HC Deb 24 May 1894 vol 24 cc1150-3
ADMIRAL FIELD (Sussex, Eastbourne)

I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that of the sum of £3,000 voted by Parliament in the Estimates for 1893–4 for necessary works in connection with the Naval Gunnery Establishment at Sheer-ness, no portion whatever has been ex- pended thereon during the last financial year, can he state to what purpose was the said money devoted; whether the sums of £5,000, voted recently for erection of a drill battery, and £1,000 towards a rifle range, will be expended upon those necessary objects this year; whether he is aware that there is absolutely no latrine accommodation on the parade ground for the seamen drilling there, although their Lordships have approved of their being built and the matter is urgent; whether the men are sent to Gravesend in parties of 100, at an expense of 1s. 4d. each, by railway per week or fortnight, being absent three days or more, and have to be billeted in military barracks; whether urgent representations have been made to their Lordships on the various matters of drill, battery, and other necessary buildings to carry on the work of a gunnery school, for the past two years; why is this institution allowed to remain in its present condition, to the great injury of the Naval Service; and whether, pending the erection of a drill shed and other necessary buildings, arrangements can be made for the use of the ground floor of the large boat-house in the dockyard for drill purposes in wet weather?

THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. E. ROBERTSON, Dundee )

(1) A sum of £3,000, on account of a total estimate of £9,000, was voted in 1892–3, not 1893–4, for gunnery establishment, including new rifle range, but the expenditure was deferred pending reconsideration of the scheme. The money remained surplus at the end of the year. (2) The sums of £5,000 and £1,000, taken on account of these works, will be spent in the present financial year. (3) Arrangements are being made for entering into a contract for the necessary latrine accommodation. (4) Until the rifle range at Sheerness is ready it is necessary to send the men to Gravesend to obtain the requisite practice. (5) As regards the suggestion in the last paragraph of the question, I am advised that it would not be practicable to use the boat-house for this purpose.

ADMIRAL FIELD

What has become of the money?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

It is quite impossible to say. It was dealt with according to the Rule applicable to surpluses.

ADMIRAL FIELD

I have given ten days' notice of this question, and ought to be able to get a reply. Was it expended on behalf of the Naval Service, or was it sent back to the Treasury?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

No answer can be given with respect to any item not expended for the purpose for which it was intended. It may have gone back to the Treasury, or it may have been spent.

MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN (Kent, Faversham)

May this money voted for Sheerness have been expended at other places?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

The money was not spent on the purposes for which it was voted. It became surplus, and fell under the rule under which surpluses are dealt with. It may have gone to other items in the Navy Votes, or it may not have been spent at all.

MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN

If it has not been spent at all it must be somewhere. Will it be spent on Sheers ness?

SIR A. ROLLIT (Islington, S.)

Are we to understand that there is no record whatever of the expenditure of surplus money?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

Money which is voted and not spent may form part of a sum used for other purposes in the Navy, or it may go back to the Treasury. It is quite impossible to give information as to any particular item.

SIR A. ROLLIT

Is there no record?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

There can be no record.

MR. HENEAGE (Great Grimsby)

Is no record kept of money transferred from one account to another?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

The money is not earmarked in any way, and you cannot trace any particular sum. All you can say is it was not spent for the purpose for which it was voted. It may be applied to other purposes with the consent of the Treasury.

MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)

Does the Comptroller and Auditor General make any Report on it?

[No answer was given.]

SIR J. LUBBOCK (London University)

I think the hon. Gentleman is incorrect in saying that money voted for one purpose may be spent on another. Was the consent of the Treasury given in this case?

MR. E. ROBERTSON

Yes; if the money was applied to other purposes.