HC Deb 01 March 1956 vol 549 cc1363-6
45. Mr. Dodds

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware of the concern arising from the frequency with which substantial quantities of Government surplus stocks are disposed of at auction sales; and if he will cause an investigation to be made to ascertain if reasonable care is taken when ordering supplies and whether suitable administrative machinery is in existence to ensure other Government Departments and public bodies make the best possible use of any surplus stocks in order to protect the taxpayer's interest before resorting to public auctions.

46. Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of losses incurred in selling surplus stocks, he will set up a central purchasing agency to act for all Government Departments in order to avoid similar losses in future.

The Prime Minister (Sir Anthony Eden)

Central purchasing arrangements exist for many common service stores, but a central purchasing agency to act for all Government Departments would not be practicable or desirable. My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Supply informed the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Dodds) last Monday of the machinery for ensuring that Government Departments know when surplus stores are available. The Departmental Ministers concerned are investigating the various transactions which have been mentioned in this House, where it has been suggested that the machinery is not working.

Mr. Dodds

Is the Prime Minister aware that the only machinery that has been in operation is the sending of a sixpenny catalogue to a Government Department when a sale has been arranged, so that the Government Department could take part in the auction sale? In view of the evidence of the waste that has been taking place up to now is not the Prime Minister proposing, in our difficult economic circumstances, to take this matter a lot more seriously than he has suggested in answering the Question?

The Prime Minister

I have been into this matter since the Questions were asked. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman is quite right in saying that that is the only step that is taken. There are many preliminary steps taken among Government Departments themselves. Let me give the House one example of the difficulties of this matter. A great many Questions have been asked about paint. I found, on inquiry, that stores of paint ordered in 1953 were largely for our troops fighting in Korea: it was bituminous paint to protect tents against weather conditions during the fighting in Korea. Happily, that fighting is over. There are no other uses for that kind of paint anywhere else, except where there are hostilities. That being so, it is inevitable that some of the paint should be sold.

Mr. Gaitskell

As I understand it, the Prime Minister has caused an investigation to be made, though it is by the Departmental Ministers. Will he let us know when the investigations will be completed, and will he consider making a further statement to inform the House of the outcome of the investigations?

The Prime Minister

I asked Ministers to look into the various points raised—I thought that was only courteous to the House—and they will give full information. I have been looking into the machinery which controls this matter and I am convinced that it is satisfactory, all things considered. It has been in operation for some time. We get this kind of circumstance when an order has been placed some time ahead, and rightly so. At that time we had 30,000 troops in Korea and it was right to get bituminous paint to protect their tents in case the fighting had gone on. Fortunately, the fighting did not go on, so we have to get rid of the paint.

Mr. Gaitskell

As there are several Departmental Ministers involved, would it not be for the convenience of the House if the Prime Minister put the results of their investigations together and made a statement himself?

The Prime Minister

I have considered that, but I will consider it again. These are mostly very detailed questions. I have looked into the general machinery, and I am satisfied that it will work. I will consider the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion.

Lieut.-Colonel Lipton

Does not the evidence already provided show that the co-ordination that at present exists in purchasing is woefully inadequate? What is the use of asking citizens to economise if the Government go on, like modern Pharaohs building up vast pyramids of costly junk?

The Prime Minister

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is wrong in his assumption. There has been a considerable reduction in the use by the Services of some of these materials, reductions caused by the end of the Korean War, the withdrawal of troops from Austria and Trieste and so on. All these reductions were very welcome to this House, but the result is that there are surpluses which the Government think it is right to get rid of.

Squadron Leader Cooper

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the paint industry is very seriously concerned about the method by which this vast quantity of paint has been disposed of, at prices substantially below the current cost of production, and that it has had a serious effect upon the industry as a whole? It distorts the production programme of very large numbers of firms. It is generally felt that better, more efficient and up-to-date methods could have been found to dispose of this quantity of paint.

Hon. Members

Hear, hear.

The Prime Minister

I am not quite sure that I can accept what my hon. and gallant Friend says, and I am surprised that it was cheered from below the Gangway. If surplus quantities of paint are sold, and the result is to reduce the price, that does not seem to me to be a very terrible event.

Mr. Dodds

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Answer I will appeal to you, Mr. Speaker, to allocate Adjournment time for a debate at an early date.