Rolls-Royce

HC Deb 04 December 1972 vol 847 cc896-8

19. Mr. Rost

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when the first annual report and accounts of Rolls-Royce (1971) Limited will be published.

Mr. Onslow

The first report and accounts for the period up to 31st December 1971 were published on 23rd August. Copies were placed in the Library.

Mr. Rost

Is my hon. Friend aware that even the auditors of the accounts admitted that they were unrealistic as the payments for the assets acquired nearly two years ago have still not been made, that a suspense account exists on the accounts for £77 million towards such payment? Why was the hearing of the independent assessor again deferred?

Mr. Onslow

My hon. Friend knows that the delays in the hearing have been due to difficulties experienced by the parties involved, and the expert has decided that the hearing should take place at a deferred date.

Mr. Dalyell

Why was not confidence shown in the independent assessor?

Mr. Onslow

I do not know what on earth the hon. Gentleman is talking about.

Mr. Rost

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, and the extreme public concern, I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

37. Mr. Whitehead

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what has been the cost to date of the winding-up of the operations of Rolls-Royce Limited.

Mr. Onslow

This is a matter for the joint liquidators.

Mr. Whitehead

But is the hon. Gentleman aware that there have been major shifts in executive control at the behest of the Government in a firm for which these negotiations are still taking place? In view of the widespread misgivings about the cost of this operation and the length of time involved, is it not time that the Government stopped their flippant attitude towards the activities of the assessor and brought these very expensive negotiations to a satisfactory conclusion?

Mr. Onslow

I am not sure how the hon. Gentleman draws those conclusions from my reply. However, I assure him that the Government are not being flippant about this matter. Since 4th February the Government have paid £55 million in respect of the assets from the receiver and for working capital. That does not seem to me to indicate flippancy.

Mr. Rost

Is not the cost of the winding-up influenced by the delay in paying the money for the acquisition of the assets? Therefore, is not that an extra liability on the creditors and shareholders?

Mr. Onslow

These are matters which must be determined by the expert whom the parties agreed to appoint to resolve the differences between them. It would not be right for me to comment on them.

Mr. Dalyell

On what criteria do the Government feel justified in interfering in the choice or otherwise of people in Rolls-Royce?

Mr. Onslow

The hon. Gentleman should not anticipate his later Question on the Order Paper, but the criterion which I apply when answering questions is that it would be wholly invidious to get involved in matters of that kind.