20. Mr. W. M. WATSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty what provision has been made to transfer the families of men from Rosyth to other dockyards; and if it covers railway warrants to sons of transferred men up to 18 years of age?
Mr. DAVIDSONIt has been decided, and notified to all concerned, that the established workmen to be transferred from Rosyth to the Southern Dockyards will have reasonable removal expenses for themselves, their wives, their children and their homes, defrayed from public funds. The term "children" includes sons under 16 years of age and unmarried daughters dependent on and residing with their fathers; it also includes any sons over 16 years of age who, by reason of physical or mental infirmity, are necessarily dependent on their parents. The undertaking does not in general cover the travelling expenses of sons over 16 years of age.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAIs the hon. Gentleman aware that these families are contemplating bringing their furniture into the southern yards, and will he take steps to prevent them adopting a course which will result in their having to store their furniture owing to lack of housing accommodation?
21. Mr. WATSONalso asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware fiat a deputation of limbless ex-service men, employed at Rosyth, interviewed the admiral-superintendent on the 10th instant regarding the notice of discharge served on one of their number; whether he is aware that this man is instructing a non-service established man in his duties, which he is expected to take over after the 13th; if this is in accord with the admiral - superintendent's Memorandum NO. 2697/25; and will he take steps to prevent disabled ex-service men being replaced by able-bodied men so long as these duties are available?
Mr. DAVIDSONEvery possible consideration is being and will be given to the -disabled ex-service men at Rosyth with a view to their continued employment so long as this is compatible with the efficient and economic working of the establishment, and does not involve injustice to other men. I regret that an assurance cannot be given of the continued employment of a disabled ex-service, man where, as in the case referred to by the hon. Member, this would mean eider the transfer of an established workman, with his family and his home, to another dockyard, or the superannuation of an established man.
Mr. WATSONDid the hon. Gentleman not give an assurance previously that so long as these jobs continued the disabled men would be kept in them? In this case the job is to continue for some time and this man is already discharged.
Mr. DAVIDSONI think that the hon. Member is mistaken. I gave an assurance that as long as work suitable for the disabled man was available he should have it., but I am afraid that in this case it impossible.