§ Mr. Donald Dewar (Glasgow, Garscadden)(by private notice) asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether an investigation or review of the overseas operations of the Scottish Development Agency is presently in progress and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. It is unseemly for hon. Members to start yelling at a Minister who has not even opened his mouth.
§ Mr. Norman Buchan (Paisley, South)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am not responsible for which Minister answers a private notice question.
§ Mr. John Home Robertson (East Lothian)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerIt cannot be a point of order for me.
§ Mr. Home RobertsonThis is an insult.
§ Mr. BuchanOn a point of order.
§ Mr. Home Robertsonrose——
§ Mr. SpeakerI shall take the point of order of the hon. Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson).
§ Mr. Home RobertsonOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) addressed his private notice question to the Secretary of State for Scotland. Whatever else the Under-Secretary of State may be, he is not the Secretary of State for Scotland.
§ Mr. SpeakerJunior Ministers very often answer questions on behalf of their Secretary of State.
§ Mr. Buchanrose——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I shall begin to regret that I granted this private notice question.
§ Mr. BuchanOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerI can guess what the hon. Gentleman is about to say.
§ Mr. Buchanrose——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The answer to the hon. Gentleman's unspoken question is that I am not responsible for the fact that the Secretary of State is not here to answer the question. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary is here.
§ Mr. BuchanThat is not my point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order is that the Scottish Office does not consist only of the Secretary of State for Scotland; it consists also, quite properly, of junior Ministers, one of whom is responsible for industry. Why is the Secretary of State not present? I believe that he is attending on the Queen today rather than on the House of Commons. As that is so, why is not his deputy with responsibility for industry here? They cannot both be paying service to Her Majesty the Queen. The Minister responsible for industry in Scotland should have been here.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That is still not a point of order for me.
§ Mr. AncramAs the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) knows, my right hon. Friend is detained by official engagements in Scotland. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate why my right hon. Friend is not here.
When in 1982 additional overseas inward investment offices in the United States of America were established for Locate in Scotland and other United Kingdom bodies, it was agreed that these arrangements should be subject to review in mid-1984. That commitment is being fulfilled and Ministers are currently awaiting a report from a group of officials in which the Scottish Office is represented. A statement would not be appropriate until this report has been received and considered by Ministers, and decisions taken, but my right hon. Friend has made clear his views on the success of Locate in Scotland, most recently in his statement to the Scottish Grand Committee on 25 June.
§ Mr. DewarI am grateful to the Minister for making it clear that this is the review that was referred to in the original response to the report of the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs two years ago. What are the terms of reference for this inquiry? Do they include the existence and future operations of the overseas offices of Locate in Scotland? At what level is the Scottish Office represented on this inquiry? Will the Minister make it clear beyond argument that the Secretary of State will fight tooth and nail to stave off any threat to an operation that has been one of the few successes that the Government have been able to point to in their dismal record in the Scottish economy?
I hope that the Minister will respond specifically to this next point. Would it not be deplorable if there were any attempt, in Government or Whitehall, to undermine Locate in Scotland's efforts to attract jobs and investment? Would not any such effort be misguided and misconceived? Why would it be inappropriate to comment at this stage when I understand that already this morning the Secretary of State has said in Scotland that he cannot imagine that its offices will be axed? Is that the Secretary of State's position, and, if so, will he accept that it is not enough to say that in passing? We want categorical assurances that this inquiry is not a prelude to another doleful chapter in the Government's record of economic failure in Scotland.
§ Mr. AncramI welcome the conversion of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) to Locate in Scotland. That is a substantial change from the grudging acceptance of its successes that we have received from Labour Members over the past three years. As I said in my answer, the review is being carried out at official level, and the Scottish Office is represented. Obviously its results will come to Ministers for consideration, and until then, and until Ministers are aware of the nature of the review, it is not possible to comment.
The hon. Gentleman asked what the review is about. As I said earlier, it is in fulfilment of the original statement that the arrangements for Locate in Scotland offices in the United States of America, and the offices of other United Kingdom bodies, would be reviewed in mid-1984. The review to which the hon. Gentleman refers is that promised review.
313 My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made his position clear in the statement that he made to the Scottish Grand Committee on 25 June, when the hon. Member for Garscadden was present. My right hon. Friend said:
In its short life Locate in Scotland has already established an excellent track record, and ther is no doubt in my mind that our decision to establish a one-door approach, designed with the paramount requirements of the customer in mind, has been a key factor in making Scotland competitive in the international market place for mobile investment projects.
§ Sir Hector Monro (Dumfries)Will my hon. Friend accept that it would be inconceivable for the four offices in the United States to be closed in view of their outstanding success in bringing high technology industry to Scotland? Will he ensure that the announcement is made as soon as possible to remove any uncertainty that has developed from newspaper reports?
§ Mr. AncramThe report from officials is due shortly. Obviously it will have to be considered by Ministers, and the decisions of Ministers will be announced in due course.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding the House of the success of the operation. My right hon. Friend told the Scottish Grand Committee:
Inquiries from overseas investors are up by 40 per cent. Visits to Scotland by overseas customers checking out the location are up by 60 per cent. and the number of new companies deciding to come to Scotland is up by 70 per cent."—[Official Report, Scottish Grand Committee, 25 June 1984; c. 56.]
§ Mr. Gordon Wilson (Dundee, East)Would it not be more appropriate for the Minister to consider that when Locate in Scotland was first established three or four years ago it was done against the opposition of the Foreign Office and the Department of Trade and Industry?
Does the Minister agree that there is considerable jealousy among certain English regions at the success of Locate in Scotland in bringing in about £410 million of major electronics investment work, with more to come? Is it not the case that there is now a sustained attack from those regions, exerting pressure on the Government, and from people such as the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, who are also attacking the system of regional grants which have benefited Scotland in the past?
Will the Minister pledge, on behalf of the Scottish Office, that in no circumstances will Locate in Scotland be dismantled, and that no offices will be shut?
§ Mr. AncramThe hon. Gentleman, as a lawyer, should not base all his statements on a speculative story in one newspaper. The purpose of the review is to try to increase inward investment for the United Kingdom as a whole, and Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. Barry Henderson (Fife, North-East)Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a great deal of evidence showing why it was wise for firms to invest in Britain, and specifically to locate in Scotland? Will he acknowledge that at last the different varieties of Opposition have seen the wisdom of my right hon. Friend's establishment of the LIS bureau? But will he point out that not only has the work of the bureau itself been important; there are his other policies, such as the specific targeting of investment incentives to groupings in which Scotland has particular expertise?
§ Mr. AncramI am grateful to my hon. Friend. Much can be learnt from the success of Locate in Scotland.
§ Mr. Dick Douglas (Dunfermline, West)Will the Under-Secretary of State accept that we are in a dilemma? 314 On 25 June we had a clear and positive statement from the Secretary of State for Scotland concerning the success of the bureau. Now the Under-Secretary cannot refute, in the name of the Secretary of State, a speculative story that suggests that the offices are in danger. Will he kill the story right now and say that all the powers of the Scottish Office will be brought to bear to ensure that the offices continue?
§ Mr. AncramI repeat that the review of the officials is not yet complete. Obviously I cannot make a statement on the review until it has been completed and Ministers have had a chance to consider it.
§ Mr. Michael Hirst (Strathkelvin and Bearsden)Does my hon. Friend agree that Locate in Scotland, which is directed by one of my constituents, has been prodigiously successful in co-ordinating the efforts to attract industry to Scotland? Is he aware that there would be justifiable anger in this House and in Scotland if the operations of LIS were to be curtailed?
§ Mr. AncramMy right hon. Friend and all of us at the Scottish Office are fully aware of the importance attached in all parts of the House — and, indeed, by the Scottish people as a whole — to the continuing success of our efforts to attract investment to Scotland. The purpose of the review is to ensure that, in co-ordinating the efforts that are made across the United Kingdom, the best possible result is achieved.
§ Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Cromarty and Skye)Will the Minister press upon his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, in the forthcoming discussions, that he should tell his ministerial colleagues south of the border that it is inconsistent for the Government continually to preach about the need for Britain to enjoy international competitiveness and even to consider an option which would lead to a diminution of international influence for the Scottish economy in trying to achieve that competitiveness? Does he agree that, were the closures to take place, it would indicate that, having already done so much damage to Scotland at home, the Government now intend to do even more damage abroad?
§ Mr. AncramIt is interesting that the hon. Gentleman who represents the SDP-Liberal alliance, has come—also rather late in the day — to welcome Locate in Scotland after the grudging acceptances given in the past to the Secretary of State. The hon. Gentleman is speculating on the outcome of a review that has not yet been completed, and I am not prepared to answer hypothetical questions.
§ Mr. Gerald Malone (Aberdeen, South)Is my hon. Friend aware that Locate in Scotland has been especially successful in attracting oil-related industries to the Aberdeen area and the Grampian region? Does he agree that the scheme has been a success and that it is part of the Conservative party's duty to sustain rather than stop success? Will he support LIS? Does he agree that it is ironic that Opposition Members, who on successive occasions — certainly for as long as I have been a Member—have poured cold water on the achievement of LIS, should now number themselves amongst its most excited and excitable supporters?
§ Mr. AncramI agree with my hon. Friend that ironically the conversion of Opposition Members has been aroused by the speculative article in a Scottish newspaper, 315 although they could not be aroused earlier by my right hon. Friend's remarks. I reiterate that my right hon. Friend has made it clear on every possible occasion that he is pleased with the success achieved by Locate in Scotland.
Mr. Bruce Milan (Glasgow, Govan)As the Under-Secretary of State has said that it is acknowledged that Locate in Scotland has been a tremendous success, why should its structure be called into question? Why should its handiwork be damaged by speculation about its future? Why cannot the newspaper story be killed off by the hon. Gentleman giving a complete assurance that the activities of Locate in Scotland will not be damaged? We should be emulating in other parts of the United Kingdom the success of Locate in Scotland instead of trying to clip its wings, as some elements in Whitehall and some Tory Members would like to do.
§ Mr. AncramI, too, regret the uncertainty that has been created by the newspaper report. Obviously I cannot place a deadline on decisions that will be taken as a result of the review. The right hon. Gentleman was fully aware, because of the statement made two years ago, that the review would take place.
§ Mr. Bill Walker (Tayside, North)Is my hon. Friend aware that I and other members of the Select Committee were especially interested in Locate in Scotland offices? We welcome the fact that the review is to take place, because it will show clearly that those offices have been successful. We as Conservatives welcome success. We shall support success, and will continue to do so.
§ Mr. AncramI am grateful to my hon. Friend for the confidence that he has expressed in Locate in Scotland. I share that confidence. I am sure that he realises, as I have explained to the House, that such a review is designed to improve inward investment and in no way to destroy it.
§ Mr. Malcolm Bruce (Gordon)For some years before I became a Member I worked in industrial development. Does the Under-Secretary of State recognise that the people involved in the business of attracting investment and jobs to Scotland are appalled at the suggestion that such a responsibility could be carried out by officers of the consular division of the Foreign Office, which even the Glasgow Herald, in its kindest words, said
are not especially noted for their expertise in handling foreign industrialists."?I regard the consular division as having the qualities of Midas in reverse — turning everything it touches into dross. Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the success of Locate in Scotland has been to the benefit of the whole of the United Kingdom economy, because it has attracted jobs that might well have gone to places other than in the United Kingdom? This service must, therefore, continue.
§ Mr. AncramThe hon. Gentleman is speculating on the outcome of the review. I have already made it clear that I am not prepared to speculate on that until the review has been completed and considered by Ministers.
§ Mr. Dennis Canavan (Falkirk, West)Will the Under-Secretary of State admit that the uncertainty would not have arisen if the Scottish Development Agency and Locate in Scotland had been accountable to a directly elected Scottish assembly? Instead the Secretary of State is just a dumb puppet in a Cabinet with not nearly enough 316 clout to take on the likes of the Prime Minister and her leather-jacketed henchmen in the Department of Trade and Industry.
§ Mr. AncramI should be more impressed by the hon. Gentleman's remarks if I had ever heard him champion LIS in the past, but all that we have ever heard from him have been stories of doom and gloom about the Scottish economy.
§ Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley)The Under-Secretary of State referred to decisions by Ministers. Will he confirm that any decision about the future of LIS or about any matters concerning the SDA will be taken by the Secretary of State for Scotland?
§ Mr. AncramI thought that I had made it clear in my original answer that the review covers all the agencies dealing not just with the SDA but with other parts of the United Kingdom. Like all other matters in Government, it will have to be considered by Ministers.
§ Mr. James Hamilton (Motherwell, North)Will the hon. Gentleman convey to his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State the justified anger of Opposition Members at the fact that it was left to the Glasgow Herald to reveal this matter? Will he also remind the Secretary of State of his earlier boasts on behalf of LIS, and will he give an assurance, as was reputed to have been given on a previous occasion, that if LIS cannot be retained he will resign?
§ Mr. AncramThe hon. Gentleman makes much of the matter being disclosed by a newspaper, but I have made it clear that the review at this time was known about. The review has been planned for some years and is now taking place.
§ Mr. Tom Clarke (Monklands, West)Does the Minister accept that lack of confidence inevitably leads to further lack of confidence? Will he make it clear today that the rumours are without foundation? If he cannot do that, will he accept that this is a resignation issue, not just for the Secretary of State for Scotland but for the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and junior Ministers at the Scottish Office?
§ Mr. AncramThe situation described by the hon. Gentleman has not arisen, so his question does not arise.
§ Mr. BuchanDoes the Minister accept that his reason for not giving an answer today is as spurious as his history because we all know that there was much opposition to the review in the committee, led by Iain Sproat and supported by the Minister now responsible for industry in Scotland? Moreover, in saying that we must wait for the review, is not the Minister leaving it to civil servants to make decisions for Scotland? If LIS is as successful as he, the only question that arises is not whether it should be abolished but whether it should be expanded, so will he now deny the rumours forthwith?
§ Mr. AncramI do not know what kind of reviews the hon. Gentleman has presided over, but the claim that background work carried out and reported to those who are to decide itself constitutes a decision is a strange extension of that concept. That may be how the Labour party works, but it is not the way in which anyone else works. The 317 review is taking place and it would be wrong for me or any other Minister to prejudge the outcome before Ministers had considered it.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I have to protect the business of the House. I have no doubt——
§ Sir Anthony Kershaw (Stroud)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerNo point of order arises while I am on my feet. I shall say to those hon. Members who have not been called that we shall no doubt return to this matter in Scottish questions in a fortnight's time.
§ Sir Anthony KershawOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. For the guidance of the House, will you tell us what degree of urgency is required for a private notice question? Does any item of news about Scotland qualify if the Opposition think that the Secretary of State will not be able to be present?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is querying my judgment in these matters. I weighed the decision to grant the private notice question.