§ 3. Mr. WelshTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has had with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on his proposals to reorganise Scottish local government; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. LangI have had no discussions with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on the issue of local government reform since it decided to adopt its policy of non-co-operation. I and my colleagues have, however, held useful meetings over the summer with representatives of a number of individual authorities.
§ Mr. WelshWill the Secretary of State rule out any form of domestic water supply disconnection in Scotland and ensure that unelected and unaccountable water boards do not use self-disconnection and water meters as a reason for cutting off domestic supply, thus creating a liquid poll tax that hits the poorest hardest? Will he bear that in mind in his deliberations?
§ Mr. LangPerhaps the hon. Gentleman is not aware that, at present, the law does not allow disconnections. I have no plans to change it.
§ Mr. Raymond S. RobertsonDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the so-called policy of non-co-operation adopted by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has had as many relaunches and comebacks as Frank Sinatra? Will he urge COSLA to drop all pretence of non-co-operation, for the benefit of those local government employees who provide such sterling services, and for the people of Scotland who are the beneficiaries of those services?
§ Mr. LangMy hon. Friend is right. The word "non-co-operation" has been redefined so many times as to lose its meaning. At present, some 28 local authorities support the convention, some 29 are against it and eight are undecided. That is hardly the way for the convention to unite local government in Scotland or to represent its interests or the interests of those who rely on its services.
§ Mr. CanavanHow is it that relatively minor local government boundary changes are referred to an independent commission, yet here we have the Government hell-bent on major surgery without any reference to an independent commission? Could it have anything to do with the Government's desperate desire to carve up the political map of Scotland to prevent the Conservative party from being virtually wiped off that political map, as the Conservative party in Canada was the other day?
§ Mr. LangI remember the hon. Gentleman's rhetoric before the general election, so nothing that he says surprises me. We are restructuring local government. Once local government is restructured, the Local Government Boundaries Commission will go to work on that in the usual way.
§ Mr. Home RobertsonHas the Secretary of State yet found anyone in COSLA or anywhere else who believes 814 his assertion that the transitional costs of restructuring local government will come to less than £196 million, let alone anyone who accepts his naive idea that any savings for council tax payers will arise from the restructuring? Has he yet grasped the fact that the folk of East Lothian want nothing to do with the folk of Berwickshire and the folk of Berwickshire want nothing to do with the folk of East Lothian?
§ Mr. LangThe hon. Gentleman might like to know that his hon. Friend the Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke) expressed the view during a television interview with me a couple of weeks ago that the cost might be £126 million. More to the point, the small cost that will be incurred in the first few years of reform will be cancelled out and compensated for many times over by the savings in the longer term.
§ Mr. George RobertsonI thank the Secretary of State for his cordial words of welcome. I also had cordial and personally good relationships with the Minister for Europe in my last job.
Will the Secretary of State tell us this afternoon how he can possibly justify telling the Scottish people that he intends to pick the pockets of millions of ordinary families throughout Scotland by putting VAT on their heating bills to solve the Government's self-created budget deficit? On top of that, he intends to finance local government reorganisation by putting his hand in people's pockets again, to the tune of about £180 on every council tax bill in Scotland to pay for an unwanted, unnecessary, politically corrupt shake-up of local councils in Scotland. If this pick-pocket Government go on displaying an attitude of complacency and contempt for the electorate, what happened yesterday to the Tory party in Canada will happen to the Tory party in this country.
§ Mr. LangIf that were so, I expect the hon. Gentleman would wish us to proceed with the policies that we have announced. The cost of reforming local government over the first five years will amount to 0.5 per cent. of the tot al funding that we give to local government. That sum will be rapidly recouped and more than compensated for by the on-going savings that will result, year after year, from the reduction in the number of local authorities and their reorganisation in a more coherent and efficient way. The residents of the local authorities will be the beneficiaries.
§ 4. Mr. BeithTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received about his proposal to remove Berwickshire from the Borders for local government purposes.
§ Mr. StewartSome 400 individual letters have been received commenting on the proposal to unite Berwickshire and East Lothian in the new unitary authority. In addition, around 660 postcards, pro-forma letters and petition signatures have been submitted from Berwickshire.
§ Mr. BeithWill the Minister confirm that the vast majority of those representations are against the Government's proposals? Does he recognise that we in the borough of Berwick rely on close co-operation with the Berwickshire district and the Borders region to promote the good of the Borders? That will be much more difficult to achieve if Berwickshire is booted into East Lothian, 815 against the wishes of its inhabitants. How can the Government go on ignoring the wishes of the vast majority of the people of Berwickshire to stay in the Borders?
§ Mr. StewartI thought for a moment that the right hon. Gentleman was going to recommend that Berwick be moved into Berwickshire from across the border in England. Combining Berwickshire and East Lothian will produce a new authority with many common features—
§ Mr. Home RobertsonWhat?
§ Mr. StewartCoastal fishing villages, an agricultural hinterland and tourist development potential. We have listened to the representations—indeed, I am meeting the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) on 5 November—but there is a very strong case for our proposals.
§ Mr. KirkwoodWill the Minister acknowledge that the proposal to take Berwickshire out of the Borders region has caused more consternation in Berwickshire than anything else in living memory? Can he say how many of the 417 letters that he has received about the proposal were actually in favour of it? Will he advise the good people of Berwickshire and tell them what they have to do to get him to change his mind?
§ Mr. StewartI can certainly confirm that the great majority of the letters received were against the Government's proposals. In my experience, it is much more usual for people to write to the Government if they are against what is proposed. Berwickshire has been a part of the Borders region only since 1975. There is an historic parliamentary constituency of Berwickshire and East Lothian which, independently of the Government, the Boundaries Commission is recommending should be reintroduced.