§ 3. Mr. Peter Morrisonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the present estimates of the cost of servicing the proposed Assembly in Scotland.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Harry Ewing)I have nothing further to add at this stage to the proposals outlined in Part VI of last November's White Paper on devolution and to the statement made in the House on 14th April by my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council.
§ Mr. MorrisonDo the proposals outlined in the White Paper include the salaries of all the extra civil servants who will be needed for the Assembly? Will it be only the Scottish taxpayer who will pay the cost?
§ Mr. EwingThe proposals in the White Paper took account of the salaries of the additional members of staff who would be required to service the Scottish Assembly, and beyond that I do not want to go at this sage.
§ Mr. HendersonDoes the Minister agree that it would reduce the cost if the 434 money from English companies which is going behind the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Sproat) and his friends to thwart the will of the Scottish people were devoted to improving the benefits for the Scottish people?
§ Mr. EwingIt is a new experience tot me to be asked to referee a fight between the SNP and the Tories: I usually promote such fights. However, I have never noticed any reluctance on the part of the SNP to accept the aid that is given to opposition parties, aid which I imagine contains some element of English money. The House will bear in mind that at a recent selection conference at Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles the short list was made up of someone from the Caribbean and someone from London. The hon. Gentleman ought not to put such questions to me.
§ Mr. SillarsDoes my hon. Friend find it remarkable that questions of this nature were never raised when the United Kingdom was to enter the Common Market? Will my hon. Friend seek out and publish the amount of money involved for the British taxpayer in servicing Strasbourg and Brussels salaries, and so on, and point out that it will probably cost a great deal less to service democracy in Scotland than bureaucracy in the Common Market?
§ Mr. EwingIt is fair to say that my hon. Friend paints with a rather broad brush. My attitude to the cost of the Scottish Assembly is that democracy cannot be too expensive. The working class of this country has had experience of democracy being expensive before, when it was not represented because of the cost. No one can argue—certainly it cannot be argued from the Government Benches—that democracy can be too expensive. We justify the cost of the Assembly on that basis.
Mr. RilkindWill the hon. Gentleman confirm that of the extra 1,000 civil servants who will be required for devolution, according to the White Paper, only 200 will be needed to service the Assembly? If 800 will be required because of the Government's insistence that there should be an Executive superimposed on the Assembly, will the Government take that into account in considering the changes that are to be made from the White Paper?
§ Mr. EwingI notice that at each succesive Question Time the hon. Gentleman slips that much further on the subject of devolution. I am beginning to wonder where he stands between his hon. Friends the Members for North Angus and Mearns (Mr. Buchanan-Smith) and Aberdeen, South (Mr. Sproat).
§ Mr. SpeakerI cannot call anyone else on this Question. It is 10 minutes to three and we are only on Question No. 3.