§ 65. Mr. HARCOURTasked the Undersecretary of State for War why, in spite of strong representations by the Food Controller, the weekly Home service ration for officers and men employed on sedentary duties remains at 70 ozs. of butcher's meat, 14 ozs. of bacon, and 8 ozs. of offal, as compared with a total of 20 ozs. of meat for civilians; and whether, in view of the discontent caused by these inequalities, it is proposed to take any action?
§ 68. Mr. BUTCHERasked the Undersecretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that sedentary Home service soldiers receive far larger meat rations than ordinary civilians; and whether, in view of the representations of the Food Controller against this inequality, he will take steps to remedy it?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster)This matter is still under the consideration of the Government.
§ Sir C. HENRYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that he told me two or three months ago that the matter was under consideration, and that steps would be taken to deal with it?
§ Mr. FORSTERIt was dealt with rather too promptly.
§ Sir C. HENRYWhat steps have been taken?
§ Mr. FORSTERA reduction was made in the rations of sedentary troops, but the method of making it was found not to be successful, and it is on that account that I said that the matter had been dealt with too promptly.
§ Mr. HARCOURTIs it proposed to bring this question before the War Cabinet at an early date for a decision?
§ Mr. FORSTERObviously, I cannot say when the War Cabinet will consider it. I must ask the lion. Member to realise that the War Cabinet have a great many other important matters to consider, but I do not suppose that there will be any undue delay.
§ Mr. BILLINGDo I understand that the War Office admit the principle and that it is only the method that is in question?
§ Mr. FORSTERIt is a matter which obviously must be decided by the Government.