HC Deb 04 April 1967 vol 744 cc22-5
33. Mr. William Hamilton

asked the Minister of Technology what is the total value of Governmental contracts with Bristol Siddeley Engines Limited; and what are the comparable figures for new contracts negotiated in each of the last six years.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Technology (Mr. John Stonehouse)

New contracts placed by my Department with Bristol Siddeley Engines Limited over the past six years have averaged between £50 million and £60 million per annum.

It is estimated that the value of uncompleted contracts is of the order of £140 million.

Mr. Hamilton

Could my hon. Friend say what steps he is taking to have another look at the contractual procedures, in view of recent events, and could he give an assurance that this firm has not been paid twice for any work mentioned there, and that the directors have behaved with propriety throughout?

Mr. Stonehouse

I would prefer not to anticipate the statement which I hope to make soon on this subject.

Mr. Speaker

Mr. Fisher.

Mr. Fisher

Owing to the contradictory statements made—

Mr. Speaker

I called the hon. Member to ask Question No. 34.

34 and 35. Mr. Fisher

asked the Minister of Technology (1) whether he will authorise a public inquiry into the Bristol Siddeley contract;

(2) whether he will devise a new and more satisfactory formula for determining the level of profits for firms undertaking Government work.

36. Mr. Edelman

asked the Minister of Technology whether the Press statement of 25th March referring to the Bristol Siddeley repayment was made with his authority.

Mr. Stonehouse

I would ask hon. Members to await the statement which I hope to make soon.

Mr. Fisher

But, owing to the contradictory statements made before Easter, is the hon. Gentleman aware that neither the public nor the House of Commons has any idea where the blame lies or what steps should be taken to prevent this sort of thing in the future? Would he bear in mind the possibility of adopting the American target system which may be more preferable than present arrangements?

Mr. Stonehouse

I have nothing to add to my original statement, and I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the original statement I gave to the House on the Wednesday before we rose for the Recess.

Mr. Edelman

In order to prepare us for his further statement, would my hon. Friend say at what date Bristol Siddeley admitted to having received a double payment and whether it has now actually been repaid, and at what stage the firm conceded that it had engaged in gross overcharging?

Mr. Stonehouse

I would ask my hon. Friend to contain himself with his usual patience.

Mr. R. Carr

While we would like to exercise patience, because we believe a full statement is necessary, could the Minister tell us what he means by "soon"? Tomorrow is one thing, but next week would be too long.

Mr. Stonehouse

I hope it will be tomorrow. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that it is important that this statement should be made and that the House should hear it as soon as it can be made.

Mr. Whitaker

How many other profits have gone undetected, does my hon. Friend think, contrary to the public interest? Is not the only way of safeguarding the public interest to nationalise these undertakings as recommended by the Plowden Report so as to make sure that their profits go to the public?

Mr. Stonehouse

That is a very wide question and I would ask my hon. Friend to await the statement which I hope to make very soon indeed.

Mr. Corfield

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, owing to the multiplicity of statements already made, Press reports have drawn extremely defamatory innuendoes both about private individuals and identifiable civil servants, and will he bear in mind the great importance of seeing that this is cleared up?

Mr. Stonehouse

This is a point very much in my mind, and I am sure that the House and the public generally will welcome the fact that this whole question will be cleared up very soon.

Mr. Maxwell

While agreeing that my hon. Friend needs to take time to prepare his supplementary statement, may I ask whether he can tell the House that he accepts the necessity in principle that firms obtaining Government contracts must open their books to the Government in exactly the same way as they do in the United States?

Mr. Stonehouse

I hope my hon. Friend, and the House generally, will await the statement I hope to make.