§ MR. W. THORNE (West Ham, S.)
I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will have printed with the Votes the names of the firms that contracted for the cruisers and destroyers; and the amount of each tender.
§ MR. MCKENNA
The tenders for the cruisers and destroyers have only been provisionally accepted, and the tender prices cannot, therefore, be given. It is not in accordance with usual practice to publish in the Navy Estimates the total cost of ships during the first year of 1661 their construction, and therefore it would be undesirable to give this information in another form.
§ In reply to Mr. CURRAN (Jarrow),
§ MR. MCKENNA
said the orders had been allocated with due regard to the interests of the Navy, the prices tendered, and the desirability of distributing the work. It was not the custom to place orders without regard to cost.
§ MR. CURRAN
Do the Admiralty also investigate whether the firms tendering pay trade union rates of wages?
|Yard.||Week ended 19th November, 1898.||Week ended 21st November, 1908.|
|West India Docks||235||217|
|The only men who would be entitled to pension are those on the established list.|
MR. T. F. RICHARDS
pointed out that the right hon. Gentleman had not stated how many of the hands were on the established list, neither had he given the figures for certain victualling yards.
§ MR. LUPTON (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)
How far is the right hon. Gentleman's Answer consistent with the under-