NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1908–9. (Hansard, 15 July 1910)

§ Mr. BURGOYNE
I would like to ask the hon. Member as to whether, instead of having any surpluses there might be from the Army and Navy expenditure brought to the House, it could not be made a rule in the future that they should without the sanction of the House be utilised for the furtherance of the Army and Navy?

The CHAIRMAN
If the hon. Member desires to argue that these surpluses

§ Mr. JOHN GRETTON
I want to ask for some explanation of one or two items. The first two items of deficits seem to show that the Government in the course of the year just ended recruited seamen rather more largely than they expected when their Estimates were laid before the 831 House. That is satisfactory so far as it goes, because we have argued constantly that the Government's Estimates for that purpose have not been sufficient, but I see on the other side a surplus of £146,000 for material. No doubt the right hon. Gentleman will be able to explain how the surplus occurs, but does it mean less expenditure on shipbuilding or does it mean that the stores and ammunition of the Fleet are below the standard which the Government estimated to be necessary at the beginning of the financial year just ended? That is a very important matter. There has been a constant decrease since this Government has been in office of naval stores, and the Vote has not been of the standard of previous' years. This has caused very grave anxiety to many expert critics in this country. I therefore desire to ask the right hon. Gentleman to what this item of £146,000 applies, and if he can assure us that it applies only to economies in price, and does not mean any deficiency in material? We have constantly urged the Government to proceed with the buildings at Rosyth, and it would allay considerable anxiety if the right hon. Gentleman was able to inform the House that the surplus of £133,000 on works, buildings, and repairs does not mean any delay in the works at Rosyth. We have been anxious for the efficiency of our dockyards on the East Coast. The only great work yet undertaken is that at Rosyth, and the delay there has been overlong. I think the time for that to be explained has come. I quite agree with hon. Members who hold it is a very vital principle that the surpluses available at the end of the year should be repaid and that the whole account should be laid before the House. It is, I know, not usual to make any criticisms on this Vote, but time will not be wasted if the right hon. Gentleman will make some explanation.

§ Mr. HOBHOUSE
This is very much more a financial question than a naval question, and for this reason, that the Vote to which this sum applies totals something like £36,000,000 or £37,000,000. Upon that Vote there is a variation of one kind or another amounting to £138,000, and that is due to a very trifling miscalculation in the expenditure of a very vast sum of money. Whether it is a question of wages, or victualling, or works, or material, it must be borne in mind that from time to time and from year to year 832 it is impossible to calculate with absolute exactness what will be the expenditure in the next twelve months. All that can be done is to give as close an approximation of the Vote as is possible. All these are matters which vary in detail over the whole year, but the hon. Gentleman can rest assured that any alteration is due to multifarious circumstances over which the Admiralty have no control.

§ Mr. J. O'CONNOR
I wish for some information as to the item for victualling and clothing for the Navy. The victualling of the Navy is a subject of great interest to Irish Members, as a great deal of what is known as "mess pork" used in the Navy is obtained from Ireland. It is well known that Ireland produces a very good article in the shape of bacon and mess pork. I suppose if we had to differentiate between North and South in regard to this important manufacture the hon. Member for Limerick would claim that the article which comes from there is the best in all Ireland. There is no need to go outside Ireland, or even outside England, for a supply of mess pork for the Navy. Ireland is the home of the pig. During his interesting life he pays the rent, the rates and taxes, and I have no doubt that after he is dead, out of his overwhelming resources, he is quite capable of feeding His Majesty's Navy.

The CHAIRMAN
The only question which can be raised with reference to this Resolution in regard to mess pork is whether any share of this £88,000 has been spent on mess pork. The hon. Member must not embark upon a general inquiry. He must not ask with regard to contracts for mess pork in general.

§ Mr. J. O'CONNOR
Keeping within the terms of your ruling, I would ask whether any portion of this £88,000 has been spent on mess pork for the Navy within the scope of the contract which the hon. and gallant Member for Portsmouth (Lord C. Beresford) placed in Ireland, probably about twenty years ago. I desire also to ask a question in regard to the clothing of the Navy. Twenty-five years ago I had the privilege of making a Motion in this House which was responded to by the then Member for Westminster, the late Mr. W. H. Smith, when he was Secretary to the Admiralty. He placed contracts for the supply of clothing for foreign service in Ireland. They were continued for a considerable time, and now I do not know whether there is any clothing for the Navy 833 made in Limerick or not. It was then considered a matter of high State policy that a very excellent factory, which had been established for the purpose of supplying foreign service clothing for the Navy, not only for this, but for other countries of Europe, should be encouraged by receiving orders. The clothing made is very suitable and cheaper than could be produced by the Army factories.

§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLES
I only rise to make one remark in the interest of financial accuracy. The Secretary to the Treasury told the Committee that the difference in the accounts was——

SCHEDULE
Number of Vote.	Navy Services, 1908–9. Votes.	Differences between Exchequer Grants and Net Expenditure.
Surpluses.	Deficits.
		£	s.	d.	£	s.	d.
1	Wages, etc of Officers, Seamen, and Boys, Coast Guard, and Royal Marines	—	28,714	18	2
2	Victualling and Clothing for the Navy	—	88,021	10	9
3	Medical Establishments and Services	4,897	5	1	—
4	Martial Law	1,379	1	3	—
5	Educational Services	8,630	10	4	—
6	Scientific Services	—	836	9	5
7	Royal Naval Reserves	2,331	7	8	—
8	Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc.:
	I. Personnel	—	88,874	1	0
	II. Matériel	146,344	13	9	—
	III. Contract Work	46,236	1	1	—
9	Naval Armaments	17,339	0	2	—
10	Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad	133,956	10	9	—
11	Miscellaneous Effective Services	—	21,544	4	10
12	Admiralty Office	4,296	0	10	—
13	Half Pay and Retired Pay	133	14	6	—
14	Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances	—	129	13	9
15	Civil Pensions and Gratuities	10,784	12	10	—
—	Amount written off as irrecoverable	—	10,017	2	11
	Total	376,328	18	3	238,138	0	10
	Net Surplus	£138,190 17 5

		£	s.	d.
"Total surpluses	…	376,328	18	3
"Total deficits	…	238,138	0	10
"Net surplus	…	£138,190	17	5