Hamilton College of Education: Sale (Hansard, 6 March 1984)

§ Lord Taylor of Gryfe
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Gray of Contin)
My Lords, the Public Accounts Committee report is being carefully studied. In accordance with long-standing arrangements, the Government will respond to the committee in due course by means of a Treasury minute. It would be a breach of the undertakings given to the Public Accounts Committee by successive Governments for me to comment at this stage on the content of the report.

§ Lord Taylor of Gryfe
My Lords, in view of the great public concern about this particular transaction, can the Minister indicate to the House when this minute might be produced and whether it will provide an opportunity for a discussion in this House, or in another place, on the facts which have been revealed by the Public Accounts Committee? Can the Minister confirm that in the Public Accounts Committee it was established that the Chief Valuer put a value of £6 million on these properties, that they were subsequently sold for £600,000 and that the Chief Solicitor has declared in the Public Accounts Committee evidence that the properties were not adequately exposed for sale? In view of these facts, can the Minister expedite the preparation of the Government's comment?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, the Government's comment, by way of a Treasury minute, will be prepared and delivered as soon as possible. I am sure that the noble Lord will appreciate that my position is such that I cannot comment on his other questions.

§ Lord Ross of Marnock
My Lords, surely the Minister of State will be aware that the Minister who was fairly closely connected with this matter has already commented? How does that square with the 141 Minister's own statement today that the Government cannot say anything about it? Is it not clear that a valuable public asset was disposed of to the private sector in a way which was contrary to the Government's own advice and at a price that was contrary to what could have been expected if the sale had been properly carried out? Would the Minister care to change the statement that he made to me on 1st December, of which I have a copy? The Minister cannot comment now, evidently.

Noble Lords
Question!

§ Lord Ross of Marnock
This is the question. Is the Minister aware that he said: As to the final decision, the noble Lord knows only too well that the Secretary of State is always made aware of the situation when such a sale takes place. The Secretary of State would not necessarily approve it but he decided not to hold up the sale"?—[Official Report, 1/12/83; col. 799.] Does the Minister agree with the statement made by the secretary of the Scottish education department, who said that the sale took place at the direction of the Secretary of State; that there was a working party set up in which the SED was involved; and that the Secretary of State finally approved of the sale? Is it not a grave dereliction of ministerial duty to have allowed this to happen?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Ross of Marnock, needs no coaching from any other noble Lord as to how to make his points in the most appropriate way. But the noble Lord cannot expect me to be led down the path he seeks to lead me down. I am not prepared to comment any more at this stage.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that he has put forward what amounts to a new sub judice rule today? He is saying in effect that a Minister cannot comment on anything which has been discussed by the Public Accounts Committee until the Government have issued a Treasury minute about it. This is a new theory. If the noble Lord cannot comment on the report, can he at least comment on the sale of the college?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, noble Lords who have served in another place are trying to divert me from my brief. On this occasion I can assure noble Lords that I am not going to be diverted. I am not prepared to make any comment. The noble Lord, Lord Glenamara, who is a very experienced parliamentarian, is as aware as I am of the conventions in this matter.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, is it not the fact—and as a former chairman of the Public Accounts Committee I can confirm that it is—that fair-minded people, when the Public Accounts Committee has reported, await the reply of the Government to the minute and then form a view; and they do not seek to form an opinion or to influence opinion by going off at half-cock on half the evidence?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, my noble friend, as he so often does, has made a very valuable contribution to our deliberations.

§ Lord Mishcon
My Lords, is the noble Lord the Minister aware that in some parts of this House the feeling is that this matter cannot be shrugged off with general words? Will the Minister accept that in some parts of this House this would prima facie be deemed a first class scandal? Would he therefore not agree that instead of merely giving the reply that the Treasury note will be available as soon as possible it is incumbent upon the Government to fix a very near date when that Treasury note will be available?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I do not recall from the past a precedent for a firm date being agreed in advance. I shall certainly pass on the noble Lord's comments; and I am sure that it will be the Government's intention to make their views known at the earliest date.

§ Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove
My Lords, is the Minister not aware that this is a very special report? With all due respect to his noble friend who spoke as a distinguished former chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, it is a very special report because this matter is causing great distress and suspicion, if I may put it that strongly, in Scotland. A date for the Government's reply to the Treasury minute ought to be fixed fairly soon. Also, it must be a time when the House will have an ample opportunity to consider and debate it in depth.

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, in view of the seriousness of the matter to which the noble Lord has made reference, I am sure he will agree with me that it is better that the Government consider very carefully their response before making it.

§ Lord Taylor of Gryfe
My Lords, I have not had the privilege of the parliamentary experience gained by most noble Lords who have spoken, and perhaps I could have some guidance from the noble Lord the Minister on the subject of the Treasury minute. There are issues of public accountability and ministerial responsibility which go back a long time—since Crichel Down. I wonder whether the Treasury minute is the appropriate vehicle for dealing with these two matters.

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I do not consider myself to be in a position to give guidance on such an important issue. If we are to go by precedent, it has always been accepted as the appropriate way of dealing with the matter.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, in view of the general concern and, indeed, disquiet felt in many parts of the House, will the noble Lord be good enough to ask his right honourable friend the Secretary of State whether he will consider as a matter of urgency making a Statement in another place when the Government have reached a view on the Treasury note—a Statement which will, of course, be repeated in this House?

§ Lord Gray of Contin
My Lords, I shall certainly pass on the noble Lord's comment to my right honourable friend.