NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1906–7. (Hansard, 27 July 1908)

§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said he wished to call attention to the scandalous state of affairs disclosed in the Resolution. It was not so much that a million of money voted for certain purposes had not been spent, because that they might reasonably expect; but that other items of expenditure had been greatly in excess of the amounts voted to the extent of £644,285. It was proposed by the Resolution that the shortcomings of the Navy Department should be covered up by the appropriation of the surpluses to meet the deficits. This kind of thing happened every year, but he doubted whether there had ever boon a more flagrant instance of it than was disclosed on the present occasion. It showed the way in which a Government which was supposed to have a great care for the finances of the country really looked after matters, and was an extraordinary commentary on the manner in which the Estimates wore made up. It was a matter which ought not to be passed by without a serious protest.

§ *DR. MACNAMARA
remarked that the hon. Member had said that this was a flagrant case, but as a matter of fact the thing was usual. They took power tinder the Appropriation Act to transfor sums from one Vote on which money had been saved, to another Vote on which the estimated expenditure had been exceeded. There had been a saving altogether of over £1,000,000, and against that had to be placed a deficit on other Votes of £644,000, which meant that the Admiralty had required nearly £400,000 less than was allowed. If the hon. Gentleman wanted particular information on any one point he would be glad to give it to him.

§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said that he did not desire information on any particular point, but it seemed a scandalous way of meeting outlay. When the Estimates were under consideration the Committee were asked to vote certain sums for specific purposes. He noticed that on the wages of officers, seamen, and boys, there had been £254,136 more spent than the Admiralty got the authority of Parliament to spend. On shipbuilding, repairs, and maintenance, there was an excess expenditure of £82,848, and in the same way £264,933 1064 extra had been spent for materials. On the other hand, the Admiralty had not spent £199,886 on contract work, which they had asked Parliament to sanction, but while this work had not been done, the money had been utilised to help towards meeting the over-expenditure in other directions. The proceeding he had described reflected no credit on the present management of the Department.

§ MR. JOHN WARD
believed that the Admiralty took credit for £200,000 to be expended on Rosyth. He wished to know whether any part of the surplus was due to money saved from the expenditure at Rosyth.

§ *DR. MACNAMARA
I do not think off hand that any of this saving is due to money estimated for Rosyth, which was not spent.

§ MR. CARLILE
said that if his hon. friend's criticisms upon the previous Resolution wore warranted, as he certainly thought they were, the statement now under discussion deserved still more severe censure. He could not look at it without realising that the cheeseparing policy of the present Government in dealing with the Army was clearly brought before them by these figures. The Government asked for considerable sums and then did not spend them. The Army was cut down in numbers and consequently the Government were able to show a large surplus, upon which he supposed they would consider themselves entitled to congratulation. There was a great surplus under the heading of pay, and it was evident from the figures that the Army stores had not been kept up to the right level. It was evident that the Government were starving the Army. The only excuse that they could offer was that they had miscalculated their requirements, and he thought it was a grievous thing that this should be the case in regard to every one of the sixteen items in the schedule. He hoped the Government would not think that it could take any credit to itself for a state of things under which the Army was bound to suffer. Besides that it was to be feared that the cheeseparing policy of the Government would expose the country to great national risks which ought never to have been encountered.

§ MR. JOHN WARD
noticed that the amount written off in the schedule as irrecoverable was only £4,106 7s. 11d. He would like to know whether that was lost on canteens.

§ THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. ACLAND)
said 1068 that the amounts irrecoverable were the remains of claims arising out of the South African war. It was rather remarkable that the sums were so small, but they had fought a great many claims and had got back a good deal of money, though sometimes there were no assets. What the hon. Member for Hertfordshire called a starving and cheeseparing policy the Government called economy. They wore quite pleased that they had boon able to spend this large amount less on the Army than they calculated upon doing when the Estimates were framed.

§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
asked the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill if he would toll them how many officers and men were represented in free medical establishments and so on. That would give them a bettor idea of what the surplus really meant.

§ MR. ACLAND
said they took the number of men authorised at the beginning of the year, and therefore the sum was not so large. The matter ought to have been raised on the Estimates on which the House had spent five days.

	£	s.	d.
Total Surpluses	1,041,698	8	7
Total Deficits	644,285	12	7
Net Surplus	£397,412	16	0

Schedule.
Number of Vote.	Navy Services, 1906–07. Votes.	Differences between Exchequer Grants and Net Expenditure.
Surpluses.	Deficits.
		£	s.	d.	£	s	d.
1	Wages, &c, of Officers, Seamen, and Boys, Coast Guard, and Royal Marines	—	254,136	17	1
2	Victualling and Clothing for the Navy	187,206	2	8	—
3	Medical Establishments & Services	22,225	13	8	—
4	Martial Law	1,842	18	0	—
5	Educational Services	9,894	19	7	—
6	Scientific Services	2,771	14	8	—
7	Royal Naval Reserves	80,309	1	6	—
8	Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, &c.:
	I. Personnel	—	82,848	1	11
	II. Matériel	—	264,933	12	10
	III. Contract Work	199,886	1	10	—
9	Naval Armaments	260,541	17	5	—
10	Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad	194,528	0	11	—
11	Miscellaneous Effective Services	78,025	9	9	—
12	Admiralty Office	4,466	8	7	—
13	Half Pay, Reserved and Retired Pay	—	20,078	19	7
14	Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances	—	19,838	9	4
15	Civil Pensions and Gratuities	—	895	11	4
	Amount written off as irrecoverable	—	1,554	0	6
	Total	1,041,698	8	7	644,285	12	7
	Net Surplus	£397,412 16 0

	£	s.	d.
Total Surpluses	1,336,708	4	1
Total Deficits	42,029	13	4
Net Surplus	£1,294,678	10	9

Schedule.
Number of Vote.	Army Services, 1906–07. Votes.	Differences between Exchequer Grants and Net Expenditure.
Surpluses.	Deficits.
		£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.
1	Pay, &c., of Army	358,433	12	9	—
2	Medical Establishment: Pay, &c.	44,876	13	4	—
3	Militia: Pay, Bounty, &c.	41,127	7	2	—
4	Imperial yeomanry: Pay and Allowances	16,943	14	7	—
5	Volunteer Corps: Pay and Allowances	30,198	4	1	—
6	Quarterings, Transport, and Remounts	107,764	3	7	—
7	Supplies and Clothing	105,665	13	2	—
8	Ordnance Department Establishments and General Stores	128,775	0	10	—
9	Armaments and Engineer Stores	306,4 29	11	4	—
10	Works and Buildings	87,310	0	6	—
11	Establishments for Military Education	—	2,323	6	8
12	Miscellaneous Effective Services	24,390	16	4	—
13	War Office and Army Accounts Department	4,229	10	11	—
14	Non-effective Charges for Officers, &c	20,563	15	6	—
15	Non-effective Charges for Men, &c.	—	32,744	16	2
16	Civil Superannuation, Compensation, Compassionate Allowances, and Gratuities	—	2,855	2	7
—	Balances irrecoverable	—	4,106	7	11
	Total	1,336,7[...]8	4	1	42,029	13	4
	Net Surplus	£1,294,678 10 9