VICTUALLING AND CLOTHING FOR THE NAVY. (Hansard, 24 May 1921)

§ Sir T. BRAMSDON
I desire to call attention to a grant which is made by the Admiralty to the members of the seamen's branch and not to the stokers. On the 17th of February I put down a question asking whether members of the sea branch were entitled to a new kit or a sum of £26 in lieu thereof, while the same privilege was refused to the stokers' branch. I drew attention to this subject again on the 17th of March. The reply was to the effect that it was easier to get stokers than seamen. During demobilisation the Government got rid too quickly of the members of both classes. Then they had to take them on again and that required the giving of this privilege of a new kit to members of the seagoing branch. Apparently it is easier to get stokers than seamen, so the Admiralty gave that privilege to the seamen, but refused it to the stokers. The hon. Gentleman can understand what discontent 103 this has caused to members of the stoker class. It is not right to give a privilege of that kind to one class and not to the other. My hon. Friend may not be able to answer the question at this moment, but I have never yet received an answer to my question of the 17th March. If my hon. Friend is not able to answer me now perhaps he will be good enough to make enquiries and write me a letter in reply.
Another question to which I wish to call attention refers to the reefer jacket given to petty officers of more than four years' standing. This creates a great deal of discontent because this reefer jacket is only granted to petty officers provided that they have four years' seniority. It is difficult to know why that line was drawn. I can only imagine that it was on account of the question of expense. If so, I would ask my hon. Friend whether he cannot see his way to take steps to allay this discontent, because petty officers cannot understand why only men of four years' seniority should obtain this privilege, while petty officers under four years' standing have to wear the ordinary blue jacket, and their position is not shown and is not realised when they go abroad, whereas the reefer jacket is a distinguishing characteristic. If my hon. Friend would do justice to both these points I should feel grateful.

§ Mr. AMERY
On the first point, I understand that, as my hon. Friend himself suggests, the early issue of kit to seamen was made as an emergency issue, in order to deal with an unforeseen shortage. I am not sure that that shortage exists any longer, or that this special issue is now being made. I will look into the matter and write to my hon. Friend, as he suggests. On the other question, I am not without sympathy with the point of view which he has put. Undoubtedly, when senior petty officers are given that privilege, it seems logical that it should also be granted to the others. Of course, sometimes it is better to have half a loaf than no bread, and in view of the financial situation it was felt when this reform was first introduced that it should not be applied to all petty officers. It would have entailed another £100,000 initial expenditure, and no inconsiderable annual expenditure. This is one of the matters which I promise 104 my hon. Friend to look into very closely, in order to see if we can carry out his wish.

§ Sir T. BRAMSDON
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the promise which he has made, and I think he will find on making inquiries that it would not cost anything like the figure which he mentions.