HC Deb 17 May 1906 vol 157 cc637-8
MR. BELLAIRS (Lynn Regis)

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the statement of the First Lord of the Admiralty that the Board declines to commit itself to that portion of Lord Cawdor's new scheme of naval training which decided that there was no need for a final division into three branches of executive, marine, and engineer officers, and of the lecture delivered at the war course Portsmouth, by Professor Ewing, Director of Naval Education, in which this decision is ignored, he will say whether the lecture was made public by permission of the Admiralty; and whether he will now take steps to publish the protests made by admirals in command of fleets, and who have recently been in command of fleets, against the new scheme of naval training.

THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. EDMUND ROBERTSON, Dundee)

In answer to the first part of the Question, the lecture was made public by permission of the Admiralty. The answer to the second part of the Question is in the negative.

MR. BELLAIRS

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the new scheme of naval training was stated by Lord Cawdor in his statement of Admiralty policy, 30th November, 1905, to be based on the Report of a Departmental Committee appointed on 8th July, 1905, to investigate the question of specialisation and allocation of duties afloat and ashore for executive, engineer, and marine officers, and how best to provide for filling the higher scientific posts at the Admiralty and the dockyards: whether the Committee examined any executive officers, on how many days did they take evidence concerning officers, how many concerning the Royal Corps of Naval Constructors, and how many days were devoted to the examination of witnesses concerning the provision of warrant officers for engine-room duties.

MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON

I can only refer the hon. Member to the Report of the Committee recently presented to the House (Cd. 2841), in which he will find full information on all the points in question.

MR. BELLAIRS

Is it not the case that no executive officers were examined by this Committee?

MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON

The Report I have referred to will supply the answer to that question.