HL Deb 27 July 1967 vol 285 cc1295-313

[The references are to Bill (231) as first printed for the Lords, The Commons Reason is printed in italics]

[Nos. 1–3]

Schedule 1, page 22, leave out lines 20 to 23. Schedule 1, page 22,leave out line 27.

Schedule 1,page 23, line 24, at end insert—

("10A. The Orkney and Zetland water Board Limits of supply of:—
Kirkwall Town Council
Orkney County Council
Stromness Town Council
Lerwick Town Council
Zetland County Council")

The Commons disagreed to these Amendments for the following Reason:

Because the Amendments would deny to the North of Scotland the benefits which would derive from the establishment of a regional water board covering the four counties of Sutherland, Caithness, Orkney and Zetland.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on its Amendments to which the Commons have disagreed. This matter was debated on Monday night in another place. I think it is fair to say that no new points emerged. The Opposition in another place repeated their contentions that the wider amalgamation reflected the Government's passion for uniformity; that the difficulties of communication would cause serious inconvenience, and that, on the analogy of what has happened with the fire service, it would lead to increased costs. These are all points which were made in discussion in another place before the Bill came to us. They are points which were made, I might almost say, time and time again in your Lordships' House when the Amendments to which the Commons disagree were inserted.

Whatever may have been said, with complete justification, about the lack of time to consider the Amendments which we have had from another place on the Companies Bill which we have just finished, no one can say that the position of the Orkney and Shetland Water Board has not been adequately discussed, because there has been very full discussion in both Houses. The fact remains that at the end of all this discussion the Opposition are of one point of view and Her Majesty's Government are of another. The Commons have stated that their Reason for disagreeing with the Lords' Amendments is that the Amendments would deny to the North of Scotland the benefits which would derive from the establishment of a regional water board covering the four counties of Sutherland, Caithness, Orkney and Zetland. Moved, That this House doth not insist on the Amendments to which the Commons have disagreed.—(Lord Hughes.)

6.26 p.m.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, it is with very deep and bitter sorrow that we have learned of the decision of the Government to disagree with these Amendments giving independence in the administration of their water affairs to Orkney and Shetland, and of the determination to force through their own proposals in defiance of all reason and all common sense. I do not suppose there are a lot of people in England, and I sometimes think not a great many in Scotland, who know or care a great deal about these remote northern islands, and when something which is blatantly stupid and unfair is done in regard to their administration there is, of course, all the less likelihood of a general movement of indignation against it. But I must say that I do not think I have ever read a more derisory and contemptible collection of reasons for disagreeing with your Lordships' Amendments than those which were given on Monday night to another place by the Minister of State.

The Minister referred to a joint non-Party letter appealing to reason and good sense which was published a few weeks ago in The Times by Members from all Parties and in both Houses, and he said that there were a number of errors in that letter which it was his duty to point out. The letter had said that the authority would be administered from Wick, and the Minister replied that it would not necessarily be administered from Wick; that it might occasionally be administered from somewhere else, or that it might even be administered from a number of places, the Board moving like a kind of circus from one island to another. I wonder whether it has ever occurred to the Government that if it is hopelessly inconvenient to get from Shetland to Wick, it is equally inconvenient to get from Wick to Shetland. And as for moving from one point to another, that may be very amusing if they were exhibiting some kind of entertainment, but when they are discussing seriously the administration of water, I do not see how it would greatly add to the economy and administration, or to its efficiency, that it should be moved about in this manner. It would be not perhaps much more inefficient, but about equally inefficient, to a permanent administration at Wick or any other place.

Then the Minister of State went on to refer to the statement in this letter that the combination of a water authority between Orkney, Shetland, Caithness and Sutherland would be as sensible as combining Cumberland and Cornwall. I cannot refrain from quoting his comment on this. He said: What is meant by that is beyond my comprehension. If it is meant to refer to geographical distance it might have a point, but I do not see its relevance."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Commons; 24/7/67, col. 213.] I wonder what else he thought it could have referred to except geographical distance. Of course, the signatories of this letter, I admit, were wrong in saying that it would be as sensible as combining Cumberland and Cornwall. What they ought to have said was that it would be very much more sensible to combine Cumberland and Cornwall than to combine the Islands with the mainland in the North of Scotland. If you have to go from Cumberland to Cornwall, even if you conscientiously observe the latest speed limits prescribed by the Minister of Transport, if you start early enough you can easily motor there in one day. To get from Shetland to Wick, or vice versa—it does not matter which—takes three days.

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, there are aeroplanes.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

And the aeroplanes do not always fly. And when they do fly, where do they go? They do not go to Wick; they go to Aberdeen, and then you have to travel all the way from Aberdeen to Wick. That is why it takes three days to get there. As for the expense, it is much less expensive to travel, whether by car, train or any other method, from Cornwall to Cumberland than it is to travel from Shetland to Wick.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, the ships do not often sail. Often they do not sail from the Shetlands either to Wick or to Aberdeen. It is one of the most treacherous seas in the world, and the storms are terrific. So how people get there in the winter months, goodness only knows! They cannot fly and they cannot go by sea.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

That is very true, and I hope that my noble friend, one of the signatories to this letter, may perhaps say a word to support what I am saying in a few minutes, because the lack of comprehension which we have encountered about this really is monstrous.

Then the Minister of State goes on to say that in the other water authorities, like Argyll, Ross and Cromarty and Inverness, there is only 1 per cent. or 1½ per cent. of the population of Scotland, and about the same percentage would be contained in a combination of Caithness, Sutherland, Orkney and Shetland. We all understand the arguments for regionalisation. If you combine contiguous land areas together which have the same collection—two or three watersheds all contiguous—it is clearly more sensible to combine them in one water authority. But population is not the only consideration. Surely, however many, or few, people happen to live in these Islands has no relevance at all to the sense, or nonsense, of trying to combine them with landward areas which are three days distant in travelling time.

Then the Minister tried to make a point which perhaps we should answer. It was said in this letter that the Government at one time, recognising the common sense and unanimous wishes of the Island local authorities, proposed a certain course, which afterwards they went back on. The Minister was at great pains to point out that at this time, on March 31, the local authorities were not unanimous. Let me just remind your Lordships why they were not. When this was discussed in another place in Committee, the local authorities and all the people of Orkney and Shetland naturally desired to keep their own two water boards—which is much the best solution, because Orkney and Shetland are a very long way from one another—one in Shetland and one in Orkney.

When the Member for Orkney and Shetland moved an Amendment, which he did very strongly and emphatically on this subject, the Minister gave what I would certainly have regarded, and what any Parliamentary person in either House would have regarded, as a very satisfactory reply. He said that, when the Member for Orkney and Shetland heard what was proposed, he would be quite happy. So he withdrew his Amendment, thinking it was going to be all right.

Then they had this meeting on March 31 at St. Andrew's House, attended by representatives from Orkney, Shetland, Caithness, Sutherland, Ross and Cromarty. The compromise proposal put forward was that if Ross and Cromarty would agree to combine with Caithness and Sutherland, making one big mainland block, and if Orkney and Shetland would agree to combine in one Island block, then the Government would consider favourably agreeing to this as a compromise settlement. Naturally, at that meeting the representatives from the Islands were not unanimous. They said, "We have got to go back and consult with our people about this." It had taken them by surprise. When they all went home they at first were not agreed on this solution, as one can well understand. But they were afterwards unanimous in saying that anyhow they wanted to be independent of the mainland and that, in order to please the Scottish Office, although they did not think it was the right solution but a very second best solution—in order to satisfy this inordinate devotion to uniformity the Scottish Office insisted upon—they would, although at some inconvenience to themselves, agree to a combined board for Orkney and Shetland if they were left independent of the mainland; and for the last two or three months they have been unanimous on that.

But what happened? Ross and Cromarty would not hear of being compulsorily amalgamated with Caithness and Sutherland. I need not go into why they would or would not. They said they would not. The Scottish Office agreed that they need not if they did not want to, but they said, "Because Ross and Cromarty would not agree to make this nice big mainland unit, therefore we will not allow Orkney and Shetland their local government independence. We must have this big collection of areas, whether they are contiguous or not contiguous, somewhere in the North of Scotland. So we shall insist upon Orkney and Shetland joining up with Caithness and Sutherland, because Ross and Cromarty will not do so". This is the kind of reason one might expect to hear in a Gilbert and Sullivan opera, or in a story in Alice in Wonderland, but not, my Lords, on a serious piece of legislation which Parliament is supposed to consider in a spirit of sense and reason.

In spite of all these hopes that were raised, first in the mind of the Member for Orkney and Shetland, which were ruthlessly dashed to the ground, and then afterwards in the minds of all of us, by this meeting at St. Andrew's House, the Government at a late hour on Monday night have insisted on using their majority. If your Lordships read the debate you will perhaps form the conclusion that not all the Members who voted were particularly well versed or particularly interested for the moment in the subject; but I do not want to go into the proceedings of another place in too great detail. They have, by a not very big majority, steamrollered their proposals, against all the dictates of reason and of common sense, for no reason whatever that I can make out, except that of a senseless devotion to uniformity. There is no good reason that has been given—none. And this decision, my Lords, which the Government have the power to insist on, will leave a sense of deep and permanent bitterness in the minds of the people of Orkney and Shetland. It will also leave a sense of deep disillusionment in regard to the ability and the capacity of the Scottish Office to administer our affairs.

6.40 p.m.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, in referring to the reasons why another place disagreed with this House in the Amendments we made, my noble friend has said that they were derisory. I think that, but for the courtesy which this House generally extends to another place, one could have used words a good deal stronger than that. We were told by the noble Lord that the reason was that of denying the benefits. On the last occasion when we talked of this matter I asked the Minister what those benefits were. He was unable to say that there was any benefit at all, other than to give the House figures with which he was supplied at the last moment, as to the benefits which would accrue as a result of the water rate being lower in Orkney and Shetland, if this combination were to go ahead, than it would be if they were left on their own. Despite that, the Islands have made it abundantly clear that they would much rather be left by themselves than have that benefit. Whether one can calculate with any degree of accuracy what the situation will be after this combination takes place, I do not know. Nor do I know where the figures came from; or how they were arrived at. We have not been told that, and altogether it seems to me to be absolutely outrageous that the ridiculous suggestion contained in the last four lines should be allowed to stand. I think it is absolutely nonsensical.

There is one other question I should like to put to the noble Lord. As far as I know, the "North of Scotland" refers—geographically at least—to the mainland of Scotland. How does it come about that Orkney and Shetland come under the title "The North of Scotland"?

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, perhaps I could answer that point quite simply. It has never at any time been suggested that Orkney and Shetland are not part of the Kingdom of Scotland; and as they are the most northerly part of the Kingdom of Scotland, under any sort of logic they must be accepted as being in the North of Scotland.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, the noble Lord may satisfy himself as to that. They may have been part of the Kingdom of Scotland, but in that case why not say so? Certainly geographically they are not part of Scotland. It is only in the last 200 or 300 years that they have come under the Scottish tongue, as the noble Lord knows perfectly well.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, that may be, but they are part of the country of Scotland. They are the most northerly part of Scotland, and if at this stage we have to go back a period of 300 years to find reasons for disagreeing with the Commons, we are getting pretty hard pressed.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, my noble friend has already pointed out to the noble Lord that he himself knows quite well why we disagree with these reasons that are before us, and I should not be surprised if, in his heart, the noble Lord sympathises with us.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, I answered only that one point. With regard to the reasons to which the noble Lord has referred, I will deal with them when I reply to the debate generally. It seemed to me that this point was so far wide of the mark that it ought not to be allowed to go further.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, I hope the noble Lord will be able to tell us something about these benefits. The Northern Islands may be part of the Kingdom of Scotland, but they are certainly not part of Scotland generally. I agree most strongly with everything that my noble friend has said as to the ridiculous nature of the Reasons which we are given on the paper before us.

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, in reply to my noble friend Lord Dundee, I should like to say that I am not entirely unfamiliar with these regions, because at the age of 23 and in the year 1923 I stood as a Parliamentary candidate for Orkney and Shetland. They made the fatal mistake of not electing me, but I came fairly near it. The noble Lord, Lord Hughes, will no doubt be astonished to hear that I think he is right. I agree with him. I think that uniformity, to a considerable extent, is now necessary in a modern community. It is no good saying any more that Orkney and Shetland are out of reach. It will always be a rough voyage for my noble friend Lord Strathclyde from Scrabster to Kirkwall, because the Pentland Firth is a pretty rough crossing. But one can get aeroplanes from Aberdeen to Wick, and Wick to Kirkwall, and on to the Shetlands. These are pretty quick and pretty good. I think it is a wise thing to consolidate these counties.

I should like to say one other thing. It is no good telling any Orcadian or any Shetlander that they are not part of Scotland, because they are. They are right in it, and they would not want to be anywhere else. They are Scots and they are proud of being Scottish. There was a claim in Shetland about 500 years ago that they were Danish, but they are much happier being Scotsmen. They are real, good Scotsmen in Orkney and Shetland, and I believe that there will be no difficulty in regard to this. I am in favour of it. I am sorry to go against my noble friend, but I really think this is the right answer to the problem, and I should like to assure my noble friend Lord Hughes of my almost impassioned support.

BARONESS ELLIOT OF HARWOOD

My Lords, I should not have entered into this discussion in order to prolong it if it had not been for the words of my noble friend Lord Boothby. I know of his interest in Orkney and Shetland, and I know that many years ago he was a candidate for Orkney and Shetland; and so no one could say that he does not know something about them. But he does not live there now. He has nothing to do with local government there, and he does not have the slightest knowledge of what is happening there. He does not know the strong feeling there is. If local government is to be democratic and—as I think the Government are anxious it should be—an effective and strong voice of the views of the people, then there is no doubt at all that as regards Orkney and Shetland and the water supply, they are anxious—that is not a right word; they are really furious at the idea that they will be tied to the mainland, for the excellent reason that it will make everything much more expensive for them.

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, there is nothing about Orkney and Shetland that I do not know.

BARONESS ELLIOT OF HARWOOD

My Lords, I know that. I have already said that the noble Lord was once, many years ago, a candidate for Orkney and Shetland—

LORD BOOTHBY

And I have been there since.

BARONESS ELLIOT OF HARWOOD

No doubt on odd occasions the noble Lord has been there, but we who signed that letter and who have been in discussion with the present Member of Parliament for Orkney and Shetland, Mr. Jo Grimond, know that this is a matter on which they feel passionately. No one can say that there is anyone in the country more aware than Mr. Jo Grimond of what is wanted by his constituents in Orkney and Shetland. He knows that they want their own water supply not tied up to the mainland and therefore made very much more expensive and difficult to organise; and involving the representatives of Orkney and Shetland in having to travel down to the mainland, which they definitely do not want to do.

I am very surprised at this scheme, as I admire enormously the way in which the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, understands local government in Scotland. He has himself been engaged in it, and indeed was for many years the Lord Provost of Dundee. I am surprised that he has allowed himself to be overruled by colleagues who, from the point of view of tidiness, perhaps, or some other absolutely unnecessary criterion, have persuaded him that it is a good idea to do something in the teeth of the opposition of the elected—and democratically elected—members of, first, the local authorities, and, secondly, the Member of Parliament who represents them in the House of Commons.

I feel very disappointed because I believe, knowing that Lord Hughes feels very strongly in favour of local government, that he has allowed himself to be overruled by people in interests which are not the interests of Orkney and Shetland. After all, that is what we are interested in—doing something for Orkney and Shetland. In spite of what the noble Lord, Lord Boothby, says, this is not in the interests of Orkney and Shetland. This is in the interests of some centralised authority which wants to make a tidy pattern and bring this matter down into a group which has really no geographical liaison with Orkney and Shetland at all. I oppose this very strongly. We can do nothing to-night. It is the last hour or so of this present term, and there is nothing one can do except protest on behalf of those in Orkney and Shetland who are very much opposed to this arrangement.

LORD HENLEY

My Lords, I should like to support the noble Earl, Lord Dundee, in what he said. I do not want to review the arguments. They have been gone over very fully, in the other place, and on Second Reading and Committee stage here, and the noble Earl has given them a full covering to-night. The noble Baroness, Lady Elliot of Harwood, says there is nothing we can do except protest, but if the noble Earl were to wish to divide the House on this issue I should be only too delighted to join him.

LORD FERRIER

My Lords, I had not intended to join in this discussion, because it is four or five years or more since I was in Shetland, but I was provoked by what was said by the noble Lord, Lord Boothby, and the noble Lord, Lord Hughes. Shetlanders do not regard themselves as Scotsmen: they call themselves Shetlanders. They are nearer to Norway than to Aberdeen. I feel that some of the things that have been said here to-night are not correct, and we are fully justified in protesting, as the noble Baroness has done, about this extraordinary move on the part of the Government, which has only one benefit, as I see it; and that is that it will increasingly provoke the dislike of this Government's management of this sort of affair.

LORD MCCORQUODALE OF NEWTON

My Lords, having some interest in Ross and Cromarty, might I be allowed to ask why Ross and Cromarty were listened to and allowed to opt out of the scheme put up by the Scottish Office, and Orkney and Shetland penalised thereby? Was it for some political reason—possibly, representation; or what other reason? Was it that Orkney and Shetland were thrown over because of the wishes of Ross and Cromarty?

6.55 p.m.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Henley, I do not wish to go again over all the arguments. However, as in another place the Opposition denied to my right honourable friend the Minister of State an opportunity to reply to the debate, and what he said in that debate has been the main theme of the remarks of the noble Earl, Lord Dundee, I think it would be wrong, even at this stage, if I did not take advantage of the opportunity of replying to some of the things which were said—and with complete sincerity: of that I have no doubt—but which are completely misguided and wrongly represent the attitude and the point of view of Her Majesty's Government. In fact, if it were not that I were completely convinced of the sincerity of what has been said by noble Lords opposite, I should not have used the words "wrongly represent": I should have used the word "misrepresent" what the Government have done. But I do not use that word, because it would connote an intention to deceive; and there is no such intention, I know.

I will refer first to the last point, raised by the noble Lord, Lord McCorquodale of Newton, who asked why Ross and Cromarty were allowed to opt out when Orkney and Shetland were not. This, I think, was the first point on which the noble Earl, Lord Dundee, was not fair to Her Majesty's Government, because he quoted what the Minister of State had arranged at the meeting on March 31. May I remind him of what that arrangement was? If Ross and Cromarty would join with Caithness and Sutherland, and if Orkney and Shetland would join together, the Government would depart from the proposals of the Advisory Committee to that extent. The conditions were never fulfilled, because Ross and Cromarty, which under the Advisory Committee's proposals was to have a separate water board, decided that it did not wish to join with Caithness and Sutherland. There was no question of Ross and Cromarty opting out. Ross and Cromarty elected to adhere to what the Advisory Committee recommended.

That brings me to the second point of wrong viewing of the Government's attitude. The noble Earl, Lord Dundee, said that the Government had "steamrollered" their proposals through, against the dictates of common sense. One of the things which noble Lords opposite have completely ignored in their argument is what was the origin of this proposal. The Government did not think up the idea of Orkney and Shetland being on their own. The Advisory Committee, which included engineering, financial and legal experts, made a recommendation on the way in which the water services should be organised in Scotland; and the recommendation of that Committee was that Orkney and Shetland and Caithness and Sutherland should form one Board. The Government accepted that recommendation. To talk about the Government's "steamrollering" their proposals through against all the dictates of common sense; to describe the proposals which the Government have accepted as being stupid and devoid of common sense, is not, I would suggest, the best way of getting the free services of professional people on Advisory Committees.

BARONESS ELLIOT OF HARWOOD

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether, in his experience, the words of Advisory Committees take precedence over those of the elected members for an area such as Orkney and Shetland, who from the very beginning have said, and said unhesitatingly, that they were opposed to this scheme? It seems to me that is a very undemocratic point of view.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, I do not think so in the slightest, but I will come to that point. I think the noble Baroness has fallen into a trap of her own creation. I could not understand the arguments of the noble Lord, whom, against all conventions, notwithstanding the rough treatment he gave me to-night, I should like to refer to as my noble friend Lord Strathclyde. He was very hard put to it to argue that at this late stage he has discovered that Orkney and Shetland are not part of the North of Scotland. He is still the Chairman of the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, and if there is any group of people who have made greater claims upon the noble Lord to give them a supply of electricity in the North of Scotland than the people who live in Orkney and Shetland I should like the noble Lord to rise now and name the people who have pressed him more hardly.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, the noble Lord is quite correct. Like everyone else, they want electricity, and they are quite entitled to have it. That is no argument for saying that geographically the North of Scotland includes Orkney and Shetland. The people of Orkney call themselves Orcadians, not Scotsmen, as the noble Lord well knows.

LORD BOOTHBY

They do not. They call themselves Scotsmen.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, in all the years when the noble Lord was denying electricity to some of the people of Orkney and Shetland, he never at any time advanced the argument, "You are outside my bailiwick; you are not in the North of Scotland". If he had thought about that, it might have made life easier for him. The noble Lord was unfair—and this is unusual for him—in one sense. He said that I had advanced only one reason of benefit to Orkney and Shetland, and that I quoted some figures—he knew not where they came from; he knew not how they had been worked out. He implied that in any event he did not believe them and that they were produced at the last minute. I would remind the noble Lord that these figures were given, not as part of the argument which I advanced but in response to a question which he put forward on the subject of cost.

This brings me to the point of the noble Baroness. She said, without giving any justification for the statement, any more than anyone else did, that it would be more expensive for Orkney and Shetland to have their water in this way than if they were left on their own. The facts do not justify this. Orkney and Shetland will have a cheaper water supply under this scheme than if they had a Board on their own.

LORD STRATHCLYDE

My Lords, I said that. The noble Lord will agree that I referred to the figures that the noble Lord had given and said that the only benefit was that they would get a cheaper water rate, which they did not want; they would rather be by themselves.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, the noble Lord did not quite say that. He said that that was the only reason I advanced, and it was not. I am making it clear that I produced these figures in response to a question which he put on the financial benefits which would accrue. But the financial benefits are not the only benefits, and they were not the benefits which persuaded the Advisory Committee to recommend that there should be a combined Board. The Advisory Committee recommended it on the basis that there would be a better all-round service for Orkney and Shetland as well as for Caithness and Sutherland if there was a Board of this kind.

The final point is the one which the noble Baroness made and which was the subject of an interjection by her; namely, did I think that the advice of an Advisory Committee was sufficiently strong for the Government to override the democratic views of a local authority and its elected representatives? This happens from time to time. Do noble Lords opposite think that in these proposals which are going through, with this the only Amendment moved against it in your Lordships' House, that every local authority in Scotland which has its own water undertaking at the present time came and volunteered to the Government that they wanted to be part of these water boards? I could name a considerable number of local authorities in Scotland who want to remain on their own. I could start with the City of Edinburgh. Every local authority which thinks that in the first instance its water will be cheaper if it remains on its own than it would be if it joined in, had primary objections to joining. So there were many objections. We do not argue that every local authority which comes into these proposals will immediately have a cheaper water supply. What we do believe is that every local authority, without exception, will in the long run have better and cheaper water supplies than if they remain fragmented in 199 separate water undertakings.

If we are to accept the point of view that it is a reasonable argument against regionalising water supplies or anything else that the people in a particular area want to do that, why was there only an Amendment for Orkney and Shetland? Why not an Amendment for every small burgh that wanted to remain on its own; for every single county that wanted to remain on its own; for the City of Edinburgh which wanted to remain on its own, and for the county of Kincardine which did not want to be divided between two water boards? These were all things in regard to which the recommendations of the Advisory Committee went against the first choices of the local authorities concerned. But if a country is to progress, it cannot progress on the basis that everybody is going to opt out of what is going to be for the greatest good of all, because they see, either temporarily or permanently, an advantage to themselves. This is what has been sought for the counties of Orkney and Shetland. It is not reasonable that this should be done.

My final point is that I do not think that noble Lords opposite do a service to Orkney and Shetland—I am most grateful to my noble friend, Lord Boothby, for his intervention on this point—to create the impression that Orkney and Shetland are so remote that you cannot get from Shetland to the mainland of Scotland in less than three days. Orkney and Shetland do expect from time to time to increase their revenue through the tourist trade. I hope that these remarks are not given undue publicity.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, on that point, nobody said that you cannot get to the mainland. They said that you could not get to Wick in three days, which is a different matter. You have to go to Aberdeen first—

LORD BOOTHBY

My Lords, that is not true.

LORD HUGHES

My Lords, that is not the case. The noble Lord, Lord Boothby, drew attention to the fact that there are air services to Wick. I have flown from Wick to Orkney and I have flown from Orkney to Wick, and I do not know—

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

But not to Shetland.

LORD HUGHES

But you can go from Shetland to Orkney. You do not need to go from Shetland to Aberdeen in order to get to Wick. I know it is a good thing to exaggerate one's case in order to help it, but it is not going to help Orkney and Shetland to create the impression that the normal journey to Wick takes three days. I will admit that in the worst possible circumstances in the winter this could happen, but it is a less common thing—I think that is the fairest way I can describe it. But to argue the case for legislation of this sort on the basis that it takes three days to get from Shetland to Wick is no service to the Shetland Islands.

I know that the noble Lord and the noble Baroness speak the truth when they say that these people do not want these proposals. I should be quite wrong if I attempted to dispute that. This is probably the one thing in many years upon which they are united. It has almost united the Orkneys and the Shetlands; I say "almost", because of course they have no enthusiasm for that. But the fact that they are united in something which is wrong is no reason for doing it. This is, therefore, my answer to the noble Baroness: that it is not good democracy to depart from the interests of a large number for the demands, even although it is not for the benefit, of a small number.

I will close by reminding your Lordships of what the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, said when I gave him the financial answer, and the remark which he has repeated tonight: that the people of Orkney and Shetland are saying, "We do not care if it is going to cost us more to be on our own. We want to be on our own." That is the answer to the point which has been made that the Government are thrusting something upon Orkney and Shetland which is not to their benefit. It may not be to their pride, but it will be to their benefit.

7.9 p.m.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, if I may, with the leave of the House, say one more word, it is simply that in what the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, has just said, in his winding-up remarks, there is nothing to which I can take exception. He is entirely correct in his account of what happened on March 31. Ross and Cromarty were not opting out of anything; they were merely asked to do something which had not been proposed. What we have objected to is not that they refused to opt out, but that their willingness to come in should have been made a condition for giving Orkney and Shetland a Board which, although it was inconvenient to themselves they agreed to for the sake of uniformity. It was a very flimsy reason for the Government to say they cannot do what Orkney and Shetland want because Ross and Cromarty will not do something which they had not originally been asked to do but were asked to do as a condition of Orkney and Shetland being given independent administration.

The noble Lord is also correct in saying that the proposal was made by the Advisory Committee. We agree with that and cannot go into that now. We went into it at Committee stage in your Lordships' House, and my noble friend Lord Lothian quoted a very significant passage of a general nature from the report of the Committee which had a bearing on this matter. But it is the Government who must take the responsibility for the particular proposals of the Committee, which I still think, in this instance, were entirely unreasonable and mistaken.

With regard to my noble friend's question about expense, again I would not dream of going into any criticism of the basis of the figures which the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, gave to my noble friend a few weeks ago. I would only say that, although my noble friend may accept them, the people of Orkney and Shetland do not think they are going to get cheaper water. They may be wrong, but they see that Caithness has the highest water rate in Scotland and they think that their own rates will go up in order to help the rates of Caithness. That is their view.

We have done our best in this matter. We have given every opportunity to another place to reconsider what we believe to be a thoroughly bad and foolish decision which we bitterly regret. But if we were to insist on this Amendment, we know well that the only result would be that in a few months it would come back again and no difference would be made. We have enabled all reconsideration to be given by another place. Unfortunately the other place has not taken advantage of that. We can do no more than say that we have done everything which is constitutionally practicable to achieve common sense and we bitterly regret the decision of the Government and of the other place.

On Question, Motion agreed to.