The reason I choose to raise the question of the future of Glenrothes is the evidence that I have received of the anxiety in the town consequent on the recent announcements of pit closures in the very near future, and in particular the effects of the announcement in respect of the Rothes pit for which the new town was originally designated.

The Rothes pit currently employs 849 men, and 400 will be declared redundant. The National Coal Board has given an undertaking that most of them will be placed in neighbouring pits, but the anxiety that arises is concerned with the uncertainty of the pits to which these men will go. The men are concerned about the future of Bowhill and King-lassie pits and even the Seafield pit. Men employed in these pits are concerned about their future. Those who live in Glenrothes are not currently employed at the Rothes pit, but at Bowhill, Kinglassie and elsewhere. If those pits are closed, I estimate that the future of 2,000 to 3,000 in Glenrothes may be adversely affected.

I was rather surprised, therefore when, in answer to a Question on 29th November, the Secretary of State said he was not aware of any general anxiety about the future of the town and that certainly none was felt for the future by the Development Corporation. I was glad to hear that, but I do not think that the Development Corporation can be in very close contact with the people at Glenrothes for it to have given that information to the right hon. Gentleman.

In any case, I want to examine the reason for that optimism in a little more detail. I think that it is based on two propositions—first, that the town is now concerned more with overspill from Glasgow, with which it entered into an agreement two years ago, and secondly, the stimulation of further industrial growth in the future. If we take the first proposition, that of overspill from Glasgow, the results so far do not give much ground for believing that this will solve the problem of Glenrothes or that of Glasgow. In paragraph 89 of the Development Corporation's Annual Report for the year ended 31st March, 1961, it is reported that only 51 families have been housed under the Overspill Agreement". That is not a very great contribution to the problems either of Glenrothes or of Glasgow.

The Report goes on to say that the future influx from Glasgow will depend on the securing of employment in Glenrothes and the surrounding area. The question which I want to put to the Under-Secretary of State is this: has the announcement about the future development of the mining industry in Fife had any adverse effect on the number of applications coming from Glasgow people who want to go to the Fife area? The Corporation's Annual Report says in paragraph 4: The Local Employment Act does not contain any benefits which have proved to be of material advantage to the securing of new industries in Glenrothes, despite the fact that the Act permits assistance to be given to places which have overspill agreements with development districts. Indeed, Glenrothes is at a disadvantage in this respect compared with other new towns and other development districts. In my view and that of the Corporation, Glenrothes should be able to compete with those areas on equal terms, and I think that this is more essential than ever now that the future of the mining industry is in the balance and when the effects of the Local Employment Act have been seen to have given very little impetus to industrial development in the town.

I want to be very careful not to cry stinking fish about the future of the town. I believe that it has a great deal to offer to industrialists. It has first-class sites, fully serviced, and it has top-quality labour, both male and female. I have talked to some of the managers of the American firms which have come there, and they have paid great compliments to the quality of the labour which they have found in Fife. They have extremely good access to surrounding areas. There are houses available for all classes of labour, the educational facilities are excellent, and when the Forth Road bridge is completed in 1963, I think that the transport facilities to the area will be even better than they are now.

On the other hand, as the Annual Report of the Corporation points out, there are difficulties in the way. It mentions, for instance, cost of land and cost of the purchase or rent of a factory as inducements to offer to industrialists to move to new towns.

The other question I would ask the hon. Gentleman is, what are the Government prepared to do towards helping to solve some of these difficulties? The Report said: The problem of inducements to industrialists is currently under examination by your Department. I should be glad if the Under-Secretary would give an answer to that question put in the Report, as to the consideration which the Government are giving to further inducements to industrialists to come to Glenrothes. I hope he will show more imagination than the Board of Trade has shown up to now. Whenever one asks questions of Ministers of that Department, as my hon. Friend the Member for Lanarkshire, North (Miss Herbison) did the other night in her Adjournment debate, one gets generalities, such as this which I got on 16th November, that the Board will continue to steer new industry to … any area in which high and persistent unemployment exists or is to be expected."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th November, 1961; Vol. 649, c. 79.] That phrase was used as an answer to my Question asking whether Glenrothes would be scheduled as a development district. Presumably it is thought that the rate of unemployment is not sufficiently high for it to be scheduled.

But the Toothill recommendations conflict with the view of the Board of Trade. The third recommendation in that Report says: The immediate relief of unemployment should not be the only factor in giving assistance. The build up of industrial complexes and centres which offer prospects of becoming zones of growth should be one of the principal aims of policy. It went, in page 154, paragraph 2008, to say: We recommend that the provisions"— of the Local Employment Act— should apply in full measure not only to the present development districts but also"— and I would ask the hon. Gentleman to note these words— to the new towns in Scotland and to all Glasgow overspill reception areas. In this way it would be possible to encourage expansion in promising centres previously eligible only on a restricted basis, and the overspill operation would be furthered more surely if with less apparent directness. On page 142 the suggestion is made that development corporations should have a freer hand in the negotiation of rents for factory space. It is true that temporary rent abatements have recently been authorised by the Government, and I hope this policy will be pursued with increasing vigour now that suddenly Glenrothes finds itself in somewhat more difficulty since the decision on the colliery was taken.

The Toothill Committee also had something to say about advance factories, and in paragraph 1814 said that the new towns have been successful in providing and letting advance factories. It went on to say that they have: a useful part to play in areas where other factors indicate a likelihood of industrial growth. In paragraph 20.30, the Committee said that a sound contribution can be made to regional development by the building of advance factories provided that they are located at promising points of growth likely to be attractive to industrialists. One would think that the Toothill Committee had been reading all the propaganda issued by the Labour Party over the last several years. The Toothill Committee, composed, as it was, mainly of industrialists, at least has been converted so far to our point of view. I believe that Glenrothes is one of those "promising points of growth" to which the Committee referred.

The Corporation says in its Report that the policy of building advance factories was vindicated in the town itself in 1960, because the fact that it had built an advance factory was the reason for the success in attracting a United States firm, Cessna Industrial Products, Ltd., a subsidiary of Cessna Aircraft Company, Ltd., of Hutchinson, Kansas. Forty men, I understand, are to be employed. There is 12,000 sq. ft. of production space and 3,000 sq. ft. of office accommodation. It is a small firm but, I believe, a progressive one. If we can get more firms like this with the help of the Government, everybody will be highly delighted.

The Development Corporation, I understand, has submitted a programme for advance building of standard factories. The first two units, of 13,000 and 21,000 sq. ft. are planned to start next June and they await the approval of the Department. I should be glad if the Under-Secretary would make a statement on this point also.

Despite the anxiety which has undoubtedly been generated by the pit closures, I do not want to be pessimistic about the future, nor am I; but it is now more imperative than ever for the Government to show more imagination, more energy and more initiative in tackling at one and the same time the problem of Glasgow's overspill and the problem of more speedy industrial development in Glenrothes.

I know that there are developers waiting to go ahead in the new town centre. They have seen me and have told me that they want to invest £¼ million in the centre of the new town, but they are hesitant and doubtful whether that would be a sound investment. I hope very much that the Under-Secretary, when he answers the debate, will say things tonight that will remove all doubt from their minds and from the minds of the people in the town.