§ 34. Sir MURDOCH McKENZIE WOODasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that, in the course of a recent prosecution for embezzlement of a collector of taxes at Banff Sheriff Court, evidence was given that the accused during the 15 years of his appointment was entirely without the benefit of a proper audit; whether he is aware that public uneasiness has been created by this case and other similar ones; and whether he is taking any steps to prevent the recurrence of such frauds?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Chamberlain)The accounts of collectors are balanced annually and on balancing are subjected to audit tests which, in the case in question, were successful in bringing the default to light. While no system of audit and accounting can prevent defaults, or do more than ensure as far as possible that they are quickly detected, I am not satisfied that the arrangements in Scotland are the best that are practicable, and the whole matter at the present time is under inquiry by the Board of Inland Revenue.
§ Sir M. WOODMay we take it that it is correct to say that this man's books were not audited for 15 years?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINNo, I do not think that is a correct statement of the case. The practice in Scotland is exactly as I have said in my answer.
§ Sir M. WOODWill the right hon. Gentleman see that a statement of this kind is not made without the counsel for the Treasury showing whether it is true or not? Is it not likely to cause public uneasiness that a statement of this kind should go out uncontradicted?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINIf I have not contradicted it, I have given a true account of what has taken place. I further stated that I am not satisfied that the arrangements in Scotland are satisfactory and that that matter is under careful inquiry. I think that that will go some way to satisfy public uneasiness.