§ 60. Mr. MACQU1STENasked the Secretary of State for War how many gum thigh-boots are in the possession of the War Office or the Disposal Board; what did they cost to buy; how much has been spent in transporting and handling them; where are they now; and, seeing that they could have been sold at or about £45 per ton as scrap rubber in January, 1919, and can now only fetch about £30, who are the officials or official responsible for the delay in selling them and the cost of storing them and shifting them about?
§ Mr. FORSTERNo stock of these boots is being maintained by the War Department. I understand that the number remaining on fraud with the Disposal Board is 507,193 pairs, which cost, when new, approximately, £456,500. The total amount spent in transport, viewing, etc., since the 1st April is, approximately, £1,800, but this covers boots already disposed of as well as those waiting disposal. The boots still on hand are at the stadium, White City. As these boots could not be obtained in large numbers in an emergency, it was necessary to hold them until the end of June with a view to possible contingencies, but there was no delay in reporting them for disposal as soon as the situation cleared.
§ 62. Mr. MACQUISTENasked the Secretary of State for War whether there is in the possession of his Department over 1,500,000 very heavy Army boots (B 5), and another 250,000 in course of manufacture; that this supply will take about four years to exhaust; whether most of these boots can now be sold for civilian purposes at a small profit, or at least at cost and supply urgent civilian wants, and enable the Army to be furnished with a boot of a pattern better suited than the existing boot for both peace and war purposes, and so keep the manufacturers of Army boots and their workmen employed; whether these improved boots may reasonably be expected to be supplied, in the course of the next four years, at a reduction in cost considerably below the price realisable for the heavy Army boot above suggested to be sold; and will he consult the technical advisers of the Royal Army 1794 Clothing Department on the above matters, and also instruct them forthwith to have a more satisfactory style of boot prepared suitable for peace and war?
§ Mr. FORSTERThe number of boots in stock, and in course of manufacture, are approximately as stated. Taking into account reserves and probable issues, the stock is below the estimated requirements of the next three years. With regard to the remainder of the question, it is not admitted that a better boot suitable for both peace and war purposes can be provided. The present boot is the result of practical experience in the field. It was produced by Royal Army Clothing Department experts in consultation with the medical authorities, and I understand has given general satisfaction. It would not, in the circumstances be advisable or economical to dispose of the present stock as my hon. Friend suggests.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENIs it the fact that these boots can now be sold at a profit, and that as time goes on the cost of making boots will be cheaper? I should like also to know if my right hon. Friend will answer the last part of the question— namely, whether ho has consulted the technical advisers, and, if so, who were the gentlemen whom he consulted?
§ Mr. FORSTERWith regard to the last question, I have already said that it was produced by the Royal Army Clothing Departments experts in consultation with the medical authorities.
§ Mr. MACQUISTENI want to know who they are?
§ Mr. FORSTERI cannot give, without notice, the names of the experts consulted, but if my hon. and learned Friend puts down a question, no doubt I can give him the information.