§ 85. Mr. Dingle Footasked the Secretary of State for War the reasons why the War Office rejected the offer of Ransomes and Rapier, Limited, to manufacture shells on a no-profit basis; whether, at the time when it was first rejected, the tender of the firm was the lowest received; and, if not, if he will state the difference between the said tender and the lowest tender received?
§ Sir V. WarrenderThe firm in question offered to make empty shell, if the Government would provide certain building and plant, on the basis that they should be indemnified against loss but make no profit, though their full oncosts should be allowed for. The figure quoted by them, however, was not the lowest tender that had been received at the time, and was, in any case, only an estimate of the cost which the Department would have to pay if the firm was to be guaranteed against loss. As the firm had expressed strong disinclination to make munitions of war at all, it was, in all the circumstances, decided not to press them to do so. As regards the last part of the question, it is not the practice of Government Departments to disclose information of this nature.
§ Mr. FootCan the hon. Member say at what, date the lowest tenders to which he refers were received?
§ Sir V. WarrenderThe hon. Member has asked me whether at the time the tender of this firm was received, it was the lowest. I have told him that it was not the lowest at the time.
§ Mr. PalingCan the Minister expect the War Office to agree to a no-profit basis in any event?
§ Mr. Garro JonesCan the hon. Member say whether any tenders were received which were of the same kind, and can he say on what grounds he refuses to give information regarding the prices, when the prices paid are known throughout the trade?
§ Sir V. WarrenderIn reply to the second part of the question, it has never been the practice to disclose such information. In reply to the first part of the supplementary question, I have said that the price quoted by this firm was not the lowest that was offered to us at the time.
§ 89. Mr. Lyonsasked the Secretary of State for War what contracts for defence material have been refused to the firm of Messrs. Ransomes and Rapier, Limited, of Ipswich and London, on account of their proposals for a non-profit basis?
§ Sir V. WarrenderNone, Sir. The offer of Messrs. Ransomes and Rapier was refused for several reasons, but the desire expressed by this firm to work without profit was, of course, a factor in favour of acceptance.
§ Mr. RadfordIs it not a fact that these people did not tender any price, but gave a provisional figure and that they would have been indemnified against loss if it cost them more than they calculated?