§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) why, in view of his Department's duty to report to Parliament under Section 451 of the Companies Act, 1948, it has not for the past decade informed Parliament of the difficulties which have confronted it in the administration of its Companies Acts responsibilities, and of any steps that ought to be taken to remedy this position;
(2) why his Department does not provide information or estimates for Parliament in its Annual Reports as to how many public and how many private companies contravene each of the various provisions of the Companies Acts which it is his duty to enforce;
(3) if he is satisfied with the operation of the Companies Acts, particularly in regard to their enforcement; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. RidleySection 451 of the Companies Act, 1948, merely states that a general annual report of matters within the Act shall be prepared and laid before Parliament. The information included in the report is that which has been thought likely to be of sufficient use to justify the labour and cost of collection, and to be of interest to the public. The experience gained in administering this complex body of legislation is being taken into account in the current review of company law.
30W
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) why, despite the recommendations of the Jenkins Committee in paragraph 234 of its report, and despite increasing company failures to the detriment of the public unprotected by his Department, it is his policy that he does not need the help and guidance of the Companies Acts Consultative Committee;
(2) what consideration and, on what dates, has the Department devoted since the Jenkins Committee reported, specifically to the terms and context of its recommendations for the reconvening and strengthening of the Companies Act Consultative Committee;
(3) if he is satisfied with the manner in which his insurance and companies branch has administered its duties and responsibilities since 1962 without the guidance of the Companies Act Consultative Committee; and if he will make a statement;
(4) on how many matters the advice of the Companies Act Consultative Committee has so far not been implemented; and what decision was taken at its last meeting as to when it should meet again.
§ Mr. RidleyThe Companies Act Consultative Committee is not a statutory body, and it has not met since 1956. Though the Jenkins Committee on Company Law recommended that the Committee should be reconvened, the recommendation was made in the context of proposals for increased control over prospectuses and take-overs which were not incorporated in the Companies Act, 1967. As stated by my hon. Friend on 23rd July, I do not intend to reconvene the Committee.—[Vol. 821, c. 374.]
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will list all public companies in which inspectors have ever been appointed under Sections 164 and 165 of the Companies Act, 1948, and state in relation to each the date of the first representation received by his Department, the source of such representation, viz., the public, the Press, the police, the Inland Revenue, &c., the total number of representations received subsequently, and the date of the appointment of inspectors.
§ Mr. RidleyA list of public companies to which inspectors have been 31W appointed since 1st January, 1968, is appended.
Information in relation to earlier years is contained in the Companies General Annual Report. I am not prepared to disclose information about representations in individual cases.
Following is list:
Name of Company Date of appointment The Ampat (Sumatra) Rubber Estate Limited 1st August, 1968. Windsign Investment Company Limited 31st March, 1969. Jerome Limited 12th May, 1969. Pergamon Press Limited 9th September, 1969. E. J. Austin International Limited 3rd April, 1970. Corton Beach Holdings Limited 20th April, 1970. Slingsby Aircraft Holdings Limited 26th October, 1970. The Vehicle and General Insurance Company Limited 9th March, 1971. Rolls Royce Limited 23rd April, 1971. Blanes Limited 25th June, 1971.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in how many cases his Department has had names of companies passed to it since 1948 by the police for investigation; in how many of these cases it has finally appointed inspectors; and what has been the average length of time before such appointment.
§ Mr. RidleyIt is not possible without a detailed examination of a large number of departmental files to answer this question. During 1970 there were 14 authorisations under Section 109 of the Companies Act, 1967, and two appointments under Section 165 of the Companies Act, 1948, upon information wholly or partially supplied by the police. The average length of time before such appointments were made after the decision that there was good reason to appoint was 35 days.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) whether he will specify the action, and dates thereof, which his Department has taken since the beginning of 1970 in relation to the affairs of Hartley Baird Limited;
(2) whether he accepts the finding of counsel, made available to his Department in the Hartley Baird case, as to the 32W inapplicability of the Jenkins Committee's reservations about the use of his Department's investigatory powers when shareholders have sufficient facts, to the position of public shareholders in complex public company cases.
§ Mr. RidleyA complaint has been made to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration about the Department's conduct in relation to Hartley Baird Limited. While the complaint is under consideration it would not be proper for me to answer these questions.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will introduce legislation to provide that his Department's annual reports on companies be audited by independent experts, with the duty of stating whether, in their opinion, such reports represent a true and fair view of the matters they must by Statute cover, and also whether the conduct of his Department's responsibilities revealed in such reports has been in accordance with the relevant Statutes.
§ Mr. RidleyNo.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will introduce legislation to strengthen the penalties for contraventions of the Companies Acts.
§ Mr. RidleyI would refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave on 28th July, 1971.—[Vol. 822, c. 114.]
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if it is his policy that his Department should only use its companies investigatory powers where there is a case for criminal proceedings or where a company is insolvent.
§ Mr. RidleyNo. The Department's policy is to use its investigatory powers where circumstances appear to be appropriate. The majority of appointments of inspectors are under Section 165(b) of the Companies Act, 1948, which is mainly concerned with matters of fraud or near fraud. Inquiries made under Section 109 of the Companies Act, 1967, are for the purposes mentioned in Section 111 of that Act.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if, having regard to the Department's reaction to the 33W recommendations of the Jenkins Committee in paragraphs 228 to 234 of its report, in view of the experience of other advanced commercial nations in setting up professionally manned securities commissions, he will introduce legislation to set up such a commission in the United Kingdom to relieve his Department of the duty of securities policing and the protection of investors.
§ Mr. RidleyI will keep this possibility in mind, during our current review of company law.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will use his Department's investigatory, interventionist and enforcement powers under the Companies Acts in relation to public companies in such a way as to protect the public in relation to managerial wrongdoing and negligence, even when the company concerned is not on the point of collapse, rather than for the conduct of post mortems when it has collapsed or is about to.
§ Mr. RidleyThe powers are exercised with this consideration in mind.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will set up a tribunal of inquiry to investigate negligence and incompetence by his Department in the conduct of its regulatory duties, in failing to inspect or investigate the affairs of Rolls-Royce Limited in January, 1970, when the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation issued its report, and in failing to insist on seeing a complete copy of the said report.
§ Mr. RidleyNo, and the imputation is not accepted.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is his policy in relation to co-operation with police fraud squads on the part of the companies investigation branch of his Department.
§ Mr. RidleyThe policy is to co-operate fully with police fraud squads in the investigation of companies.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many cases have been passed by police fraud squads to the companies and insurance branches of his Department for investigation; and 34W how many of these cases have resulted in the appointment of inspectors.
§ Mr. RidleyIt is not possible without a detailed examination of a large number of departmental files to answer this question. During 1970 there were 61 authorisations under Section 109 of the Companies Act, 1967, and 15 appointments under Section 165 of the Companies Act, 1948. Fourteen of the former and two of the latter were made wholly or partly as the result of information supplied by the police.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in how many cases of companies, about which information has been passed to his department by the police, no action has been taken.
§ Mr. RidleyIt is not possible without a detailed examination of a large number of departmental files to answer this question. When information is received from the police, the matter is considered and appropriate action is taken. In cases where no action is taken, the decision is arrived at after consultation with the police.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether, in view of the evidence given to the Expenditure Committee relating to the Report of the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation on Rolls-Royce Limited, he will ensure that the Companies Branch of his department fully utilises its powers under Section 165(b)(i) and 165(b)(iii) of the Companies Act, 1948, and Section 109 of the Companies Act, 1967, to protect shareholders and avoid charges of gross negligence.
§ Mr. RidleyI consider that the inquiry now taking place under Section 165(a)(i) of the Companies Act, 1948, is the appropriate procedure in the circumstances of Rolls-Royce Limited.
Pursuant to his reply [OFFICIAL REPORT 30th July, 1971; Vol 822, C. 192] Mr. RIDLEY gave the information provided in the replies to the following questions:
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what was the number of cases noted under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to public companies in each year since 35W 1958, and which represented applications under Section 172(3);
(2) what was the number of appointments of inspectors under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to public companies in each year since 1958; and which Section 172(3) applications were rejected;
(3) what was the number of cases noted under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958; and which represented applications under Section 172(3);
(4) what was the number of appointments of inspectors under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958; and which Section 172(3) applications were rejected.
§ Mr. RidleyNo inspectors were appointed under section 172 in 1968, 1969 or 1970. During the same period, the only case noted or application received was one under Section 172(3); this was rejected on the grounds that it was vexatious. Information for earlier years is contained in the Companies General Annual Reports.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) how many times powers under Section 169 of the Companies Act, 1948, have been used in relation to public companies in each year since 1958;
(2) how many times powers under Section 169 of the Companies Act, 1948, have been used in relation to private companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleySection 169 of the Companies Act, 1948, was repealed by the Companies Act, 1967, with effect from 27th July, 1967. Since 1958, winding-up petitions have been presented against six public companies and 23 private companies under Section 169 of the Companies Act, 1948, or Section 35 of the Companies Act, 1967. Other proceedings have been taken in relation to public companies on 26 occasions, and in relation to private companies on 21 occasions; it is not possible to give separate figures for each year as proceedings usually extend over a longer period.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many times 36W powers under Section 37 of the Companies Act, 1967, have been used in relation to public companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleyPowers under Section 37 of the Companies Act, 1967, have not been invoked in relation to a public company.
Civil actions brought by the Board of Trade in the names of such companies under section 169(4) of the Companies Act, 1948 (the predecessor of Section 37 of the 1967 Act) are:
Year Number of actions 1958–1962 — 1963 2 1964 6 1965 6 1966 1 1967 —
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many times powers under Section 37 of the Companies Act, 1967, have been used in relation to private companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleyPowers under Section 37 of the Companies Act, 1967, or under Section 169(4) of the Companies Act, 1948, have not been invoked since 1958.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the number of cases noted under Section 173 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to public companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleyOne case in 1968, three in 1969 and one in 1971. Information for earlier years is contained in the Companies General Annual Reports.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what was the number of cases noted under Section 173 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to private companies in each years since 1958;
(2) what was the number of inspections made under Section 173 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleyNone.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the number of inspections made under Section 173 of the Companies Act, 1948, in 37W relation to public companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleyOne in 1968, two in 1969, and one in 1971. Information for earlier years is contained in the Companies General Annual Reports.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what was the number of cases noted under Section 14(1) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in relation to public companies in each year since 1958;
(2) what was the number of cases noted under Section 14(1) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958;
(3) what was the number of inspections made under Section 14(1) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in relation to public companies in each year since 1958;
(4) what was the number of inspections made under Section 14(1) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958;
(5) what was the number of appointments of inspectors under Section 14(2) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in relation to public companies in each year since 1958;
(6) what was the number of appointments of inspectors under Section 14(2) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleySection 112 of the Companies Act, 1967, provided that Section 14 of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, should no longer be invoked after the passing of the Companies Act 1967. Inspectors were appointed under Section 14(2) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, in three cases:
- 1959 Pilot Assurance Co. Ltd.
- 1962 American Military International Insurance Association (and its subsidiary, First General Assurance & Guarantee Co. Ltd.).
- 1967 Gibraltar Insurance Co. Ltd.
Pilot Assurance Co. Ltd. is a public company incorporated in the United Kingdom. The other companies are or were incorporated outside the United Kingdom, and their status is not readily ascertainable.
It is not practicable to extract the information as to the number of 38W occasions on which Section 14(1) of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, was invoked.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will set out in a table each Section of the Companies Acts, the Insurance Companies Acts, the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963, and the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, 1958, under which prosecutions are possible, and list how many public and how many private companies have been prosecuted under each such section since 1958, and with what results.
§ Mr. RidleyIt would not be possible to provide all the information sought without undue expenditure of time and money. Information about prosecutions under some Sections of the Companies Acts and the Insurance Companies Acts is provided in the Companies Annual Report and the Insurance Business Annual Report. The figures below relate to prosecutions by the Department under the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963, and the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, 1958:
Protection of Depositors Act, 1963 Number of cases to date 10 Number of cases involving companies 1
Section Number of charges Number of convictions 1 12 12 2 19 11 14 — — 15 (see Note (a)) — — 16(3) — — 18(5) (see Note (b)) — — 19(4) — — 20 (see Note (c)) — — 31 23 NOTES: (a) Paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of subsection (1) were repealed by the Companies Act 1967. (b) See Section 112 of the Companies Act 1967. (c) Repealed by the Companies Act 1967.
PREVENTION OF FRAUD (INVESTMENTS) ACT 1958 Number of cases to date 84 Number of cases involving companies 17
39W
Section Number of charges Number of convictions 1 5 4 6 — — 8 — — 13 90 72 14 79 60 18 — — 174 136
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many public companies and how many private companies since 1958 have had exercised upon them his Department's powers under Section 5 of the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, 1958; in how many cases such action was followed by a Section 6 tribunal; and what were the results.
§ Mr. RidleyThe powers have been exercised against private companies on 18 occasions since 1958. They have also been exercised against foreign companies on two occasions, and against individuals on three occasions. In three cases there were appeals to the tribunal established by Section 6 of the Act. The tribunal
Powers exercised under s. 18 of Protection of Depositors Act Company subsequently wound up: Inspectors appointed under s. 165 of Companies Year 1963 Under s. 16 Otherwise Act 1948 1964 … … 2 2 — — 1965 … … 2 2 — — 1966 … … 1 1 — — 1967 … … 8 — 4 1 1968 … … 2 — — — 1969 … … 3 — — — 1970 … … 3 — — — 1971 (to date) … 1 — — — Section 18 of the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963, ceased with the enactment of the Companies Act, 1967. It was replaced by Section 109 of that Act, which confers similar powers.
Separate figures for public and private companies are not readily available.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many wind-
40W
Public Companies Private Companies Companies Acts Companies Acts Insurance Companies Acts Protection of Depositors Act Year 1948–1967 1948–1967 1958–1967 1963 1958 … … — — — — 1959 … … — 1 — — 1960 … … — — — — 1961 … … — 1 — — 1962 … … 1 — — — 1963 … … — — 2 — 1964 … … — — — 2 1965 … … — 1 — 1 1966 … … — 1 — 2 1967 … … 6 3 6 — 1968 … … — 7 1 — 1969 … … — — — — 1970 … … — 7 — — 1971 (to date) … — 4 — — upheld the Department's decision in all three cases.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) how many cases were noted under Section 18 of the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963, in relation to public companies in each year since 1958; and how many of these resulted in inspections;
(2) how many cases were noted under Section 18 of the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963, in relation to private companies in each year since 1958; and how many of these resulted in inspections.
§ Mr. RidleyFollowing is the information:
ing-up petitions were presented by his Department in relation to public companies and private companies, respectively, in each year since 1958; and under what statute such petitions was brought in each case.
§ Mr. RidleyFollowing is the information:
41W
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many times his Department has exercised its powers under Section 210 of the Companies Act, 1948, in relation to public companies and in relation to private companies, respectively.
§ Mr. RidleyNo application to the court has been made under Section 210 of the Companies Act, 1948, in respect of any public or private company.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many times the Accountancy Advisory Committee has met in each year since its inception; what matters it has advised upon; and on how many such matters its advice has so far not been wholly implemented.
§ Mr. RidleyThe committee has met on some 20 occasions. Its proceedings are confidential.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many times the Insurance Consultative Committee has met in each year since its inception; what matters it has advised upon; and on how many such matters its advice has so far not been wholly implemented.
§ Mr. RidleyAs the advice offered by members of the Insurance Consultative Committee is given in confidence it would not be right to disclose it.
Information about the number of meetings is as follows:
1944 1 1958 — 1945 6 1959 1 1946 2 1960 — 1947 1 1961 — 1948 1 1962 2 1949 — 1963 — 1950 — 1964 1 1951 — 1965 1 1952 — 1966 1 1953 — 1967 3 1954 — 1968 — 1955 — 1969 2 1956 — 1970 2 1957 —
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what are the names, terms of reference, functions, and composition of all advisory committees set up to give guidance to the Insurance and Companies Branch, including the Registrar of Companies and the Official Receiver.
42W
§ Mr. Ridley(1) the Companies Act Accountancy Advisory Committee advises the Department on matters arising from the provisions of the Companies Acts relating to accounts. The composition of the Committee is:
Chairman: Sir Ronald Leach, C.B.E.
Members:
- Mr. S. R. Harding.
- Mr. J. L. Kirkpatrick.
- Mr. J. P. Landau.
- Mr. D. S. Morpeth, T.D.
(2) The Insurance Consultative Committee advises the Department on matters relating to British insurance. The composition of the Committee is:
- Chairman: The Under-Secretary, Insurance and Companies Department, Department of Trade and Industry.
- Members: (representing insurance companies) the Chairman, immediate past Chairman, two past Chairmen and Deputy Chairman of the British Insurance Association; (representing Lloyd's) the Chairman, Deputy Chairman and one other member of Lloyd's.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what was the number of applications relating to public companies under Section 164 of the Companies Act, 1948, in each year since 1958; and how many of these were respectively, initially and finally rejected;
(2) if he will give the number of cases noted relating to public companies under Section 165(b)(i) and Section 165(b)(ii) of the Companies Act, 1948, in each year since 1958; and in relation to how many of these no inspectors were appointed, omitting connected cases;
(3) what was the number of cases noted relating to public companies under Section 165(b)(iii) of the Companies Act. 1948, in each year since 1958; and in relation to how many of these no inspectors were appointed, excluding connected cases.
§ Mr. RidleyI refer to the answer given to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 26th July, 1971. Further information is not readily available. Complaints received from members of the public do not usually refer to specific Sections of the Compaines Acts.—[Vol. 822, c.3–6.]
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the 43W number of public and the number of private company liquidations commenced in each year since 1958; and how many of these were voluntary.
§ Mr. RidleyFollowing is the information:
Liquidations of companies registered in Great Britain notified to the Registrars of Companies:
Voluntary liquidations Year Total Creditors Members 1958 3,609 970 2,222 1959 4,117 953 2,753 1960 4,506 1,086 2,885 1961 4,964 1,296 3,037 1962 5,214 1,552 2,925 1963 5,463 1,508 3,212 1964 5,469 1,465 3,266 1965 7,081 1,893 4,351 1966 12,057 2,441 8,647 1967 8,939 2,435 5,224 1968 9,806 2,157 6,503 1969 8,951 2,474 5,269 1970 8,782 2,549 4,896 Separate figures for public and private companies are not readily available, but normally not more than 1 per cent. are public companies.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the number of reports made by the Official Receiver in relation to public companies each year under Section 236(1) of the Companies Act, 1948, and the number in relation to private companies.
§ Mr. RidleyThe Official Receiver is obliged to report to the court under Section 236(1) of the Companies Act, 1948, in every compulsory winding-up. In 1969, five reports were submitted in respect of public companies and 1,227 in respect of private companies. The numbers in 1970 were 10 and 1,397 respectively.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the number of reports made by the Official Receiver in relation to public companies each year under Section 236(2) of the Companies Act, 1948, and the number of these which stated that in the opinion of the Official Receiver fraud has been committed; and if he will give similar statistics for private companies.
§ Mr. RidleyThe Official Receiver has a discretion whether or not to submit a further report to the court under Section 236(2) of the Companies Act, 1948. In44W 1969, one report was submitted in respect of a public company and 30 in respect of private companies. The numbers in 1970 were one and 23 respectively.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the number of public examinations relating to public companies that have taken place under Section 270 of the Companies Act, 1948, since 1958; and if he will give similar statistics for private companies.
§ Mr. RidleyNo public examinations under Section 270 of the Companies Act, 1948, have taken place since 1958.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in relation to public companies and to private companies, respectively, how many cases were noted and how many were acted upon in each year since 1958, under each Section of the Companies Acts, the Insurance Companies Acts, the Protection of Depositors' Act and the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act which gives his Department discretionary powers.
§ Mr. RidleyIt would not be possible to answer without disproportionate expenditure in view of the volume of business to which the question refers.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the estimated number of contraventions during 1970 by private companies and by public companies, respectively, of each Section of the following Statutes which is capable of being contravened, namely, the Companies Act, 1948, the Companies Act, 1967, the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, 1958, and the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963.
§ Mr. RidleyThe information is not available. Information as to prosecutions is published in the Companies General Annual Reports.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) under which Sections of the Companies Acts, the Insurance Companies Acts, the Protection of Depositors Act, and the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act his Department considers that it has discretionary powers;
45W(2) if he will list his Department's statutory duties under each Section of the Companies Acts, the Insurance Companies Acts, the Protection of Depositors Act, and the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, in relation to all relevant companies covered by the Acts;
(3) if he will list his Department's statutory duties under each Section of the Companies Acts, the Insurance Companies Acts, the Protection of Depositors Act, and the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, in relation to only some of the companies to which the relevant Act applies, and when the relevant Section does not itself restrict its own application, how are the cases where it admits to a statutory duty selected.
§ Mr. RidleyAs the answers to these questions are lengthy, I have written to the hon. Member, and have placed a copy of the information in the Library.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what consideration he gives each year to the affairs of all quoted public companies to determine whether they give rise to the need for the exercise of his powers to protect investors, to safeguard the public interest and to enforce the law;
(2) what consideration he gives each year to the affairs of all large unquoted companies, to determine whether they give rise to the need for the exercise of his powers under the Companies Acts and other like legislation to safeguard the public interest and to enforce the law.
§ Mr. RidleyI would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 5th August, 1971. The Department naturally examines all evidence brought to its attention which suggests a possible breach of the Companies Acts or a possible case for the exercise of its powers. Each case is considered on its merits, and appropriate action is taken whenever in the opinion of the Department the circumstances justify such a course.—[Vol. 882, c.453.]
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what consideration he gives each year to the affairs of all insurance companies to determine whether they give rise to the need for the exercise of his power to protect policyholders 46W and investors, to safeguard the public interest, and to enforce the law.
§ Mr. RidleyThe returns required at least once a year from all companies carrying on insurance business in Great Britain are examined. In addition, extra information is called for as required: and the affairs of all insurance companies are kept under close scrutiny.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what consideration he gives each year to the affairs of all deposit taking companies to determine whether they give rise to the need for the exercise of his powers to protect depositors and investors, to safeguard the public interest and to enforce the law.
§ Mr. RidleyThe accounts of deposit-taking companies which are subject to the Protection of Depositors Act, 1963, are examined by the Department at six-monthly intervals.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what, according to available information, is the cause of the large and steady increase that has taken place since 1958 in the number of cases of public companies noted under Section 164 and 165(b) of the Companies Act, 1948, and what is the cause of the same trend in relation to private companies.
§ Mr. RidleyI have no information as to the cause of the increase.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what he considers to be the main sources, particularly as between applications from the public, from the Inland Revenue, from the police, etc. of public and private company cases respectively, noted under Sections 164 and 165 of the Companies Act, 1948; and which of these sources have accounted for the bulk of cases noted since 1958.
§ Mr. RidleyApplications mainly come from the public and their advisers.
§ Mr. Cantasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will take legal action against the second auditors of the Pinnock Finance Company (Great Britain) Limited in the name of the company, under Section 37 of the Companies Act, 1967, in the public interest.
§ Mr. RidleyNo.