HC Deb 07 May 1895 vol 33 cc635-7
SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD (Somerset, Wellington)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state how much of the forage supplied for the use of the Woolwich Garrison is British or Irish, and how much Foreign or Colonial?

*THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. W. WOODALL,) Hanley

I cannot say. The forage supplied must pass the prescribed standard; but no question is raised as to the source from which it comes. This was fully explained to the hon. Member in a reply made on December 27, 1893.

SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD

Is the hon. Member aware that not one single pound of British or Irish forage is now being supplied for the use of the troops at Woolwich?

*MR. WOODALL

No, I am not aware that that is the fact; nor do I think it probable. All I know is that the forage has passed inspection, and that it is therefore suited to the purposes for which we require it.

SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state how much of the meat supplied for the London Garrison is British or Irish, and how much Foreign or Colonial?

*MR. WOODALL

The contractor is required to deliver at least 40 per cent. of the meat from home-killed supplies. The actual quantity supplied from home and foreign sources respectively cannot be stated.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN (Worcestershire, E.)

What is the reason for the distinction between the cases of forage and of meat supply? Why, when 40 per cent. of the meat is required to be supplied from home sources, is there no analogous restriction in connection with the supply of forage?

*MR. WOODALL

The restriction was never found inconvenient in practice. The hon. Member knows that the year before last, when we suffered such great inconvenience from the want of hay, the supplies that came from Canada were particularly welcome and proved satisfactory.

SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD

Are we to understand that the produce of British and Irish farms is to be put out of court, and that our Army is to be supplied with inferior articles from abroad because they are cheap?

MR. WOODALL

No; quite the contrary. The question of cheapness does not arise in the matter; it is a question of quality.

MR. T. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)

Why is it allowed that 60 per cent. of the meat should be of foreign growth while only 40 per cent, is to be of British growth? What is the basis of the proportion?

*MR. WOODALL

It has been very often stated in this House that foreign supplies of beef are only available between October and the end of May, and that during the rest of the year the beef supplied must be home grown. Mutton is only allowed in one day in the week out of the season and it may be either refrigerated or home grown. The average of foreign meat supplied is, as I have said, not permitted to exceed 60 per cent. The quality of the meat is proved every year to be more satisfactory.

MR. JAMES LOWTHER (Kent, Thanet)

Is the House to understand that this regulation respecting the proportions of the foreign and British meat supplies applies only to meat, and that as to forage there is nothing to prevent 90 per cent. of it from being foreign?

*MR. WOODALL

Yes. [Cries of "Oh!"]

MR. C. J. DARLING (Deptford)

Are we to understand the hon. Member as meaning that home-grown meat is only accepted when, in consequence of climatic or other conditions, foreign meat cannot possibly be got?

*MR. SPEAKER

Order, order! I think these questions are tending to become a debate.