§ Mr. GEORGE YOUNGERasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, under present arrangements, the Board of Works execute all alterations and additions at Osborne, which are paid for out of Naval Votes; and, if so, whether he will consider the desirability, in the interests of economical administration, of entrusting to the Department which bears the cost the execution of the works?
§ Mr. McKENNAThe reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. 608 I should be greatly disposed to agree with the view taken by the hon. Gentleman had I to deal with anyone else than my right hon. Friend the present First Commissioner of Works.
§ Mr. GEORGE YOUNGERIf the right hon. Gentleman thinks it desirable that this work should be dealt with by his Department, why has he prevented it from being so dealt with?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have hitherto been so satisfied with the work done by the right hon. Member that I feel that there is no immediate occasion for a change.
§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESShould not the right hon. Gentleman consider whether these works could not be done much better by his own Department than by the Board of Works?
§ Mr. McKENNAWe have the office of works in which my right hon. Friend serves. We have a department of works in which I have served myself, but I do not know that I could say that one is very much better than the other.
§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESWhy have a department of works if the right hon. Gentleman does not employ his own Department?
§ Mr. McKENNAThis particular case of Osborne was a special case which for exceptional reasons was left in control of my right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works. I found it so when I entered the Admiralty, and I see no good reason for a change so far, but it is quite possible that I might change in the future.