§ 4. Mr. Eadieasked the Minister of Aviation Supply what information he has now been given by the Receiver about the financial position of suppliers who lost money as a result of the collapse of Rolls-Royce Limited.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply. A Statement of Affairs, as required by the Companies Act, is being prepared for the Receiver, but I understand it has not yet been completed. The Receiver is accordingly not yet in a position to give me further and fuller information about the amounts owing to the creditors of Rolls-Royce Ltd.
§ 9. Mr. Whiteheadasked the Minister of Aviation Supply what information he has now been given by the Receiver of the number of redundancies consequent upon the bankruptcy of Rolls-Royce Limited.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply.
Since I last reported to the House on this subject on 24th March, the net figure of redundancies notified by Rolls-Royce Ltd. or notified to the Department of Employment by other companies as being attributable to the Rolls-Royce collapse has decreased somewhat. Short-time working among these other companies has decreased from 8,000 on 22nd March to about 2,000 on 19th April.—[Vol. 814, c. 519.]
§ 18. Mr. Whiteheadasked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he is satisfied with the accounting methods employed in the investigation of the accounts of Rolls-Royce Limited; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. David PriceI have been asked to reply.
It was the responsibility of the auditors appointed by Rolls-Royce Ltd. under the Companies Acts to investigate their accounts.
388W
§ Mr. J. H. Osbornasked the Minister of Aviation Supply what is now the position of contractors and sub-contractors to Rolls-Royce Limited who have outstanding accounts up to the date of appointment of a receiver; whether he is aware that there have been cases where all outstanding debts have ultimately been paid in full; and if he can give any guidance or help in this instance.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply.
The position remains that claims by unsecured creditors of Rolls-Royce Limited are the responsibility of the Receiver and Manager, who has obligations to the unsecured creditors as a whole as well as to the debenture holders.
§ Mr. Whiteheadasked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he will now make a further statement on the renegotiation of the RB211 contract.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply.
I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to similar Questions earlier today.
§ Mr. Scott-Hopkinsasked the Minister of Aviation Supply what is the current position regarding the patents in the United States of America of the old Rolls-Royce Company; and whether they have been transferred to Rolls-Royce 1971 or are held by Her Majesty's Government.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply.
There is nothing I can add to the statement made to the House on 11th March, 1971 by the Leader of the House when he explained that the Patents of Rolls-Royce Limited had been acquired by Her Majesty's Government in the national interest. They are still held by Her Majesty's Government.—[Vol. 813, c. 667.]
§ Mr. J. H. Osbornasked the Minister of Aviation Supply whether he has now 389W received full details of the creditors and amount of outstanding debts incurred by Rolls-Royce Limited; and whether he is now in a position to consider making funds available to the Receiver to meet at least part of these commitments.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply.
I have dealt with the first part of my hon. Friend's Question in my reply earlier today to a similar question by the hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Eadie).
On the second part of the Question, I doubt whether it would be right for the Government to try to help meet the debts of one particular insolvent company. There is also the danger of running foul of Section 332 of the Companies Act, and incurring liability for the debts of any of the sub-contractors, if they should become insolvent for any reason whatsoever.
§ Mr. Wilkinsonasked the Minister of Aviation Supply what proportion of the liabilities incurred by Rolls-Royce Ltd. was for non-RB211 work sponsored by his Department.
§ Mr. CorfieldI have been asked to reply.
I am unable at present to make any estimate on this point. I would need to see the company's Statement of Affairs which the Receiver is still awaiting. But even then, I suspect that the liabilities of the company at 4th February towards any one particular supplier will not be capable of being analysed by my Department into charges against any one main contract with my Department or anyone else. For example, some of the Rolls-Royce Ltd. liabilities towards one company will no doubt relate to such things as raw materials and unspecialised components.