§ 12. Mr. Ness Edwardsasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the financial standing of British Projects, Limited, was investigated prior to their being placed on the Admiralty list; and what experience they had of carrying out the type of work involved in the contract awarded to them?
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty (Sir Victor Warrender)As regards the first part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given on nth July to the hon. Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes), of which I am sending him a copy. The firm's previous experience consisted chiefly of building construction with a small quantity of civil engineering work. The greater part of the Admiralty work entrusted to the firm comprised a large building and two housing schemes, with the necessary attendant water, gas mains and roads and drainage. The remainder of the work consisted of concrete runways and earthworks, of a simple character, involving no difficulty, and for their proper execution the firm's previous experience was considered adequate.
§ Mr. EdwardsCan the hon. Gentleman say whether or not this firm was recommended to his Department by any Members of this House?
§ Sir V. WarrenderNo, Sir. We made the usual inquiries as to the capabilities and the financial state of the firm, and these were all satisfactory, but I am not aware that any recommendations came from Members of Parliament.
Mr. J. J. DavidsonWas this particular contract submitted to tender, and, if so, did any local organisation which could have done this job receive the opportunity of tendering?
§ Sir V. WarrenderThese contracts were put out to tender. This firm was one of the contractors on the Admiralty list, and it was invited to tender along with other firms.
§ 13. Mr. Ness Edwardsasked the First Lord of the Admiralty why payment to British Projects, Limited, was delayed; and whether he is aware that this firm had obtained substantial credits on the grounds that they had obtained Admiralty contracts and that they have now gone into bankruptcy?
§ Sir V. WarrenderI am unable to accept the implication in the first part of the Question. British Projects were liberally treated in regard to payments. It was only when financial difficulties arose that the Admiralty became aware that the firm had obtained substantial credits from suppliers and sub-contractors. It is not unusual for firms to do this, and however regrettable the result, it cannot be regarded as the responsibility of the Admiralty, who took the usual precautions to establish the firm's bona fides. The firm is now in voluntary liquidation.
§ Mr. EdwardsIs it the fact that this was the first contract that this firm had received from the Admiralty and that its failure to carry out this contract in a proper way is an indication that it had had no previous experience?
§ Sir V. WarrenderThis was the first Admiralty contract that it had secured, but in the previous two years it had executed no less than 13 contracts, the value of which was in excess of the seven contracts which it was subsequently awarded by the Admiralty.
§ Mr. LipsonWhen substantial payments are made by the Admiralty, are steps taken to protect sub-contractors from financial loss?
§ Sir V. WarrenderThat is another question, and I should like to see it on the Paper.