Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Scottish Economic Council

11. Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he next intends to meet the Scottish Economic Council to discuss trends in the Scottish economy. [30081]

Mr. Kynoch: On Friday 21 June.

Mr. Salmond: Has the Minister responsible for industry taken account of the comments of the president of the Scottish National Farmers Union yesterday and of the CBI today about the economic damage that could be done if the Government's beef war gets out of hand? Has the Secretary of State succeeded in persuading the rest of the Cabinet to adopt the same infantile attitude to Europe as he adopts? He has hardly succeeded in persuading the Scottish people, who have dumped the Tory party back to 12 per cent., as an opinion poll will show tomorrow. How many of the 70,000 jobs in Scotland that depend on European markets, the 50,000 that depend on inward investment and the 20,000 that depend on European tourism is the Minister prepared to jeopardise in pursuit of the Secretary of State's insulting and aggressive attitude to our European customers?

Mr. Kynoch: That is choice, coming from the hon. Gentleman, whose party seems intent on incorporating a European star even in its logo. He will be well aware of the significant impact that the unjustified and unscientific ban is having on north-east Scotland especially--on his constituents and mine. I have been in constant contact with my farming community, and my farmers are behind the Government's efforts to have the ban lifted. They want the market opened and confidence restored. They appreciate the moves that the Government have made. If the hon. Gentleman spent a little less time canoodling with his European partners and got his colleague, the Member of the European Parliament for Scotland North East, to fight on behalf of north-east Scotland's farmers, the farming community would be a lot better off.

Mr. Stewart: When he meets the Scottish Economic Council, will my hon. Friend discuss the impact of removing the present controls on business rates, as proposed by the Labour party? Business rates are an overhead for every company in Scotland. Would not such a policy be disastrous for investment and jobs?

Mr. Kynoch: My hon. Friend is very experienced in such matters and knows perfectly well that business pleaded for many years for a level playing field on non-domestic rates. He will also be aware that the new chairman of the Glasgow chamber of commerce has said that it would be utter folly to return business rates to local government control. That would be a back-door increase in business taxation on top of a tartan tax, with its effects on Scottish business, and on top of the effect of the social chapter, the minimum wage, the teenage tax, the graduate tax and all the other proposals for increased taxation that would reduce the competitiveness of Scottish business if the Labour party ever took office.

Dr. Reid: The Minister is an expert on lecturing people about tax. Will he confirm that the extra taxes that the Government have inflicted on the Scottish people in the

5 Jun 1996 : Column 604

past two years have been equal to 7p in the pound? Working on the figures given only a few minutes ago by the Secretary of State showing that each penny of that represents £130 million in income, will he confirm that the Government now receive £910 million a year more from the Scottish people than they did two years ago? Why are services being cut and the fabric of society being destroyed if the Government are taking almost £1,000 million more from the Scottish people for that privilege?

Mr. Kynoch: The hon. Gentleman and his party talk about tax increases. They credit the Government with a tax increase that has been applied largely by the Labour party--this year's increase in council tax. The hon. Gentleman clearly does not understand that central Government have increased funding to local government by 3.6 per cent., which is well in excess of inflation. He also does not understand the fact that Labour councils have increased council tax by an average of 13 per cent.--and sometimes much higher--which has had a damaging effect on services.

The Conservative party believes in trying to get value for money for the taxpayer, and so to increase competitiveness and attract more inward investment to areas such as his. Companies such as the Chunghwa Picture Tube Company, of which the hon. Gentleman is well aware, would not come to Scotland if they had to pay the increased taxation that is proposed by the Labour party.

Social Work Services/(Borders)

12. Mr. Kirkwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will review the financial constraints in the provision of social work services in the Scottish borders; and if he will make a statement. [30082]

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Scottish Borders council has been allocated substantial resources to meet the broad range of its social work responsibilities. In 1996-97, the council has £18.5 million in grant aided expenditure to social work--an increase of 2.5 per cent. on the previous year's allocation.

Mr. Kirkwood: Does the Minister accept, however, that the money allocated to the social work department of Scottish Borders council is inadequate to meet present need and demand? Is he aware that the externalisation of domestic care services, the reassessment of eligibility criteria and the increased charges for such services as Border care alarm are causing great heartache and concern and impacting badly on those most in need of help in south-east Scotland? Will he look again at the amount of money that is made available to the social work department of Scottish Borders council? Will he consider visiting my constituency to see just how difficult it is to make those savings in terms of the exercise that is now in hand and the potential damage that will occur unless the council can find more resources with which to do the job?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I am happy to visit the hon. Gentleman's constituency. Scottish Borders council has been allocated more than £14.5 million for its community care responsibilities in 1996-97--an increase of £0.5 million on the previous year. It is for local

5 Jun 1996 : Column 605

authorities to choose their own priorities within the overall allocation. We believe that they should encourage the development of services appropriate to the particular needs of all the areas concerned.

Mr. Donohoe: Does the Minister accept that, if more resources had been made available to the social services, Maguire would not have been in a position to commit his crime because there would have been sufficient resources to address the problem? Should not the Minister and the Secretary of State accept some responsibility for the actions of Maguire and the murder of that young girl in Kilmarnock?

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The answer is no. What happened in that particular case has absolutely nothing to do with social work expenditure. It concerns the circumstances that were before the court. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has made it quite clear that repeat sex offenders who carry out extremely dangerous acts should expect a life sentence once our proposed legislation becomes law.

Public Spending

13. Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of public spending in Scotland is represented by taxation revenues for that country; and if he will make a statement. [30083]

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Excluding the revenues from North sea oil, the proportion of public spending in Scotland represented by taxation revenue from Scotland is 72 per cent.

Mr. Winterton: As an English Member of the United Kingdom Parliament, I am perfectly happy that the people of Scotland should receive from the United Kingdom Exchequer £8.1 billion more in spending than they contribute in taxation, because of the great benefits that the Union brings to all the people of the United Kingdom. If there were to be a separate Parliament in Scotland with tax-raising powers, is it not inevitable that the influence of Scottish Members of Parliament in this place would be devalued and reduced, and the benefit that Scotland and its people get from being a member of the United Kingdom would be undermined and dramatically reduced to their disadvantage?

Mr. Forsyth: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. He is quite right to say that expenditure in Scotland is £8.1 billion greater than revenues. Even if we include all the proceeds from North sea oil, the deficit is £7 billion. The Union is greater than the sum of its parts. We welcome the resources that Scotland receives from the United Kingdom, just as we welcome the partnership that we have with my hon. Friend and his constituents.

It is incumbent upon the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) and the right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) to work out their position on the matter. They must decide whether they agree with their Liberal Democrat partners in the Constitutional Convention, who say that there would have to be a reduction in the number of Scottish Members of Parliament. They must decide whether they agree with the Liberal Democrats' assertion that the office of Secretary of State and Scotland's place in Cabinet would go.

5 Jun 1996 : Column 606

We need answers to those questions because, as my hon. Friend said, the ability to argue Scotland's case in Cabinet and in this Chamber is central to the provision of resources for vital services. That is what Parliament is about, and the hon. Member for Hamilton is putting those services at risk by his foolish proposal that is more to do with his party's advantage than his country's interests.

Mr. Graham: The Secretary of State will be aware that people in Scotland pay taxes. Can I remind hon. Members that they are lounging on leather seats that were produced in my constituency by the Bridge of Weir leather tannery? The workers there make a tremendous contribution to this country through taxes, and they need support from the Government. They may lose their jobs because of the Government's mad, stupid and aggressive policies in Europe. It is time that the Government realised that some of the statements that they are now making could cost thousands of jobs throughout the country. It is time that they acted responsibly and did their business for the whole of Scotland.

Mr. Forsyth: I think that I got the gist of the hon. Gentleman's question. The leather makers in his constituency are in a competitive business, as he knows. If they were ever unfortunate enough to get a Labour Government who set up a Parliament with tax-raising powers, their costs would increase, their marketing would be more difficult and jobs would be destroyed in that industry and many others in Scotland.


Next Section

IndexHome Page