§ 4. Mr. Stokesasked the Secretary of State for Air whether he give the name of the vendor of the 160 acres of bog-land, for which the Government paid £26,637, referred to in the Fifth Report from the Select Committee on National Expenditure, and the names of those responsible for the selection of the site; and what steps the Government propose to take to recover this amount?
§ The Secretary of State for Air (Sir Archibald Sinclair)The total area of 160 acres was acquired from seven separate owners. These were: Paisley Borough Council, the Duke of Abercorn, Mr. Robert Rowand, Messrs. Houston Bros., the Misses Taylor, Douglas Estate (Earl of Home), J. P. Cochrane's trustees. The site was finally approved by the member of the Air Council concerned after hearing the views of his professional advisers. It was essential that a site adjoining an aerodrome should be chosen and the nature of the site was only one of a number of considerations which had to be taken into account in determining the final choice.
The average price paid, exclusive of tenant right compensation and legal and other expenses amounting to £3,359, was £145 per acre. This price was considered fair and reasonable, and was well below the estimate of value which had been furnished by the Inland Revenue Valuation Department. I am not aware of any grounds on which it could reasonably be proposed to recover the cost of the land from the vendors. Part of the site is at present in use for Air Force purposes, and the remainder, which has been improved as building land by the work already carried out upon it, will be disposed of as opportunity occurs.
§ Mr. AmmonIs it a fact that over £250,000 was lost on the site; and who is to blame for the fact that no one of local knowledge was consulted before the decision was taken to buy it?
§ Sir A. SinclairThe reasons why this land was chosen are many. The purchase of the land was strongly advised for reasons affecting unemployment in the locality and so forth. The best advice was taken on the question of the purchase of this land, and actually we were able to get it at a price lower than that estimated by the Inland Revenue Valuation Department.
§ Mr. AmmonIs it not a fact that in the report referred to in the Question it is pointed out, as one of the items of condemnation, that no account was taken of local knowledge?
§ Mr. KirkwoodIs the Minister not aware that this ground is on the Clyde, and that it is causing tremendous dissatisfaction on the Clyde that the landowners are charging all this money for this bog land while men are having to give up positions of £600 a year and join the Army, where they get only 2s. a day?
§ Mr. SpeakerThis is not the time to make a speech.
§ Mr. KirkwoodI am not making a speech, Mr. Speaker; but I want an answer.
§ Sir A. SinclairThe answer is that we got this land cheaper than the valuation put on it by the Inland Revenue Valuation Department. It has yet to be seen at what price we may be able to sell the land. It may well be a higher price than we gave.
§ Mr. StokesCan the Secretary of State tell us what was the rateable value prior to the purchase—was it rated, or all derated?
§ Sir A. SinclairI cannot, without notice.
§ Colonel WedgwoodOn what basis did the Inland Revenue authorities calculate? Was it for Death Duty purposes, or what?
§ Sir A. SinclairI think that question should be addressed to the Minister responsible for the Inland Revenue Valuation Department. It is not my responsibility.
§ Colonel Sir Charles MacAndrewWhat steps have been taken against the people responsible for this purchase?
§ Sir A. SinclairNo steps have been taken. It has yet to be proved that this will cause a loss to the State.
§ Mr. StokesMay I give notice that, in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I will raise the matter on the Adjournment?