§ 60. Lord C. BERESFORDasked the date that Rosyth will be a properly equipped naval base?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe contract date for completion of the engineering works now in hand is 30th September, 1916. The contractor is entitled to extension of time due to various strikes. This has not yet been adjusted. On the other hand, the contractor hopes to gain some acceleration on the extended contract date, as the Admiralty are offering a large bonus for earlier completion. It is not, however, possible to say at present how much acceleration will be achieved.
§ Lord C. BERESFORDHave they discovered a bank of mud that was not in the original contract?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI cannot answer that without notice.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEYou cannot answer it! I thought you were a slinger of mud. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is very fond of making very offensive observations. I have repeatedly called his attention to it, and I call his attention to it again, and that of the House, and ask him to behave as the other Members do.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE (subsequently)Perhaps I may be allowed to make an apology to the right hon. Gentleman for what I said just now, which I beg him to accept.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI am very glad to accept it.
§ 65. Mr. JOHN WARDasked the terms of the arrangement between the Department and the contractors relating to the granting of permission to obtain a licence for the canteen proposed to be erected in connection with the temporary housing of the workmen at Rosyth, for enforcing good order and management, and especially as regards the police and the prevention of inducements for excessive drinking?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAThe terms of the arrangements proposed have not yet been settled, but Messrs. Easton, Gibb have promised to submit them for Admiralty information. As I stated, in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for West Fife on the 3rd instant, the Admiralty will not oppose the licence for the canteen provided it is run on certain lines, and the points raised by my hon. Friend as to the enforcing of good order and management will no doubt be borne in mind by the contractors in making their arrangements.
§ Mr. J. M. HOGGEWill the right hon. Gentleman say why the Government, or one of its Departments, should grant a disinterested management licence to this canteen, when it refused to accept the Lords disinterested management Licence Amendment to the Scottish Temperance Bill?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAWe are not granting it; we are raising no objection to the granting of this licence to the canteen.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe Admiralty have no control over that matter.
§ 66. Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked whether the First Lord of the Admiralty can see his way to place men employed in the works department of the Royal dockyards on the establishment list; and, if not, will he explain the reason the Government advance for refusing to one set of men employed in His Majesty's dockyards the privileges as to pension given to another set of men?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAWhilst the amount of work in the shipbuilding departments of the dockyards may be regarded as fairly constant, subject, of course, to the variations in shipbuilding programmes, the demands for building and engineering work are liable to fluctuations from time to time. These considerations have militated against the granting of establishment to men employed in the works department. 480 The question has been frequently placed before me at the hearing of petitions, and is at present under review.