§ 1. Mr. Tim Rentonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland how much money the Government have now spent in adapting the Royal High School in Edinburgh for a Scottish Assembly.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Harry Ewing)£650,000 has been spent in purchasing the former Royal High School site.
§ Mr. RentonAt a time when economic pressures in the United Kingdom are so great that they are likely to cause serious trouble, is it not foolish for the Government to pursue a further element of disintegration in our society? Will Ministers pause and think again, and postpone the devolution Bill until the next General Election, when it can be discussed with the whole electorate?
§ Mr. EwingIt is not the Government's purpose to pursue any element of disintegration in our society. One of the fundamentals of the devolution proposals is the preservation of the economic and political unity of the United Kingdom. We are committed to put this Bill on to the statute book, and we will do so in the next Session.
§ Mr. Gordon WilsonWill the Minister resist English interference in Scottish affairs and admit that the amount of money being spent on the Scottish Assembly is a mere bagatelle compared with the £2½ million coming from Scottish oil every day?
§ Mr. EwingI always welcome interest rather than intervention in Scottish affairs from all parts of the House and all parts of the United Kingdom. This sort of interest will help to preserve the unity of the United Kingdom. As far as costs are concerned, the amount spent on the Royal High School, and in particular on its conversion, is very good value for money.
§ Mr. SillarsWould it not help to get things in perspective if the Minister took 403 the costs involved in devolution and compared them with the cost of our joining the European Economic Community and of direct elections to Strasbourg?
§ Mr. EwingI am not necessarily sure that both matters are related. We have studied the costs involved in devolution and we are satisfied that we will get adequate value for money.
§ Mr. GalbraithCan the Minister explain to the House why he is so sure that this expensive Assembly will stop the disintegration of the United Kingdom? Is it not a fact that it will be a stepping stone to the creation of a separate Scottish State?
§ Mr. EwingI know that that is the view which the hon. Member has held for some time and which he has expressed forcibly. However, it is not a view which is shared by many hon. Members of his own party. There is no evidence, in looking at other parts of the world where there is a devolved system of government, to show that this will lead to separation. I do not think that the hon. Member should take the threats of the Scottish National Party all that seriously.
§ Mr. Alexander WilsonI hope that my hon. Friend will not listen to advice given by the Scottish National Party in relation to English interference. Will he also—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."] I am not reading. I resent that remark. Will my hon. Friend also ask the Scottish National Party what it intends to do with the Scottish coal industry if it does not want English interference? The Scottish coal industry is dependent on English coalfields.
§ Mr. EwingIn many respects my hon. Friend has hit the nail on the head. Hitherto, the Scottish National Party has not been in a position to talk about policies, whether in relation to the coal industry, housing, education, the health service or anything else. On the day the Scottish Assembly elections are held, politics in Scotland will be transformed and the SNP will no longer be able to campaign on slogans.