§ Mr. T. M. HEALYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether) as it is admitted that Colonel Crompton, the consulting engineer of the Road Board, frequently acts as consulting engineer to Taroads, Limited, and the Praed Construction Company, Limited, the Road Board consider this consistent with his duty as their adviser on various competing methods of road surfacing; and, if so, whether the other competing companies are at liberty to secure the impartiality of Colonel Crompton's advice by also employing him as their consulting engineer?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe Road Board are informed by Colonel Crompton2380W that, in accordance with the usual practice of his profession, he acts as consulting engineer for any clients who desire to employ him. The Board consider this is consistent with the satisfactory discharge of the duties which they require from him as their consulting engineer.
§ Mr. T. M. HEALYalso asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Road Board in the summer of 1911 invited various companies engaged in making road surfaces by special proprietary processes to lay down experimental lengths on a road at Sidcup, and required them as a condition of competing to send in specifications and descriptions of their processes; whether these specifications came before Colonel Crompton, as consulting engineer of the Board, and were reported upon by him as such; whether, after having acquired this experience, he applied on the 5th October, 1911, for a patent for a method of road surfacing, which has since been granted under an amended description; and whether Taroads, Limited, and the Praed Construction Company, Limited, are using any machinery and methods covered by this patent?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe descriptions of the materials used by various contractors in the Sidcup road trial lengths contained nothing of a confidential nature. These descriptions and Colonel Crompton's report on them were set forth in a pamphlet issued by the Road Board in July, 1911, and publicly distributed. I understand that neither Taroads, Limited, nor the Praed Construction Company, Limited, are using any machinery or methods covered by the patent referred to in the question, and that such patent does not relate to any method of road surfacing used in any of the trial lengths at Sidcup.