HC Deb 23 April 1956 vol 551 cc1421-2
3. Mr. Hamilton

asked the Minister of Supply the total amount paid from public funds to the aircraft company which manufactured the Comet aircraft.

Mr. Maudling

I assume the Question relates to expenditure by my Department following the Comet accidents. I would refer the hon. Member to paragraphs 36 and 47 of the Comptroller and Auditor General's Report on the Civil Appropriation Accounts (Classes VI-X), 1954–55.

Mr. Hamilton

Has the Minister seen the accounts of the recent report for de Havilland in which the company indicates its record profits for the year 1955? In the words of the Sunday Express a week ago, suspicion is growing in the City that the Ministry of Supply has treated the company with remarkable generosity over the Comet affair. Will the Minister give an assurance that in the £100 million about which the Chancellor talks the Ministry of Supply will play its part by cutting down the extortionate profits made by these companies?

Mr. Maudling

I think the hon. Gentleman has failed to observe that the de Havilland enterprise goes much further than the aircraft company, and in the matter of the dividends paid he should not assume that any of the money was contributed by the aircraft company. So far as Her Majesty's Government have bought products from the company, the prices of these are, in my opinion, both fair and reasonable.

Mr. Beswick

May I ask two questions? The first is that, according to a deputation of workers from the Cheshire factory which came here, work on the Comet II is held up and time is being wasted. Can the Minister say whether that is, in fact, the case? Secondly, can he say whether in addition to paying the company—according to the Comptroller and Auditor General—too high a price for the Comet II, there is a report that the company is asking for some compensation from the Ministry for the Comet IV because of the short production line that will apparently be entailed there? Can the Minister say whether there is any truth in that second suggestion?

Mr. Maudling

On the first point, I was not aware that anything was holding up production of the Comet II, but I will gladly look into it. On the second point, I do not see how any question of compensation for the Comet IV can arise.