§ 19. Mr. Whiteheadasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now publish the results of his departmental inquiry into the affairs of Rolls-Royce Ltd., prior to the bankruptcy of 4th February 1971; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Peter WalkerThe report by two independent inspectors appointed under Section 165 of the Companies Act 1948 to inquire into the affairs of Rolls-Royce Ltd. was published on 2nd August. I am grateful to the inspectors for producing this report.
§ Mr. WhiteheadDoes the Minister agree that a report of this magnitude was far too important to have been published in the depths of the Summer Recess, with no possibility of parliamentary debate upon it or a statement by the right hon. Gentleman? Does he further agree that the report should have gone into more detail about the circumstances in which the Government decided to bankrupt the company as well as to nationalise it?
I ask this in view of statements within the report, first that Lockheed, on 3rd February, was asking for more time to consider a compromise solution and, secondly, that the engine was likely to be a technical success at the moment the receiver was appointed.
§ Mr. WalkerAs regards the timing, we thought it important to publish the report as soon as possible. The Government have already given a clear account of their part in these events in the White Paper, "Rolls-Royce Limited and the RB 211 Aero Engine".
§ Mr. Maxwell-HyslopWhy does my right hon. Friend refuse to publish the evidence that was given in the course of that inquiry, so that hon. Members can judge whether the conclusions arrived at by the inspectors on the basis of that evidence logically followed from it? Would it not be just to all the parties concerned if the evidence were published as well as the conclusions?
§ Mr. WalkerIn reports under Section 165 it has not been customary for this to be done.