HL Deb 16 July 1970 vol 311 cc734-41

3.40 p.m.

THE EARL OF PERTH rose to draw attention to Scottish economic development with special reference to the recent Report, Oceanspan, of the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) and its importance for the United Kingdom; and to move for Papers. The noble Earl said: My Lords, my first duty, and it is a very pleasurable one, is to welcome the noble Baroness, Lady Tweedsmuir, to this House, where she joins her husband. I do not know whether it is in order to congratulate her on the honour done to her, but if it is I certainly do so. Furthermore, with, I am sure, many others, I am delighted that from the start she should be a Minister on Scottish affairs in this House. My second duty is in a sense less pleasurable, in that it is to express regret that one cannot have one's cake and eat it by having at the same time two Ministers of State—one on each side of the House—because the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, has served us very well on Scottish affairs. It has always been a puzzle to me that he was not promoted to Ministerial rank a great deal earlier. All noble Lords will know how well he served us, how often he carried the burden with hardly anybody else on his Benches able to speak on Scottish affairs, how he conducted Bills through the House not only with skill but with charm and a readiness to listen to Amendments which showed that his real interest was that of Scotland. I know that he is going to prove very valuable in Opposition.

I take great comfort and pleasure from the fact that this debate on Scottish affairs takes place so early in the new Government's programme. I hope and trust that this means that they recognise the real importance of Scotland and of Scottish affairs in relation to the country as a whole. If I may say so, they are right to do so, because the record of the Labour Government in Scottish affairs was, I think, one of fair progress. If proof is needed of that, it is to be found in the fact that in the Election the swing to the Conservatives was considerably less in Scotland than in the rest of the country. That shows that on the whole people were relatively satisfied—I will not go further than that—with what was being done for them.

I also feel that all Parties should heed the relative success of the Scottish Nationalists. It shows that if either Party, Labour or Conservative, in Government pays too much attention to what goes on in Whitehall and not enough to the voice of Scotland, we may very well find that the Scottish Nationalists will gain great strength. I, for one, do not want to see them in a position where they can plead the cause of independence too strongly, because I do not believe it is a good thing in itself, although I understand the reasons which dictate their feelings—that they want to be more on their own; that they do not want the whole of Scottish affairs to be directed from the South and from Whitehall. Noble Lords will find in the Report, Oceanspan (which I will come to shortly), that there is another direction, not only to London but from East to West, to which we ought to pay attention.

Before I touch on Oceanspan I think it is worth while to look briefly at the history of the Scottish economy over the last ten years. I think two things stand out. One is that the unemployment figures, relative to the rest of the country, are better than they used to be. To-day the rate is about one-and-a-half times that of the country as a whole, whereas ten years ago the rate was twice as great. I think that that is satisfactory progress—although it is not good enough, it is progress—particularly when one realises that the economy at the present time is stagnant and that during such times the effect on unemployment in Scotland is usually much worse than in the rest of the country. Now this is less true than it used to be; which shows that the new industries which we have got going, electronics and light engineering in place of the heavy industries, have a growth momentum of their own. Despite the nonsense of S.E.T. in the Highlands we are managing to do better than before.

The second point that I should like to make in these broad observations is that the trend of emigration from Scotland is on the decline. I think it is true to say that this year the emigration figure will be about balanced by the figure for natural increase in population. It is fair to hope that if things go on as they are going we shall see an increase, the first for many years, in the population of Scotland; and that we may expect an inflow as opposed to an outflow. Accepting that this is going to happen, I think that one of the things which we need to do is to pay special attention to the housing situation, because if we are to have an increase in the population we must get our housing right. I say "get our housing right" because I think that our housing has been too cheap and that, as a result, local authority rates have had to subsidise housing to the discouragement of industry generally and to the discouragement of the private builder. One wants the private builder to play his part in housing in Scotland.

The other point on housing that I would make is that the local authorities should not go on building these high buildings. I do not believe anybody likes them. All the reports of high buildings that I hear show that they are not proving satisfactory. I do not believe that they are necessary. I recall a conversation with the eminent architect, Sir Leslie Martin, a short time ago, in which he said that the same density can be obtained n an area by a system which is really based on the London square, as opposed to building up high. I ask the Government and the local authorities to follow the teaching of Sir Leslie Martin and try to build at a lower height which would provide the same density but would be much more attractive for those who are going to live there.

Another point which I wanted to touch upon is the location of houses. Access from housing to leisure is a matter of very great importance, and Scotland can do much in that way. We all know about the beautiful scenery, but there are many other advantages which ought to be kept in mind when we are considering new housing. I do not need to detail them all—fishing, golf, hiking, boating, winter sports and many other such things. It is possible so to site new towns or housing estates that access to all of these is easy for those who are going to live in those areas. I am not entirely sure that we are right in concentrating on new towns; I believe that there is much to be said for enlarging some of the older towns which are well placed from every point of view.

In that respect I recall the recent programme which has the shorthand title of "Tayside". I should declare an interest here. The point I am trying to make is that the programme set out in "Tayside" is for the provision of a large number of smaller housing groups and smaller industries in the older towns round that area. I believe that that is the right idea. In saying that, I know that I am going against the noble Earl, Lord Lauderdale, who was inclined to decry the "Tayside" programme, but I do not think that he took sufficiently into account the probability that we are going to see an increasing population, with all that that implies. In other words, we have to be forward-looking in our planning, and that is what your Lordships will find in the Report, Oceanspan.

As you know, my Lords, Oceanspan is the product of the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) and I should be wrong if before getting down to the Report I did not pay particular tribute to the Scottish Council. It is a body which is unique in the United Kingdom. It has forward-looking ideas and also it acts. It goes abroad, to America, or to Canada, or elsewhere, and persuades industry to come to Scotland. It "brings back the haggis", if I may put it in that way. That must be, and is, of the greatest value. The Council is always forward-looking, and I think it is a compliment to St. Andrew's House and the Scottish Office that they arc apt to listen to the voice of the Council and follow what it says. The voice of the Council runs counter to the voice and the clamour from London and Whitehall, and long may it continue!

I should like to say particularly how grateful we in Scotland are for the work which has been done by the Council. Saying that, brings me also to say how grateful we ought to be for the work done by the editors of Oceanspan, which is a remarkable Report. The editors and all who have helped in its compiling deserve our very real thanks. Oceanspan is a good title for the idea that in Scotland the area from Glasgow to Edinburgh should be a brideghead from the Pacific or the Atlantic through to the seas of Europe and to Europe itself. The need for this bridgehead is brought out clearly in the Report: it is, quite simply, the great growth in the size of ships which may be bringing in oil, or iron ore, or even at times container traffic, to Europe.

To-day ships of 200,000 tons for conveying oil are commonplace and the same is becoming true of vessels carrying iron ore. There are few places in the United Kingdom or Europe which can easily take vessels of 200,000 tons. The North Sea is pretty shallow and the Channel and the Dover Straits become very congested. Perhaps the main cost in running these very big ships is that of insurance. The Report shows that it is as much as 50 per cent. of the total cost. Ships which have to face the hazards of a shallow sea or congested traffic lanes naturally have to bear high insurance rates; but if a deep harbour can be found for them where they can easily unload, the situation is altered and the insurance costs are less. If we, in the United Kingdom, are fortunate enough to have such deep harbours, surely it is for us to exploit them as much as we can.

My Lords, I believe that the Clyde is probably the only area which is easily capable of this exploitation at the present time. Milford Haven is pretty well full up. Places like the Tees or the Humber can take 100,000 tonners only with great difficulty, and it is very expensive to start with because of the dredging involved; and that dredging has to be continued afterwards. In the Clyde none of that is necessary; the facilities are all there. I have been talking about vessels of 200,000 tons, but 500,000 tonners or 1-million tonners are on the drawing board and I think that we shall see them very soon. I recall that in 1938 a company of which I am a director, United Molasses, owned the biggest tanker in the world and that was of 18,000 tons, so your Lordships will see what can happen.

Apart from the need for deep water, what is required is a flat coastline, and again the Clyde can offer it. So clearly we ought to aim at deciding where we are going to put these deep water berths, and develop the area around them. I am not going to pretend that I have any knowledge of where this should be—that is a difficult and important question, and amenity has to be taken into account—but I think it is a Government and a local authority responsibility rather than that of a private company. Your Lordships may recall that the Murphy Oil Company sought to base a refinery in a certain area and for two years or more an inquiry was conducted. For three years the company tried to get a decision on whether the area it chose was the right one. In the end the answer was, "No"; and I suspect that that answer was the right one, because the smell emanating from the refinery might have spread over a population of 300,000. We do not want that. On the other hand, at this moment there are two other applicants for the use of this deep water; namely, the Chevron Oil Company, for a refinery, and the British Steel Corporation, for an iron ore unloading port. I believe that it is of great importance that a decision should be come to, and quickly, as to where these centres should be located, especially in relation to the B.S.C. proposal.

The rest of Europe are not going to wait on these things. If we do not move, they will do something else. I saw in the paper only the other day a report of how France plans to make an artificial island two or three miles out from Le Havre. There we are. If we do not make up our minds, we shall find that it will be too late, and the imaginative idea of a bridgehead able to serve Europe will have been missed.

I attach particular importance to the B.S.C. project, because I think that it would be the beginning of something bigger. In the olden days the great steel works were placed near iron ore or coal. These supplies of raw material dictated their location. It is all different to-day. What matters is deep water, easily available power, and a good surrounding area which can be used for the appropriate purpose. For example, we have only to look at what the Japanese are doing. They are the movers not only in building big ships but also in putting up steel complexes on the coast, and very efficient and cheap they are. I believe that we also have to do this, or lose out in what is, after all, the survival of the fittest by the cheapest methods. So I hope very much that the Government will consider, and consider quickly, the question of the location for this deep-water harbour.

We must not always think in terms of North and South. One of the values of this Report and the imaginative idea of a bridgehead from Glasgow to the Forth, is that after unloading and processing, or not processing, as the case may be, commodities can go by road, rail or what you will, to places like Grangemouth and Leith and then pass on to the Continent, providing just what is wanted for the Continent from the oceans of the world. I am sure that it is right that we must think in these terms. We must not always think of London. I, for one, was glad to read that the Government had decided that Birmingham should remain as a centre rather than give way to London. London is not the only place to be considered.

We have heard to-day questions about Edinburgh Airport, which is an outstanding disgrace; and so is the fact that there is now talk about planning permission, after this argument has been pressed by so many people for so long. And what about Prestwick, the most fog-free airport in the whole of Europe? There it languishes, when the opportunity is great, particularly in conjunction with Oceanspan.

Many other noble Lords are to speak, and we look forward to two maiden speeches. Finally, I should like to press two things on the Government. The first is that, given the increases in population which I confidently expect we are going to see, they will make a special effort and drive in relation to housing, along the lines I have indicated; and the second—and I do not know which is the more important—that they should accept the principle of Oceanspan and decide now where they are going to put the necessary deep-water industrial complex and make the necessary communications between West and East—or East and West: it comes to the same thing. If they do that, I feel sure that the prospect for Scotland for the next 50 years is set fair. If that is so, it would be of benefit not only to the United Kingdom but of advantage to Europe as well. My Lords, I beg to move for Papers.