§ 1. Mr. Budgenasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the progress towards a Scottish Assembly.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Would the right hon. Member be kind enough to raise his point of order at the end of Questions so as to save Question time?
§ The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Bruce Millan)The Government's plans and programme were set out in paragraph 6 of last November's White Paper. A large number of organisations and individuals have submitted comments on the proposals. Others have still to comment. We are considering these comments carefully.
§ Mr. BudgenI offer the Secretary of State my personal congratulations upon his appointment. However, does he realise that it would be completely wrong to make any provision for a Scottish Assembly unless and until Parliament has decided that there should be such an Assembly?
§ Mr. MillanObviously the Assembly will not come into operation unless Parliament so decides. I believe that Parliament will so decide. We have already had a long debate about this and no doubt we shall have other debates.
I thank the hon. Gentleman very much for his kind remarks.
§ Mr. Donald Stewartl should like to extend to the right hon. Gentleman congratulations from the SNP Bench, and our best wishes to him in his new task.
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to reject the kind of advice that he has just been given? Does he realise that there is already strong feeling in Scotland about the Government's slippage in their timetable for an Assembly Bill and that any further delay will be greatly resented and will see the Government's boots off when the time comes?
§ Mr. Millanl thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind opening remarks. There has been and will be no delay on the devolution commitment. I have already made clear that the Bill will be introduced at the start of the next Session and it will go through the House during the Session.
§ Mr. William HamiltonWill my right hon. Friend have another look at the idea of a referendum among the Scottish people to ascertain whether they want complete separation, as advocated by the SNP, or a measure of devolution, as advocated by the Government?
§ Mr. MillanI do not think that we need a referendum on separation, as it is already clear that the overwhelming majority of the people of Scotland do not want it.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI should like to continue the happy note on which Question Time today has been started by offering my felicitations and those of my right hon. and hon. Friends to the right hon. Gentleman in his new tasks. As long as he continues them in the interests of Scotland, we shall certainly do what we can to support him.
Concerning the Assembly legislation, will there be one Bill or two Bills?
§ Mr. MillanI thank the hon. Gentleman very sincerely for his kind words.
I think that the hon. Gentleman and the House know that whether there should be one Bill or two Bills is still under consideration.
§ 5. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will pay an official visit to Rosyth Dockyard to discuss with the workers there the 1351 implications of separatism for their job prospects.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Harry Ewing)As the Government have no plans to separate Scotland from the rest of the United Kingdom and are confident this will not happen, my right hon. Friend would be wasting the workers' time to discuss this particular issue with them.
§ Mr. HamiltonIs my hon. Friend aware that it is the official policy of the SNP to have a separate Scottish navy? Does he think that three men in a boat could keep Rosyth Dockyard going? Will he read very carefully the official pronouncement from the SNP in the recent defence debate? It is an extremely important statement.
§ Mr. EwingAs I understand the SNP. far from being three men in a boat, it consists of nine men and two women in a boat. On policy they are certainly all at sea. I agree that this is a very serious issue indeed for the workers at Rosyth Dockyard. From my knowledge of these workers—some of my family are at Rosyth Dockyard—I can say that they are very much aware that if the SNP ever got its way—and that certainly will not happen—they would all be out of a job. That mesage is coming home more and more.
§ Mr. MacCormickDoes not the hon. Gentleman appreciate that the Question is a disreputable subterfuge designed to mislead the people of Rosyth into believing that what the hon. Gentleman has said would happen? Does he not agree that the strategic situation is almost certain to force the Labour Government to close Rosyth Dockyard?
§ Mr. EwingThe hon. Gentleman should appreciate that, because of the statement in the defence debate, he and many of his colleagues at the next election will be sunk without trace.
§ Mr. SillarsIs the Minister aware that this whole exchange is based on the erroneous assumption that an SNP Government will be Socialist, and therefore rational in its approach to defence? Would he care to re-assess his answers on the much more accurate supposition that an SNP Government dominated by 1352 the philosophy of the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. Henderson) might be a good bit to the Right even of the Conservative Party, leading to a bigger army, navy and airforce?
§ Mr. EwingI am glad that my hon. Friend appreciates that the SNP is on the extreme Right of Right-wing politics in this country. I agree that there is no possibility of the SNP ever controlling the country. SNP Members should look at their voting record. They have voted more often with the Conservatives than have the Ulster Unionists. I agree with what my hon. Friend said, that on defence strategy there is no doubt what would happen if the SNP were ever to control Scotland. SNP Members quote Norway. Time and again we have the example of Norway thrown at us. There is no doubt that national service would be a feature of the SNP defence policy in Scotland.
§ Mr. YoungerIs the Minister aware that the suggestion of a visit to Rosyth is quite inadequate for the purpose which the hon. Gentleman has in mind? Is he not aware that he would have to visit Kinloss, Leuchars, Lossiemouth, Faslane and Kirkcudbright to tell the employees there that they would be out of a job?
§ Mr. EwingThe hon. Gentleman should appreciate that from today my right hon. Friend has 10 days at his disposal. I do not know what he wants to do in the next 10 days. It may be that a tour of the defence establishments in Scotland to convey that information is in his mind.
§ 8. Mr. Cryerasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received for the separation of Scotland.
§ Mr. Harry EwingI refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I have just given to my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, Central (Mr. Hamilton).
§ Mr. CryerDoes my hon. Friend agree that the SNP constantly states that it will separate companies, nationalised industries and the Armed Forces? At the same time, the SNP qualifies those statements with talk about independence. Does my hon. Friend agree that perhaps the message is getting through to the Scottish 1353 people that separation is really the SNP's policy and that that realisation is reflected in the opinion polls showing Labour in the lead? Does my hon. Friend also agree that the problems of capitalism—which has produced a high level of unemployment—will never be solved by splitting the working class?
§ Mr. EwingWe are all aware that the problems of the workers on Merseyside and in Birmingham, Glasgow and Dundee are exactly the same and that a concerted effort is required by all on a United Kingdom basis to solve the workers' problems. A divided working class has always been a defeated working class. If the SNP succeeds in dividing the working class, it will be acting in the interests of the capitalist class which finances its policies. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) should contain himself. He is always on about crime, and he is in danger of being charged with a breach of the peace if he does not behave himself. I agree with my hon. Friend that what he said is reflected in the improved position revealed in the System Three opinion poll in the Glasgow Herald on Monday morning.
§ Mr. SproatWill the hon. Gentleman join me in welcoming the increasing interest of both sides of the House in devolution and note that there is hostility to the idea not only from Scottish Members but from English Members and Scotsmen sitting for English constituencies? If the Government insist on trying to push through the House legislation that puts at risk the unity of the United Kingdom, they will meet implacable hostility. What they are now witnessing is the beginning of the British backlash to plans that would lead to separation.
§ Mr. EwingThat is the view that the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Sproat) has held consistently, and I pay him credit for that. The other side of the story is that there is a great deal of support from English Members representing English constituencies for the views held by the Government and for the legislation which we shall put through the House. The right hon. Member for Sidcup (Mr. Heath) and the former Prime Minister are good examples of that support.
§ Mr. Gordon WilsonThe hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) appears to be unaware that the SNP won yet another election last night. Given that a recent parliamentary answer shows that only 4.1 per cent. of parliamentary time on the Floor of the House is devoted to Scottish matters, does not the Minister accept that the invasion by English Members of Scottish business is intolerable?
§ Mr. EwingThe SNP should be eternally grateful for the 4.1 per cent. of the time on the Floor of the House which is devoted to Scottish matters, because, judging by the speeches which members of the SNP make in that time, they are fortunate that they do not have to speak for any longer. The people of Scotland are becoming more aware of the separatist views of the SNP. That is why the percentage of people in Scotland who want separation has dropped from 26 to 15. As for what the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson) described as the invasion by English Members of Scottish Question Time, the English Members' intrusion, especially from the Government Benches, has considerably increased the standard.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Hon. Members more and more are debating matters instead of seeking knowledge.
§ Mr. BuchanDoes my hon. Friend recall the magnificent display of solidarity between the workers of Scotland and the workers of England in the fight over Chrysler? Does he also recall that the main contribution of the SNP on that issue was, first, to try to split the workers of both countries by saying that Coventry should go to the wall, and, secondly, a week later, in an agricultural debate, to say that all the money should be used to plant trees instead of helping both sets of workers?
§ Mr. EwingIn addition to what happened during the debates on Chrysler, it is worth recording that the SNP still hopes—and I understand that the hon. Member for Banff (Mr. Watt) is on record as saying this—that Chrysler, Linwood will fail, because plainly, for the SNP to succeed, the Scottish economy and industry in Scotland must collapse. Therefore, I understand that 1355 the SNP still lives in hope that Chrysler will fail.