomas Cox and|
|Gould, Bryan||Oakes, Gordon||Mr. Joseph Harper.|
§ Question accordingly negatived.