British Technology Group (Hansard, 12 February 1992)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Reay)
My Lords, the Government are proceeding with the privatisation of the British Technology Group by competitive sale. A number of consortia have been shortlisted and are currently preparing final bids. We intend to ensure that BTG is sold to a consortium which will continue BTG's traditional technology transfer business.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, can the noble Lord confirm or deny that one of the bidders is Research Corporation Technology of Arizona, the chief competitor of the British Technology Group? Can he also confirm or deny that British Technology Group is now being asked to supply the Arizona 718 company with confidential information which, if given, would destroy the trust of British researchers —particularly in the universities—in the British Technology Group?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, I can say that a number of consortia have submitted bids. I do not want to go into the details of them because that could prejudice the efforts of some of the leaders of the consortia to finalise their arrangements with their own investors. On the question of confidentiality, the matter here is that all bidders need equal access to information on which they can make their final bids. However, we recognise the importance of the issue of confidentiality to BTG. I am, therefore, pleased to be able to say that we have agreed procedures with BTG to protect the most commercially sensitive information, while at the same time allowing consortia access to information they need on which to base their bids.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, will the noble Lord address himself to my noble friend's question? Is this American company to be provided with information about BTG simply because it is part of a consortium which may be, and I believe is, on the short list for consideration by the Government? Furthermore, is it the case that this American trust —which certainly does good business in America and is a competitor of BTG—will be allowed in one way or another to gain control of BTG as privatised, or are the Government now sticking firmly and categorically to the assurance that they gave to this House that nobody, directly or indirectly, will own more than 15 per cent. of a privatised BTG?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, I can confirm that we stick to the assurances which we gave to the House. No one investor will have overall control; nor will it be sold to an industrial consortium. We have always made it plain that we shall sell BTG to the right consortium, one which will take a long-term view and which satisfies us that it will continue the traditional technology transfer activities of BTG. On the matter of confidentiality, I believe that I answered the question of the noble Lord, Lord Hatch.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, I am sorry to press the noble Lord but I must do so on this point. Is RCT a member of a consortium which is bidding for BTG? Why are the Government so coy about all this? If the answer is yes, will the Government give us an assurance that, indirectly or directly, there will be no question of this American company trust taking over control of BTG? If the answer is no, will the noble Lord please say so, honestly and plainly?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, there is no question of any single company or body taking over control of BTG because it will be sold, as we have repeatedly said to Parliament, to a consortium. It is the case that not all parties have wished their interest to be disclosed while they finalise details of their consortium; and we respect that.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that to use flotation in order to demand 719 information that has been supplied to BTG by research scientists all over this country is to betray their trust in BTG?

§ Lord Reay
No, my Lords, I do not think so. The British Technology Group Act gave authority to the Government to privatise BTG. It is now up to the Government to carry it out. We intend to conduct the negotiating process in confidence in order to ensure an orderly sale process and to maximise competition between the consortia.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, has the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals been consulted about this matter?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, we indeed consulted the CVCP prior to the sale, following the amendment to the British Technology Group Act passed in this House.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, do I understand from the noble Lord's second reply to me that it is the Government who are prepared to give up the confidentiality of research projects submitted to the British Technology Group? Is it the Government's intention during the flotation to compel BTG to surrender the confidentiality of the research with which it has been provided?

§ Lord Reay
My Lords, as I said, we believe that it is in the best interests of a competitive sale to conduct the negotiating process in confidence. However, we have not sought to prevent bidders from revealing the identity of their own consortium, nor from giving information about the structure of the consortium, nor factual information about the members of their consortium.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, does the noble Lord recall that there was a great deal of secrecy about the sale of Rover to British Aerospace? Does he also recall that as a result of that secrecy a huge scandal blew up? Are we likely to have a similar kind of scandal over this matter?

§ Lord Reay
No, my Lords.