asked the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received following the award of the contract for the Royal Air Force trainer to Shorts; what is the substance of these representations; and if he will make a statement.

A number of representations have been received from British Aerospace. In particular, the company has expressed disappointment at losing the competition and said that it had believed that the final bid it submitted on 19 March for the PC-9 would have been cheaper for the Ministry than acceptance of the bid from Shorts for Tucano. This was definitely not so; the total acquisition cost would have been higher for the PC-9 than it was from the Tucano, as was also true of operating costs. British Aerospace has also asked both for the opportunity to be de-briefed on the trainer project which, following normal practice, has been granted and for a review of the ground rules governing such competitions.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether any contract for the supply of the Royal Air Force trainer has yet been signed with Shorts.

Yes. The contract was signed on 30 April 1985, following a letter of intent on 4 April 1985.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether, subsequent to the receipt of Short's bid for the Royal Air Force air basic trainer on 14 March, any member of his Department requested Shorts to make a revised offer;(2) why, on 15 March, the controller of aircraft of his Department's procurement executive requested a revised bid from British Aerospace for the new basic trainer for the Royal Air Force.

[pursuant to his reply, 3 May 1985, c. 262]: On 15 March controller aircraft rang Sir Raymond Lygo, managing director of British Aerospace, to confirm that Sir Raymond understood that the bid received by the relevant MOD contracts branch before noon the previous day was indeed its final offer. Sir Raymond indicated that he was not aware that this was so and shortly thereafter submitted a revised bid. At the same time controller aircraft rang Sir Philip Foreman, chairman of Short Brothers, who confirmed that its bid submitted before 14 March deadline was its final one.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will state the ranks and posts held of the members of the procurement executive who telephoned British Aerospace on 13 March to inform it of the deadline date for tender for the new basic trainer for the Royal Air Force; to whom he spoke; and if the call was logged by his Department.

[pursuant to his reply, 3 May 1985, c. 262]: The telephone call was made by the principal director of contracts, air, to the group commercial director of British Aerospace. Telephone calls in the Ministry of Defence are not normally logged.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions in the past the procurement executive has telephoned tenders for his Department's contracts or contracts worth more than £100 million giving the deadline date for tendering; whether this is the normal procedure within his Department; and on how many occasions such a telephone call has been confirmed by letter, telex or other written communication.

[pursuant to his reply, 3 May 1985, c. 261–2]: The original deadline for the receipt of "best and final" bids had been set by telex at 31 January. The telephone call made to British Aerospace on 13 March dealt only with the end-point for post-tender improvements to those bids and followed on previous discussions with the two firms who had submitted the most attractive bids. Written communications are the normal and preferred practice within the Ministry of Defence; the telephone is used only when this is more suitable for giving or receiving information in the time available, and such information is confirmed in writing where necessary.