HC Deb 08 December 1893 vol 19 cc812-3
MR. GIBSON BOWLES

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty proposes to continue the ordering of armour-piercing projectiles from firms in France, instead of ordering them from firms in Sheffield or elsewhere in Great Britain?

THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Sir U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH,) Lancashire, Clitheroe

This subject was formerly raised and debated on Sept. 19 last. The course taken by the Admiralty in giving an order for armour-piercing projectiles to a foreign firm was in accordance with many precedents set by their immediate pre decessors. The explanations which I gave were apparently approved by the House, as only 19 Members accompanied the hon. Gentleman in the "No" Lobby. We are affording all the help and information we can to British firms to enable them to compete with foreigners. Our desire is to give a preference to British firms—especially as to munitions of war. But this can only be done within reasonable limits as to price, quality, and time of delivery.

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER (Belfast, W.)

Is the Navy dependent for a supply of these projectiles, in the case of war, on a foreign firm?

SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH

I explained fully to the House last September that the demand for armour piercing projectiles is limited; that they are not used in time of peace; and that we should have a sufficient reserve in time of war.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES

Does the Admiralty propose to continue ordering these projectiles of foreign firms?

SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH

That depends on the circumstances to which I have already referred.