§ 25. Mr. Channonasked the Minister of Public Building and Works what evidence he has received from the Mann Committee regarding the efficiency of the direct labour departments inside his Department; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Mr. PrenticeMy predecessor received a Report from the Mann Committee in 1965, which dealt with methods of executing maintenance and minor works. I am expecting to receive, in the early summer, a further report from the Committee on the use of directly employed labour.
§ Mr. ChannonDid not the Mann Committee say that direct labour departments inside a Minister's Department are less efficient than private contractors? Is that the reason why this information has not been given to the House?
§ Mr. PrenticeThe first Report of the Mann Committee dealt mainly with other matters, and it made a number of recommendations, for example, on the way in which we let contracts. Most of those recommendations have been put into effect. The only reason why the Report was not published was that it contained a lot of confidential information obtained from firms, which it would have been wrong to make public.
§ Mr. MurtonIf Parliament is not to be informed, how is it that the building trade operatives know the answer.
§ Mr. PrenticeThere is some confusion here. I said in my original reply that I expect to receive the second report from the Committee, dealing with the question of directly employed labour, in the early summer. The unions have been giving evidence to the Committee and discussing among themselves the kind of evidence they would give and the general situation surrounding the report.