House of Commons Hansard Debates for 16 Dec 1999 (pt 30)

6.50 pm

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Dr. John Reid): Because of the time constraints and the fact that some speeches have been cut short to allow time for others to contribute, I shall not take interventions. I apologise in advance for that and for the fact that I may not cover everyone.

I am tempted to respond immediately to the point on beef. I should like to correct the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) on the facts of the case, as I have had to correct his colleagues. No formal offer was made during tripartite discussions. The idea of a herd-based scheme was discussed at the margins with a number of people, including the Scottish Executive's Minister for Rural Affairs, who was aware that the issue was coming up. Had it been put into effect, it would have had no implications in Scotland, because it would have meant abandoning the law and science and everybody in Europe who was supporting us on the date-based scheme and changing to a narrow certified scheme that could have applied only in Northern Ireland. Had it applied to Scotland with a narrow definition of grass-fed cattle, it could have applied to less than 1 per cent. of Scottish cattle. That is why I am so disgusted that the only allies that the French seem to have in Europe on the issue are the Scottish nationalists. I would have been insulted if the Prime Minister had even considered making any formal approaches to any of us to abandon our correct position.

Now that I have put that right, I shall turn to the report, on which I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr. Marshall). A tremendous amount of work went into it and he was central in steering it through the Committee. Inward investment and good export performance are important issues. They are both essential to the health of the Scottish economy, although we should never forget how dependent we are on the indigenous growth of our own industries, small and large.

The debate is a useful opportunity to set out the basis of the Government's view. My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley, South (Mr. Alexander) had it in one. In this post-devolution era, the people of Scotland are interested in successful output and delivery--not endless discussion on the process of devolution, but how it makes day-to-day life better. Central to that is the concept of partnership. The policies of the Government here on fiscal and economic matters, international relations and the key elements of economic infrastructure, such as energy supply, telecommunications and transport links, are crucial to providing the right climate for business investment and success. We need to work in partnership with the Scottish Executive, who are responsible for promoting economic development and trade and providing assistance to business and industry. Both bodies need to work in partnership with the agencies involved in encouraging inward investment and the export trade.

16 Dec 1999 : Column 493

The results of that partnership approach have been impressive and we abandon it at our peril. That is where my party, both in the Scottish Executive and in the Westminster Government, parts company with the Scottish National party. The illusion that, in place of that partnership, we can throw a ring fence around our economy, that a fortress Scotland policy will protect us from the real world, that conflict instead of co-operation will provide cohesion and that grudge and grievance are an adequate analysis of the world economy--

Mr. Alasdair Morgan: Wrong.

Dr. Reid: Absolutely. That analysis is wrong on every count, but they are all the policies of the Scottish National party. The idea that continual constitutional instability will be the basis for economic stability is a cruel illusion that will not be bought by the people of Scotland.

Mr. Swinney: Will the Secretary of State give way?

Dr. Reid: I am sorry, but I will not give way to the hon. Gentleman. He understands why. He is being selective in his interventions. I notice that he was wise enough not to involve himself in the compact disc recorded by some of his colleagues. Presumably, either he chose not to take part, or he was disqualified on the basis that he could sing.

Since we were elected in May 1997, the Government's sound management of public finances and our fiscal and economic policies have produced the very conditions of economic stability that the hon. Member for Beaconsfield described as essential. From May 1997 to date, inward investment in Scotland has amounted to more than £2 billion and an estimated 30,000 jobs. By any standards, that is an impressive performance.

Figures published by the Invest in Britain Bureau show that, although it accounts for less than 9 per cent. of the UK population, Scotland has consistently over the past few years secured between 12 and 20 per cent. of all inward investment projects attracted to the UK, and between 17 and 25 per cent. of the new jobs associated with such projects.

In the five years to March 1999, Locate in Scotland recorded 436 inward investment projects, involving planned investment of no less than £7 billion associated with the expected creation or safeguarding of nearly 68,000 jobs. That is the record of success of the co-operation that would be put in peril by the continual instability that the Scottish National party represents as the way forward.

In 1998-99, Locate in Scotland and its partners helped to attract to Scotland a total of 9,041 planned new jobs. So far this financial year, 1999-2000, inward investors have already--in only nine months--announced plans to create a total of 8,849 new jobs in Scotland. So Locate in Scotland, far from declining--as the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) suggested--is well on its way to beating its performance last year.

It is not just the statistics that are encouraging. The range of companies and their activities demonstrate a robust portfolio. Project sizes have ranged from 25 to 1,500 jobs in both the central belt and in rural areas.

16 Dec 1999 : Column 494

Of course, it is not all one way. My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe) mentioned how some areas have missed out, and I am the first to accept that. That is why the measures brought in by this Government on child benefit, the working families tax credit and the new deal are so important, as is the work carried out by the Scottish Executive on social exclusion and poverty.

The hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Moore) mentioned a case from his area. I accept that companies will sometimes relocate--they have done from my constituency, including Cummings and Caterpillar. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that companies are closely monitored. If they go elsewhere in the UK, they are monitored by the DTI to ensure that the money provided by this Government is not used merely to assist the geographical movement of similar jobs.

We have had a short but significant debate. I pay tribute to the work force in Scotland who, along with our infrastructure, education system and environment, are one of our greatest means of attracting people to Scotland.

We now move to another stage of the devolution settlement--not only the concordats, but the joint action committees. We have established co-operation and partnership in practice, and we are aiming to deliver. We now move from the joint action committee on poverty to that on the knowledge economy. That subject is vital, as is the fact that we are working in partnership. That partnership approach will ultimately be backed by, and to the benefit of, the people of Scotland.

It being Seven o'clock, Mr. Deputy Speaker proceeded to put forthwith the deferred Questions which he was directed by paragraphs (4) and (5) of Standing Order No. 54 (Consideration of estimates) to put at that hour.