§ Mr. Cryerasked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will publish the figures for Merseyside special development area regional preferential expenditure for 1973–74, 1974–75, 1975–76, 1976–77 and 1977–78, including figures for total expenditure and per head of population.
§ Mr. Les Huckfield,pursuant to his reply [Official Report 22 March 1979; Vol. 964, c. 726–27], gave the following answer:
The information requested is as follows:
sidered that the grantee had provided assets for use by an associated company, a situation outside the provisions of section 1 of the Industrial Development Act 1966. The Department sought to recover the grant and refused to approve grant amounting to £52,000 in respect of other applications. Following legal advice, the case was settled out of court on the basis that the Department withdrew its claim and the grantee withdrew his claim for further grant. No disciplinary measures were taken. In the light of experience in operating the investment grant scheme, the Department later insisted upon the production of written leases.
Investment grant of £796 was paid to a receiver in respect of an asset provided under a hire purchase agreement signed by a company before his appointment. The matter is now being reviewed. 45W Disciplinary action was not appropriate and detailed instructions regarding payments in the case of receivership have now been issued.