---

Knowledge-based Economy

3. Jim Sheridan (West Renfrewshire) (Lab): What assessment he has made of the future of the knowledge-based economy of Scotland. [192845]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mrs. Anne McGuire): Prospects for the Scottish economy are bright, including for those businesses and sectors that are particularly reliant on intellectual assets.

Jim Sheridan: Does my hon. Friend agree that it is wrong to view the knowledge-based economy as being synonymous only with information and communications technology companies? The brand new Rolls-Royce factory, which opens today in my constituency, is a perfect example of a traditional company investing in technology and its employees' knowledge. Will she assure me that every assistance will be given to our indigenous industries as well as to our new industries such as electronics?

Mrs. McGuire: My hon. Friend is right. I am pleased to join him in welcoming the new plant at Inchinnan, where the relocation of the compression systems manufacturing facility will secure 900 jobs. He is also right to point out that we should not always think that the knowledge-based economy concerns ICT. I had the pleasure of meeting some young Scots whose small group, Lightweight Medical, is at the forefront of science and innovation, and they recently won the entrepreneur of the year award in Scotland. Their critically needed neonatal care product is based around a university project, and it is going into production. It came out of Scotland, where young people were willing to use their brain power and manufacturing capability to move into the medical industry. The knowledge-based economy covers a great part of the Scottish economy, and I hope that we will continue to be optimistic about our young entrepreneurs and investment in Scotland.
 
26 Oct 2004 : Column 1278
 

Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East) (Lab): The Minister mentioned the medical field, and she knows that biotechnology is well represented in Grangemouth. I had the pleasure of opening the laboratory in which Avecia is developing 20-layer DNA drugs. The Health and Safety Executive is taking a strange and strict view in interpreting its role. It has thrown a 2.7 km consultation distance around that plant, which, if we consider Seveso 2 and societal risk, may force that company to go elsewhere because it cannot develop new products in that location unless the HSE sees sense and shows moderation. Can she intervene to discuss with the Minister responsible and me how the HSE can be persuaded that its job is not to destroy jobs in the Scottish economy, but to look after the safety of people seriously and sensibly around that plant?

Mrs. McGuire: I know that my hon. Friend is usually a great supporter of the HSE in relation to the petrochemicals industry in Grangemouth in his constituency, as well as being a great supporter of the industry itself. I am not apprised of the exact details of that particular issue, but I hope that he agrees that it is important that the HSE puts in place proper standards and procedures. I undertake to investigate exactly what is happening at that plant, and perhaps we can discuss the matter at a later date.

Defence

5. Mr. Peter Atkinson (Hexham) (Con): When he last met the Secretary of State for Defence to discuss defence matters that relate to Scotland. [192847]

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Alistair Darling): I have of course discussed defence matters with my right hon. Friend on a number of occasions.

Mr. Atkinson: I hope that the Secretary of State has passed on to his Cabinet colleague, the Secretary of State for Defence, the outrage that has been caused in Scotland by the treatment of the Black Watch and the other Scottish regiments. Is he aware that several soldiers serving in the Black Watch who were fined for disciplinary offences are having their pay stopped while on active service in Iraq, which is causing problems back home? Surely he must understand that it is outrageous to put that kind of pressure on soldiers on active service in relation to such a small issue.

Mr. Darling: Of course I am concerned about people's understandable worries about the reorganisation of the Scottish regiments. I am equally aware that many people attach great importance to maintaining the historic traditions and identities of the Scottish regiments. I hope that that will be taken into account by the Army Board, which has to make these decisions, and ultimately by the Secretary of State.

It is worth bearing in mind, though, that these difficult decisions are being taken because although we are increasing the amount of money that is being spent on defence—I think that this is the longest sustained period of increased defence spending in the past 20 years—the
 
26 Oct 2004 : Column 1279
 
changed commitment in Northern Ireland means that the Army Board has to reconsider Army formations. We are all aware of people's understandable attachment to identities and traditions, and I hope that that will be taken into account.

Mr. George Foulkes (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab/Co-op): Is the Secretary of State aware that my discussions with Ministers in the Ministry of Defence and with people involved with the regiments in Scotland lead me to believe that a solution that is acceptable to all sides can be found in relation to the proposal—it is only a proposal—made by the Council of Scottish Colonels? May I tell my right hon. Friend that the only thing that is seriously undermining the morale of our troops in Baghdad is the ill-informed campaign mounted by The Scotsman and the Daily Mail to boost their flagging circulations and the campaign run by the Opposition parties for party political advantage?

Mr. Darling: I very much hope that a sensible solution that is satisfactory to most people will be found. Although people are understandably concerned about any such reorganisation or change, they should realise that it is taking place because although we are spending more on defence, the changed commitment in Northern Ireland makes it necessary to reinforce logistics, engineering and communications, all of which are absolutely necessary to support infantry battalions.

People who are against this—particularly the Conservatives, whose principal Defence spokesman said that they could not do anything about it, completely undermining the promise made by the Leader of the Opposition only 24 hours beforehand—must face up to the fact that these difficult decisions need to be considered. Notwithstanding that, I hope that we can find a solution that is not only accepted in military terms but respects the traditions and identities that are of understandable concern to people in Scotland.

Sir Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD): Will the Secretary of State acknowledge the widespread concern in south-east Scotland about the proposals that are being considered for the King's Own Scottish Borderers? Will he use his good offices to encourage the Secretary of State for Defence to come to south-east Scotland before final decisions are made so that he can explain for himself what he is trying to do and give people a chance to cross-examine his motives?

Mr. Darling: The recommendation was made by the Council of Scottish Colonels, whose advice then goes to the full Army Board, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will ultimately make a decision. I assure the hon. Gentleman that all of us in Government are well aware of people's concerns. I hope that we will be able to reach a solution that is acceptable to most people.
 
26 Oct 2004 : Column 1280
 

Mr. Eric Joyce (Falkirk, West) (Lab): Will my right hon. Friend confirm that he has no plans to lobby the Secretary of State for Defence to rip apart the British Army by forcing all Scottish soldiers to leave, as would the Scottish National party?

Mr. Darling: People would do well to remember that if the Scottish National party had its way there would be no British Army, no Royal Navy and no Royal Air Force.

Mr. Peter Duncan (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (Con): The Secretary of State will have heard the Prime Minister state yesterday that no final decisions had been taken on the future of the Scottish regiments. He will also be aware that the Defence Secretary stated last month in a parliamentary debate that the only option was to abolish the six Scottish regiments and merge the battalions into one or two Scottish super-regiments. Can the Secretary of State tell us which statement was correct?

Mr. Darling: The Prime Minister said exactly what I have been saying in the past few minutes: the Secretary of State has not yet reached a decision. The hon. Gentleman was in a position to know what the Secretary of State said because he attended the Westminster Hall debate on the future of the regiments. It was interesting that he was unable to mount a coherent argument on behalf of the Conservative party to explain what it would do. All we know from the shadow Defence Secretary is that it appears that the Conservative party cannot do very much. The Conservative Government cut defence spending whereas we have increased it.

Mr. Duncan: Infantry regiments have been cut under the Labour Government. If no final decision has been taken, is it not time that the Secretary of State for Transport took more seriously his role as Secretary of State for Scotland and stood up for Scotland on the issue? One Scottish manager may have had his decision deferred for another day, but the verdict on this Scottish manager will be cruel if he does not stand up for the Scottish regiments. When will he stand up to his Cabinet colleagues and tell them that Scottish regiments must stay?

Mr. Darling: The hon. Gentleman does not get any better. It is worth bearing in mind that if we consider defence overall, we have had the longest period of sustained increase in defence spending for more than 20 years. For most of the time that the Conservatives were in power, they cut defence. We are facing up to the fact that changed commitments in Northern Ireland, which we all welcome, mean that it is necessary to ask what the best military formations are. The hon. Gentleman would do better to concentrate on that instead of all the bluster, which simply obscures the fact that he has no coherent defence policy.
 
26 Oct 2004 : Column 1281
 

ADVOCATE-GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND

The Advocate-General was asked—

---