| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ms Rachel Squire: I shall take the Minister's advice, and seek meetings with those two organisations. I am, indeed, no expert on motor racing, although I share my London flat with a woman formula 3 racing driver, which gives me a certain insight into the subject.
I was not claiming that no displacement analysis had been carried out; my point is that that analysis has not been as detailed and thorough as it should have been, and has not involved all the interested parties sufficiently.
I understand that Knockhill involves formula 3 racing. I know that a longer track is being promoted at Forrestburn, but I gather that shorter tracks have distinct advantages, in that they allow spectators to see far more: the cars come round even faster.
Mr. Kynoch:
I am pleased to learn that the hon. Lady shares a London flat with a young lady who is involved in formula 3 racing. Some claim that I can remember being a member of Bristol university's motor club and winning a rally. Perhaps I was wrong to say that I knew little about motor sport, but I must confess that I am a little rusty.
The hon. Lady asked whether a full displacement analysis had been carried out. That is a matter for the funding bodies--and Strathclyde European partnership, the tourism advisory group, the Lanarkshire development agency and Scottish Enterprise are indeed satisfied that the displacement issue has been dealt with adequately.
People in Fife are bound to disapprove of the project until they see that it will increase the inflow of motor sport into Scotland to their possible benefit. It might be helpful, however, if the proprietor of Knockhill talked to the project team at Forrestburn. I cannot bring that about; I can only urge the hon. Lady to suggest that Mr. Butcher in Knockhill try to establish contact. When the project is completed--if it is completed--there may well be a working relationship allowing discussion. If, as I am assured, the two facilities will not be in competition, let us ensure that the relationship is established on an informal basis at a fairly early stage. That could allay some fears. I suggest, however, that the hon. Lady contact the two bodies that I mentioned earlier.
Other than Knockhill, Great Britain has no proper motor sports venue further north than Oulton park in Cheshire. Given the potential catchment area of Scotland
and much of the north of England, there is no reason why the motor sports market should not be able to support more than one circuit. That was certainly the case in the 1950s and 1960s, when Scotland had a number of successful circuits--for example, at Charterhall, Turnberry and Crail.
Given the resurgence of interest in motor sports-- encouraged by the success of David Coulthard--I believe
that it is a growing business. I consider that the question of displacement has been properly investigated by the bodies concerned, and I see no justification for Government intervention.
It being Two o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
1. Mrs. Gorman:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the current level of agricultural subsidy in Scotland. [5195]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Raymond S. Robertson):
Agriculture grants and subsidies in Scotland amounted to around £330 million in 1994.
Mrs. Gorman:
Is my hon. Friend yet aware of the findings of the Select Committee on Scottish Affairs, which, I understand, recently went to New Zealand? From what I have read in the newspapers, I believe that it has done away with its farmers subsidy system. At first, of course, that was greeted with consternation, but now it is being welcomed by farmers, who are doing very nicely without having to do all that dreadful paperwork. If he has been informed about that event, will he tell us a little about its outcome?
Mr. Robertson:
The Select Committee on Scottish Affairs did go to New Zealand to consider a country that had abolished all agricultural subsidy under, I must add, a Labour Government, but we have no plans to follow suit. The Committee has still to report and I am sure that the Committee's Chairman will ensure that my hon. Friend has a copy of the report once it is published.
Mr. Home Robertson:
I declare an interest, Madam Speaker. After years of half measures, will the Government now introduce a subsidised scheme, if necessary, for the eradication of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, both for the sake of better animal welfare and to restore confidence in Scottish beef? Meanwhile, will the Minister advise people that it might be risky to inject tissue from infected cattle into their brains, but that the more conventional practice of eating prime Scottish beef is much more enjoyable and perfectly safe?
Mr. Robertson:
As the hon. Gentleman knows, two weeks ago in the Scottish Grand Committee, we had a useful Adjournment debate, initiated by my right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Sir H. Monro), on that matter. I told the Committee on that occasion, and I repeat it now, that our measures to eradicate bovine spongiform encephalopathy in cattle are working. In Scotland, out of a total of more than 2 million cattle, the number of confirmed BSE cases in 1995 is expected to be around 600, some 27 per cent. below the 1993 level. We are fully aware of the problem and our measures are working.
Sir Hector Monro:
Does my hon. Friend agree that our support through the beef special premium and the suckler cow subsidy helps to provide the best prime Scots beef? Will he say yet again that prime Scots beef is safe to eat and that the education authorities and others who are depriving children of good Scots beef are wrong?
Mr. Robertson:
I agree completely with my right hon. Friend. I know that, at this time of year, our thoughts turn to eating white meat, but, perhaps after Christmas day's
Mr. Canavan:
Will the Government reverse their disgraceful decision to discontinue taking up the European Union milk subsidy, which will mean that many school children will be deprived of free school milk, with detrimental consequences for their health and nutrition? Is it not ironic that the Government are proposing that measure when, earlier this week, the Scottish Office Minister with responsibility for health was complaining that 62 per cent. of Scottish five-year-old children suffered from tooth decay and that Scottish school children were near the bottom of the dental health league table?
Mr. Robertson:
The hon. Gentleman should direct his comments to local authorities all over the country, and I hope that he will take the opportunity to raise the matter with his own Labour-controlled authority.
2. Mrs. Fyfe:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the operation of the student loans scheme in Scotland. [5196]
Mr. Raymond S. Robertson:
I am pleased to say that the scheme is working well.
Mrs. Fyfe:
That is not what the Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment said on Thursday in Committee when he announced that the whole scheme had had to be postponed until October 1997 because the banks had difficulties over mergers and because of difficulties with information technology. That is in spite of the whole thing being hustled through in the Queen's Speech at great speed. Will the Minister extricate himself from this mess or will he be tied into his hon. Friend's shambles and share the blame for the mess that no one in Scotland needs or wants?
Mr. Robertson:
I congratulate the hon. Lady on her consistency. She disagrees with the Government's approach and with that of her Front-Bench spokesmen to student support. We announced a postponement of the scheme after discussions with the banks and building societies to ensure a proper and smooth transition a year later. As always, the hon. Lady is scaremongering on student numbers and on student support. She cannot accept, and will not admit, that there are more students in higher and further education in Scotland than ever before in our nation's history.
Mr. Stewart:
Can my hon. Friend confirm that parity between grants and loans will be achieved in 1996-97?
Secondly, does he agree that parity will be maintained thereafter? Thirdly, does he agree that recent debates in the House have shown that the Opposition have no policy whatever?
Mr. Robertson:
I agree entirely with my hon. Friend, and I can give him the assurances that he seeks. As I have said, we have more students than ever before in higher education and the last survey showed that for the first time students from less well-off backgrounds are now in the majority in our universities and colleges.
Mrs. Liddell:
The Government have been forced to walk away from the student loan privatisation proposals.
Madam Speaker:
Order. I have to bring two points to the hon. Lady's attention. First, I have not yet heard a question from her: that is most important. Secondly, we are dealing with student loan schemes and not with nursery vouchers.
Mrs. Liddell:
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I was just coming to my substantive question. We have put a number of questions on education to the Minister and have failed to get replies. Why are we not getting a response to our request for an independent assessment board in relation to nursery vouchers? [Interruption.] Why is the Minister not prepared to respond to detailed questions about student loans and student accommodation and about other aspects of education policy? Will he give us a substantive reply rather than the bluster that we are used to when he is flummoxed?
Mr. Robertson:
What does the hon. Lady have against those from less well-off backgrounds? Yesterday she was at every media outlet criticising our scheme for assisted places, which helps children from less well-off backgrounds. Today she is ranting about student loans and nursery vouchers, which are designed to help everyone in society but particularly those from less well-off backgrounds. Over the recess she should take a long hard look at what she has been saying since she joined the Front Bench because some of it has been quite shameful.
Sitting suspended, pursuant to Standing Order No. 10 (Wednesday sittings), till half-past Two o'clock.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |