"Scotland in the Union"

HC Deb 05 May 1993 vol 224 cc170-2

2. Mr. Canavan

To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he has taken to assess public opinion in Scotland on his White Paper, "Scotland in the Union—a Partnership for Good", Cm. 2225.

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Ian Lang)

The response to the White Paper "Scotland in the Union—a Partnership for Good" has been generally very favourable.

Mr. Canavan

If the Secretary of State is still afraid to take up my suggestion of a referendum along the lines set out in my Bill, will he take up an alternative suggestion to test the White Paper proposal for an enhanced role for the Scottish Grand Committee? Will the Government table a substantive motion for a full-day debate in Scotland in that Committee and give the Opposition parties the opportunity to table, debate and vote on amendments to it so that the Government can ascertain, and act upon, the majority view of the elected representatives of the people of Scotland, most of whom want a real Scottish parliament rather than the Mickey Mouse White Paper, which proposes no genuine transfer of voting power from this place?

Mr. Lang

A referendum was not part of the proposals that we included in the White Paper, and we do not contemplate proceeding in that direction; nor was the suggestion that we should establish a separate Scottish parliament. Central to the White Paper was our commitment to maintaining the integrity of this Parliament of the United Kingdom. As to the views of other parties, I shall be consulting in due course and there will be opportunities, if any amendments to Standing Orders are required, for such matters to be debated.

Sir Nicholas Fairbairn

As the Government flounder for a new bank holiday, may I suggest that it should be on I May? That would give the Opposition the impression that it was union day, when it was actually the day on which the treaty of Union 1707 came into force and it is one of the most important circumstances in our history.

Mr. Lang

My hon. and learned Friend makes an interesting suggestion. It is worth noting that the May day holiday has existed in Scotland for more than 100 years. It existed long before the Labour party and it will probably long outlast the Labour party.

Mr. Salmond

Is not one of the key arguments in "Partnership for Good" for a new relationship within the United Kingdom, with Scotland's subordinate position being changed? Has the Secretary of State deployed that new relationship with the oil tax changes announced in the Budget? Did he know about them before they were announced? Does he now understand that they will cost thousands of jobs in Scotland? Has he done anything since the Budget to try to alter the changes—or has he just been, in Lord Boothby's term, the scullery maid of the Cabinet attempting to clear up the mess that his political betters have left behind?

Mr. Lang

Only an hon. Member with the inferiority complex of the hon. Gentleman would regard Scotland's role as in any way subordinate. Scotland is a full partner in the United Kingdom and our White Paper "Scotland in the Union—a Partnership for Good" reasserts that. Within this unitary Parliament and within this United Kingdom, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is responsible for taxation matters. I am sure that he will take careful note of the hon. Gentleman's point.

Mr. Gallie

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is no better commendation of the White Paper than the words of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) who, at a recent Scottish Grand Committee meeting, pleaded for the Minister responsible for health to be present? For the benefit of those on the Opposition Front Bench, will my right hon. Friend explain that the implementation of "Scotland in the Union" would permit that Minister to participate in future Scottish Grand Committees? Does he agree that all hon. Members should join the hon. Member for Maryhill in welcoming our right hon. and learned Friend from another place?

Mr. Lang

My hon. Friend has identified an important point in the White Paper. Its proposals include providing an opportunity for greater scrutiny of Scottish Office Ministers, including the opportunity to ask questions of Ministers from another place. I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the House will be interested in pursuing that opportunity.

Mr. Galloway

Is not it true that the White Paper "Scotland in the Union—a Partnership for Good" has been received in our country with all the joy that a paperback edition of "Satanic Verses" might have been received had it arrived in down-town Tehran? Is not it also true that the long labour to produce that White Paper has been followed by what looks to be an equally long period of "due course"—as the Secretary of State puts it—before the Government take stock of the Opposition's responses?

Frankly, is not it an excuse for the Government doing nothing—nothing at all—about the democratic deficit in our country? Why does not the right hon. Gentleman do the simple thing and allow the Scottish people to give their opinion in a democratic referendum that would be worthy of a Government?

Mr. Lang

Perhaps I do not get about as much as the hon. Gentleman, but I do not know what sells in down-town Tehran. However, I can tell him that the publication of the White Paper received an extremely favourable response throughout Scotland. I feel sure that when we bring more detailed proposals before the House, they will find favour with the Opposition.

Sir David Steel

As the proposals in the White Paper, however welcome, are really quite minor, why has it taken so long to implement them? When will we have that first opportunity, to which the right hon. Gentleman keeps referring, to question him in the Scottish Grand Committee?

Mr. Lang

The implementation of a number of the proposals in the White Paper is already under way. I said at the time of publication that I envisaged that any amendments to the Standing Orders of the House would start in the next parliamentary Session. Between now and then, there will be an opportunity to consider what amendments might be necessary, what views people of other parties put forward, and how best to proceed.

Mr. McLeish

Is not it a disgrace that the Secretary of State should even hint at his concern for public opinion? Why is it that in Scotland, with so many people opposed to water privatisation, the right hon. Gentleman is willing to spend vast sums of taxpayers' money behind closed doors to further that issue?

Why is it that when public opinion in Scotland wants young people to be trained, the right hon. Gentleman reneges on his commitment to 7,500 potential YT trainees? This is not about a partnership for good, this is an organised hypocrisy—a conspiracy against the citizen. The Opposition believe that trust and faith in good government in Scotland will be restored only when we have a Parliament run by Labour at Westminster and a parliament in Edinburgh run by Scots for Scots.

Mr. Lang

Not only are the hon. Gentleman's figures on water and youth training places wrong, but he knows that they are wrong. He has had the facts pointed out to him and he knows how misleading he has been on those matters. However, the water case at any rate will be aired in future questions when the answer will be spelt out to him.