§ 53. Mr. Stokesasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the Fifth Report from the Select Committee on National Expenditure, wherein it is stated that 160 acres of bogland were purchased at a price of £26,637 for a repair depot; that that site has since been abandoned; and whether he will demand a repayment of the purchase money to the Government, or alternatively, assess that sale for 100 per cent. Excess Profits Tax?
§ Sir K. WoodI am aware of the report to which the hon. Member refers. I read the committee's criticisms as directed not against the price paid for the land but against the selection of this site for a repair depot in view of the expense of preparing it for heavy buildings.
§ Mr. StokesDoes not the Chancellor realise that the criticism of the people is against the price paid for the land and that it is a scandal that land of this kind—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. Speakerrose—
§ Mr. StokesIn view of the fact that that Supplementary Question was reasonably framed, may I ask for a reply?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member has been a Member of the House long enough to know that Supplementary Questions must be framed in equally reasonable language to that of the Question on the Order Paper. The kind of adjective he has used would not be allowed in a Question on the Paper, and cannot be used in a Supplementary Question.
§ Mr. ShinwellMay I ask the Chancellor whether he regards the price paid as reasonable for this kind of land?
§ Sir K. WoodThat is not a matter to which my attention has been directed. I was asked whether, in fact, the Committee adversely reported on the question of the price, and I said in my answer that I read the criticism as being directed against the selection of the site for a repair depot.
§ Mr. StokesIn view of the public concern in this matter, will the Chancellor have a proper investigation made into the price paid?
§ Sir K. WoodI will certainly communicate with the Departments concerned.
§ Sir Percy HarrisHas anybody been brought to book for this transaction? Has the responsibility been brought home?
§ Sir K. WoodAs I read the report, certain steps have been taken.
Mr. De la BèreSurely the Chancellor will not acquiesce in this laisser faire method, of which we have had too much already?
§ Mr. SilvermanOn a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask for your guidance in view of the remarks you have just made? Are we to assume that no matter how preposterous a transaction may be or how preposterously extravagant a price may be paid for a piece of land, it is unparliamentary to describe it as a scandal?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat might be reasonable in Debate in some cases, but not in a Supplementary Question or in a Question on the Paper.