| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Veterinary Scientists and Technicians
3. Mr. Eric Clarke: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many veterinary scientists and technicians were made redundant in the past year, 1995-96, in Scotland; and how many of these redundancies were followed by withdrawal of Government grants. [26051]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Raymond S. Robertson): The information that the hon. Gentleman has requested is not held centrally.
Mr. Clarke: I am surprised at the Minister's answer, as I have been co-operating with him to try to get the answers I want. As a result of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy situation, a number of scientists--including my constituents Dr. Melrose and Mrs. Margaret Clark, who are scientific technicians--have been made redundant due to Government cuts. I believe that they should be employed. The area that I come from is renowned for scientific excellence and veterinary research. A review of 35 of these institutions throughout the United Kingdom is currently under way. The confidence of the people involved is low because the Government have withdrawn their grants.
Mr. Robertson: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of his question with regard to his constituents. That is an indication of how seriously he takes this issue. The Overseas Development Administration has a contract with the university of Edinburgh for the provision of certain research services. However, it is up to the university to decide how it delivers the service and the number of research staff it needs to do so. The number of staff will vary according to the nature of the research at any particular time.
I emphasise that the ODA--and therefore the Government--is not the employer. That is a matter for the university. Individual contract staff who have a grievance about their employment should pursue the issue with the university, which may then decide to take the matter up with the ODA. If the hon. Gentleman has any further information that he would like me to pass on to the ODA, I shall be delighted to do so.
Mr. Gallie:
Does my hon. Friend agree that the use of veterinary and other scientists in the United Kingdom goes beyond that of other countries in relation to food hygiene and ensuring the safety of the public in general? On that basis, does he not despair that the sound advice given by scientists in our country that British beef is safe is ignored by scientists elsewhere, who do not carry out tasks at similar levels with the same degree of responsibility in their own countries?
Mr. Robertson:
My hon. Friend raises a valuable point. This year, the Government are spending more than £9 million on research into bovine spongiform encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and the amount will be increased to £10 million next year. As my hon. Friend said, all the scientific advice available from the world's experts is to the effect that British beef is safe. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has so eloquently said, the ban should be lifted.
Dr. Bray:
Is the Minister aware that the closure of research institutes and the dismissal of research teams goes far wider than that? The prior options study is cutting a swathe through Government research establishments and greatly weakening the efforts in Scotland. Is he further aware that the progress of scientific research, which underlies the ability to tackle diseases such as BSE and CJD, depends critically on the underlying basic research, which has been savaged by the Government?
Mr. Robertson:
The hon. Gentleman does himself no credit with his wilful scaremongering. The prior options review of the research establishments is no threat to the
However, the research establishments cannot be immune from regular review and appraisal, and there is a need to ensure that research is being conducted in the most effective manner, providing the best value for money. With his background, the hon. Gentleman should be praising what is going on in this country, not seeking to run it down and trying to score cheap party political points.
5. Mr. Michael J. Martin:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to deter drug abuse in Scotland; and if he will make a statement. [26054]
The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton):
On 7 May we are launching a new all-party drugs campaign, which will build on the significant progress that has been made in implementing the recommendations of the ministerial drugs task force report.
Mr. Martin:
Every mother and father heaves a sigh of relief when their child joins a youth club, because when they are in the youth clubs they are off the streets and away from the drug pushers. Will the Government give every encouragement to local authorities and the voluntary sector by helping such organisations? People in my community and throughout Scotland are also sickened to see those who are making money from drugs buying up land, public houses and taxi companies and many other so-called legitimate organisations. May we hope that the courts will not only sentence those people harshly but take away their ill-gotten gains?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton:
I agree whole- heartedly with everything that the hon. Gentleman has said. We have passed into legislation measures to the effect that the proceeds of drug trafficking should rightly be confiscated. That provision is in place, and that is now happening in Scotland. Youth clubs need to be strongly supported, as the hon. Gentleman said, and I am glad to confirm that the all-party campaign will build on, not replace, the drugs task force work already under way. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the drug action teams are very active in and around his constituency. Many measures have been put in place, and we intend to advance them in a co-ordinated manner.
Mr. Bill Walker:
What measures will my hon. Friend introduce to tackle the problem that arises when senior social workers make comments that are unhelpful to the all-party campaign? There is no doubt that the great advantage of the all-party campaign has been its all-party basis, and it is making progress.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton:
I think I know what my hon. Friend is referring to, and I am glad to note that the person concerned subsequently acknowledged that
Madam Speaker:
Order. There are a lot of arguments across the Floor of the House. Has the Minister completed his answer?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton:
It was impossible for me to hear what the hon. Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Ross) was saying, but I shall be only too happy to answer him.
Madam Speaker:
The hon. Gentleman did not ask the question. It was asked by someone else. Has the Minister finished? If he has, I will call Mr. Davidson, who very seldom gets called.
Mr. Davidson:
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am particularly glad to be called today as this programme appears on Scottish television, although my mother, who resides in Galashiels, will not be able to see it because Border Television does not carry the programme.
Does the Minister agree that, in the fight against drug dealers, the police are greatly handicapped because, when they catch people for offences and charge them, those people are often quickly back out on the streets, either because the procurator fiscal's department does not oppose bail or because the courts grant it far too readily? In my constituency, there are many youngsters running around who have committed serious offences with knives. They are released and can then offend again. Such occurrences demoralise the police and the public. What does the Minister intend to do about that?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton:
I shall certainly look into the matter, although it comes within the responsibility of the Lord Advocate. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that guidelines have been issued to procurators fiscal, especially in relation to restricting bail. If the hon. Gentleman will give me the names and examples, I will ensure that the matter is followed up speedily with the Law Officers.
6. Mr. Pawsey:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many staff in his Department are involved in the administration of forestry, and at what cost. [26055]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. George Kynoch):
The Forestry Commission currently employs 3,600 staff throughout Britain, at an annual cost of £66 million.
Mr. Pawsey:
I thank my hon. Friend for his typically helpful, detailed and comprehensive reply. Given the amount of resources being made available within the Scottish Office for United Kingdom forestry, does my hon. Friend feel that it might be wise to transfer those responsibilities to the Department of the Environment?
Mr. Kynoch:
I am not sure that I heard my hon. Friend correctly. My hon. Friend's interest in forestry matters is well logged. Under Scottish Office guidance, forestry is
Ms Roseanna Cunningham:
What effect will the right of pre-emption have on the Government's plans for forestry in Scotland, given that it is likely to cause great difficulties in the transfer of crofting estates? Do the Government intend to introduce legislation to remove that feudal remnant from our past?
Mr. Kynoch:
The hon. Lady will be aware that a consultation document on crofting has been issued. All the matters will be raised when the results of that consultation are known.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |