HC Deb 26 July 1949 vol 467 cc2437-42

Lords Amendment: In page 44, line 26, leave out from "1948" to end of line 30.

Mr. G. R. Strauss

I beg to move. "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

This Amendment raises a simple issue. It is the question of the presentation to Parliament of the accounts of the companies and laying them before the Minister and the House. We have followed in the Bill quite strictly the provisions laid down in the Companies Act, which says that group accounts must be published, and the holding company must publish consolidated accounts, but it is not necessary to publish the subsidiary accounts. It is a very simple issue here. There are about 80 group accounts to publish, and they will be sent to the Minister and laid before Parliament. If all the subsidiary accounts are to be laid as well, there will be about 225, and their presentation would be a considerable nuisance. All these accounts will be made public, and anybody can see them. There will be far more accounts published than ever before, and we do seriously suggest that it would be quite wrong to demand the presentation of these 225 accounts to the House. The procedure we suggest actually goes farther than is demanded by the Companies Act.

Mr. Peake

The right hon. Gentleman asks us to disagree with another place; we would disagree with his remarks; but, seeing that the Parliamentary Secretary has found himself able, on 10 out of 12 of the last Amendments, to say that he agrees with another place, out of mercy to him and other hon. Members opposite we shall not divide the House.

Mr. Erroll (Altrincham and Sale)

It may be all right in the case of a private company for one to go to Somerset House and get a copy of an account on demand, but in the case of a public undertaking, the accounts should be available by means, perhaps, of a consolidated booklet, with the accounts properly published.

Major Legge-Bourke (Isle of Ely)

I do not propose to detain the House for long, but as it may be recalled, my main charge against the Government on this Bill has consistently been that they are taking powers unto themselves, and putting into the hands of Ministers powers over which Parliament has no proper control. There is only one way in which we can have any control over the way in which this industry works, and that is by having the most detailed accounts each year. If this Amendment is rejected, it means that group accounts will be used to disguise anything which the Minister may wish to hide. I disapprove of the Minister's intentions in this matter.

Lords Amendment: In page 44, line 39, at end to insert: () The accounts of each publicly-owned company shall give or be accompanied by a statement giving separate information as respects each of the principal activities of the company and as far as may be the financial and operating results of each such activity.

Mr. G. R. Strauss

I beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

This Amendment asks that the accounts of each publicly-owned company shall give a separate statement about the financial results of the principal activities of the company concerned, together with other statistical information. I suggest that it is undesirable, for two reasons. First, it is the duty of the Corporation under Clause 38 (5) to publish all statistical information available about the trading activities of the publicly-owned companies. This statistical information will be there. The other point is whether the actual financial results and production costs of all the principal activities shall be collected and published.

That, we suggest, would again put an undue burden on the Corporation and the publicly-owned companies. The costing system of the publicly-owned companies would have to be adapted to make that possible, and that would take a considerable time and would be a considerable burden. It would mean, moreover, that the production costs of all these principal activities, having been published, would come to the knowledge of our competitors overseas. It is undesirable that the production costs of all these important articles should be published to the world, and it might seriously damage our trade in foreign countries. For these reasons, I suggest that the proposal contained in the Amendment is unreasonable. It would be a very substantial burden on the Corporation and it should be rejected.

12.45 a.m.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke (Dorset, Southern)

I think that the Minister is confusing two things. It is quite true that in Clause 38 (5) there is provision for the Corporation to publish periodical statistics and returns, not only of the Corporation but of each of the publicly-owned companies. What is asked for in the Amendment is something quite different from the mass of figures rather like the green document which the Government issue every month. It is a statement giving separate information as regards each of the principal activities of the company.

I do not consider that that is any more than we are now getting from the iron and steel companies which are privately owned. If we look at their balance sheets we find set out at the end two or three pages of print showing the ramifications of the companies, their subsidiaries, where they operate in different parts of the world, and lists of the activities which they conduct. I do not think it unreasonable to ask that what is now being done in the best private commercial practice should be repeated by the Corporation and its subsidiaries. I do not believe that the Minister has properly considered this matter, and I ask him to indicate that he might, after all, accept the Amendment.

Mr. G. R. Strauss

This is not done by private companies at the moment; they do not give financial records of their activities.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

I did not say "financial records."

Lords Amendment: In page 44, line 46, at end insert: () Where it appears from the accounts of a publicly-owned company that in any year such publicly-owned company has incurred a loss from its activities taken together the Report of the Corporation required under section four of this Act shall draw attention to such loss and to the circumstances in which it has been incurred.

Mr. G. R. Strauss

I beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

The Amendment suggests that whenever a publicly-owned company has made a loss, the Corporation in its report to the Minister and to Parliament should set out the reasons for that loss and the circumstances in which it has been incurred. If we are going to specify all the things that shall be contained in that report, I would point out to the House that we have a whole lot of suggestions to make, and that I do not think this particular item would be at the top of the list. There are all sorts of other things which we hope will be reported to us by the Corporation—new developments, general prospects, the size of the staff, and so on, which are all of great importance—as well as this one which has been suggested in the Amendment.

We take the line that it would be wrong to specify any particular matter of interest to the House and to the public. If we did that, it would look as if we put greater emphasis on it than on other things. It is much better to leave it to the Corporation. We know from experience that the accounts of these corporations are very full of information. We should leave it to them to give such information as they think desirable, and if important information is withheld the Minister has the power to ask for it and to present it to Parliament. For these reasons, I suggest that the House should reject the Amendment.