§ 11. Mr. VIANTasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that operative painters to the number of 12 have recently been discharged from His Majesty's dockyard at Devonport on the grounds of a, shortage of work and that, notwithstanding this plea, a number of naval ratings were instructed, on 27th February last, to distemper the ceiling and walls and paint the woodwork in D block dining-room at the Devonport dockyard; and will he reconsider this policy of the employment of naval ratings?
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY(Lieut.-Colonel Head lam)I am aware of the discharges referred to, and I regret that they were inevitable because no money was available for wages of the men in question. If we had the money we have work for many more men. The particular work to which the hon. Member refers was done in the naval barracks by naval ratings for the benefit of naval ratings. Had naval ratings not have been employed the work would not have been done. The reply to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. VIANTIs the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware of the discharges that are taking place at Chatham now, and for precisely the same reason, that naval ratings are doing the work hitherto done by building trade operatives?
§ Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAMThat is not the reason for the discharges. I tried to point out in my answer that the reason is that there is not sufficient work going on all the time to enable us to keep on these men. The only reason why we are discharging men is that there is not sufficient work. It may happen that some little piece of work may arise, for which naval ratings can be utilised. That is the only reason why they are being utilised.
§ Mr. VIANTDoes it not follow that, had naval ratings not been employed in the doing of this work, money would have been forthcoming in the Estimates for doing the work by the ordinary operatives in the dockyards?
§ Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAMNo, this work would not have been done at all.