HC Deb 22 July 1907 vol 178 cc1161-3
MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in spite of the definite and categorical pledge given on behalf of the Army Council by the Under-Secretary of State that there would be no reduction in the artillery till trained Militiamen, liable to serve abroad, can take their place, the establishment and the strength of both the Royal Garrison Artillery and of the Royal Horse and Field Artillery have already been reduced; whether, in view of the great importance of maintaining an adequate trained artillery force, he can now give an assurance that he does not propose to adhere to his announced intention of reducing the Regular Horse and Field Artillery by sixty-seven officers and 3,700 other ranks; and whether, if he is unable to give this information, he will state on what grounds of public policy he considers it necessary to refuse it to the House of Commons.

MR. HALDANE

In the various replies I have given to the right hon. Gentleman I have made it perfectly clear that the pledge with regard to Horse and Field Artillery to which he refers, and which was concerned with the general scheme of reorganisation, has been strictly adhered to. Not a single field battery has been done away with by me. The last reduction of the sort was made by the right hon. Gentleman himself, who, in 1905, brought home a field battery from Egypt and abolished it. The only diminution in Horse and Field Artillery which has taken place in my time is the consolidation for administrative reasons of certain artillery depots, and the placing on the lower establishment of six batteries which came home from South Africa last year. I have not in any way broken my pledge, as suggested by the right hon. Gentleman, nor have I failed to give the House the fullest information available. May I, in view of what I have now said many times over, express the hope that the right hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Stepney, who was associated with him in the discharge of his duties as my pre- decessor in office, will now rest content. For I have nothing to add to the in formation given in this Answer and in my Answer to the similar Question put to me on behalf of the right hon. Gentleman on the 1st inst.†—nor do I propose to give to him any further undertaking of any sort or kind.

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER

asked the right, hon. Gentleman to answer the first Question, whether it was a fact that, in spite of a pledge given, the Royal Horse and Field Artillery and the Royal Garrison Artillery had been reduced by nearly 5,000 men. The second Question he had asked several times. Did the right hon. Gentleman adhere to the announcement made in the House that the Horse and Field Artillery were to be reduced by 3,700 men and sixty-seven officers; did the right hon. Gentleman still propose that?

MR. HALDANE

The Answer to the first Question is, No. As to the second Question, I do not propose to add a single word to the Answer I have given.

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER appealing to the Speaker, said

I am putting a perfectly reasonable Question on a matter of public policy upon which I submit I might expect; an Answer; I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the statement made in the House last year to the effect that he proposed to reduce the Horse and Field Artillery by 3,700 men and 67 officers still forms part of the right hon. Gentleman's policy. The Answer to that Question has not been given before, and has not been given to-day.

MR. HALDANE

An Answer to that appears on the Estimates. I have given the Answer over and over again, and decline to give it again.

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER

I am in the recollection of the House, and I submit that no Answer has ever been given.

*MR. SPEAKER

This is in the nature of a debate.

MR. ASHLEY (Lancashire, Black pool)

Will the right hon. Gentleman say if the strength of the Garrison † See(4) Debates, clxxvii, 346 Artillery has been reduced since he took office?

MR. HALDANE

The Question refers to Horse and Field Artillery, not Garrison Artillery. ["Yes."] Will the hon. Gentleman point out where Garrison Artillery is mentioned? ["Line 5."]

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

reminded the right hon. Gentleman that the Question was "whether the establishment and strength of both the Royal Garrison Artillery and the Royal Horse and Field Artillery have already been reduced."

MR. HALDANE

That appears on the Estimates; of course they have been reduced in pursuance of the policy recommended by the Committee appointed by the right hon. Gentleman, which I have carried out.

MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER

again asked was it a fact or not that, in spite of the pledge given, the Garrison, Horse and Field Artillery had been greatly reduced since the right hon. Gentleman had been in office.

MR. HALDANE

This has nothing to do with the Garrison Artillery, as the right hon. Gentleman must know; as to the other Question, I have already answered.

MR. LEVERTON HARRIS (Tower Hamlets, Stepney)

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman did not in July last make the statement that the Horse and Field Artillery would be reduced by 3,700 men and sixty-seven officers.

MR. HALDANE

The hon. Member can inform himself upon that point.