§ 2. Mr. Andrew WelshTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next expects to meet representatives of the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) to discuss the effects of the recession in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. LangI have frequent contacts with the Scottish Council and look forward to a continuing exchange of views. I am sure that the council will have noted the consensus view of economic commentators that Scotland has been less affected by the world recession than any other part of Great Britain and that Scottish economic growth this year is likely to match or exceed that of the United Kingdom as a whole.
§ Mr. WelshHaving invited debate on self-government and having not received the answers for which he hoped, why is the Minister not listening to leaders of Scottish commerce and industry who say that we have nothing to fear and a great deal to gain from independence? As the United Kingdom's high interest rates and other policies are creating record bankruptcies and rising unemployment and making Scottish industry and commerce less competitive in European and world markets, how can he justify the continuation of those inappropriate Government policies in Scotland?
§ Mr. LangThere is absolutely no doubt that the almost unanimous view of business men in Scotland is that the one thing that would undermine Scotland's economic future would be for Scotland to be cut off from the rest of the United Kingdom and reduced to a small home market of about 5 million people, driving away inward investment with higher tax rates and with a volatile currency dependent on the fluctuations of oil, with future uncertainty as to Scotland's continuing membership of the European Community. The recipe of the hon. Gentleman and his party for Scotland's future is a recipe for decline and impoverishment.
§ Mr. McAvoyThe Secretary of State will be aware that the co-operation of the work force at Hoover Cambuslang has been a major factor in ensuring the long-term viability of that factory. Bearing in mind the financial support that the Government have made available to Hoover plc for the factory at Cambuslang, will the Secretary of State join me in supporting the work force who are looking for assurances from Hoover plc that there will be no transfer of work from Cambuslang to any other location?
§ Mr. LangThat is essentially a matter for the management and not for me. Certainly, it would be wrong for the Government to intervene in important management decisions. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for paying tribute to the fact that the Government's regional assistance policies are helping Hoover, as they have helped so many other companies in Scotland, and for the implicit acknowledgement that industrial relations have so improved under the Government that the negotiations to which he referred can take place. What a contrast with the last period of Labour Government.
§ Mr. Bill WalkerWhen my right hon. Friend meets the Scottish Council, will he draw its attention to the fact that under the SNP's proposals Scotland would lose up to about 30,000 defence-related jobs? Will he tell the council that Lossiemouth, Kinloss and Leuchars, the RAF main bases, would all close, that the Royal Marine base at Cawdor would close and that Rolls-Royce, Ferranti, GEC and others would lose their orders and Yarrows would get no orders for frigates? Consequently, Scotland would lose 30,000 jobs. What for? For separatist, socialist, nationalism.
§ Mr. LangMy hon. Friend is absolutely right and puts the point extremely well. In addition to what will happen to all those defence-related jobs, it is certain that the large flow of inward investment and the jobs created from that will cease. The most recent announcement of such investment—that Matsushita will create a factory in East Kilbride with £8 million investment—follows my visit to the company in Japan last autumn. That and other inward investment will dry up.
§ Mr. WilsonThe Secretary of State referred to the last Labour Government. I assure him that we are extremely pleased to make comparisons with that Government in terms of unemployment statistics and the support given to Scottish industry. Will he confirm that in 1976–77 some £680 million, in current terms, was paid to Scottish industry in regional assistance? Will he also confirm that last year the equivalent figure, in current terms, was less than £160 million? What immense improvement in the Scottish economy and in unemployment justifies a 75 per cent. reduction in assistance to Scottish industry when in my constituency, for instance, the official figures show that one person in seven is out of work and the unofficial figures, based on the old count, show that almost one person in five is out of work?
§ Mr. LangI will give the hon. Gentleman the comparisons. For every four companies in existence when the last Labour Government left office there are now seven. When they left office, the rate of inflation had doubled and had averaged 15 per cent. for the previous five years; the present rate is well below 5 per cent. When the last Labour Government left office, unemployment had doubled; within the past three years, employment has risen 953 by 150,000. Within the lifetime of this Parliament, unemployment has fallen by 100,000 and productivity has risen by more than 5 per cent. a year. Within the past three or four years, investment has reached the highest levels ever, and in four of the past five years we have achieved record output. In the past year or two, we have achieved record exports. Those are some comparisons between this Government and the last Labour Government.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. So that I am able to call more Members, may we have briefer questions? Long questions lead to long answers.