HC Deb 13 November 1929 vol 231 cc2015-8
22. Mr. HORE-BELISHA

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the nature of the work hitherto done by contract which is now being done in the Royal Dockyards; whether this refers solely to orders given during the lifetime of the present Government; what is the cost of the work involved; and in which of His Majesty's dockyards this work is being carried out?

Mr. ALEXANDER

The following work formerly carried out by contract is now being done by the Royal dockyards:—

  • Building caisson, pulling and sailing boats, balsa rafts and lifefloats.
  • Making gunnery and torpedo fittings and stores and various small metal articles for store.
This system was introduced during the lifetime of the late Government, and the policy is now being continued on similar lines and developed as far as is practicable.

The approximate total annual cost of this work is £63,000 (labour £38,000, material £25,000).

The work is being carried out at each of the home dockyards (Chatham, Devon-port, Portsmouth and Sheerness).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

Is the right hon. Gentleman of opinion that this work might be usefully extended, and will he use every endeavour to extend it?

Mr. ALEXANDER

We are giving every possible attention to the development of such work, but I would remind the hon. Member that it is a question of practicability.

Rear-Admiral BEAMISH

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea of the comparative cost of articles made in the dockyards by the present system and of the normal practice?

Mr. ALEXANDER

I should like notice of that question, but I have no reason to believe that dockyard production is uneconomical.

26. Mr. ALLEN

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in providing alternative employment for workers who may be displaced by the anticipated reduction in naval armaments, he will adopt the principle that any alternative work undertaken by Admiralty dockyards shall not be of such a character as to cause unemployment among workmen in the private dockyards in Northern Ireland, Clydeside and other parts of the United Kingdom?

Mr. ALEXANDER

I cannot give any undertaking of this character in advance. The Government will, of course, take into account all relevant considerations.

29. Sir BERTRAM FALLE

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty the increase in the number of men employed under all Votes in the Royal dockyard, Portsmouth, between 1st July of this year and 21st October; and if any increase on the money voted by the last Parliament for Royal dockyards is contemplated?

Mr. ALEXANDER

As regards the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him on the 29th October (OFFICIAL REPORT, column 10); the answer to the second part is in the negative.

Sir B. FALLE

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the answer then given clashed with what was said by his colleague; and may I at the same time say that this question is put down in no hostile spirit, but in order to get the facts?

Mr. ALEXANDER

The answer I have just given in no way clashes with the previous answer given in the House.

Sir B. FALLE

The answer given by the right hon. Gentleman's colleague was that there was double the number of men working in the dockyards now that there was two months ago. As I have said, I ask this question with no hostile feeling, but just to clarify the matter.

Mr. ALEXANDER

If the House understood that, they were under a misapprehension. What my hon. Friend really intended to say was that the number of entries into the dockyards had been rather more than double the number of discharges.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

On a point of Order. In view of the answer just given by the right hon. Gentleman, I wish to call your attention to a fact which I should not otherwise have mentioned, namely, that the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty has been altered in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. SPEAKER

This is the first time that this particular case has been brought to my notice. Ministers and hon. Members are entitled to correct within narrow limits their speeches and answers to questions; they always have been.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

I beg to give notice that I shall call attention to this as a matter affecting the privileges of the House.

Mr. AMMON

Perhaps, with the permission of the House, I may settle the matter out of hand. The House will remember that there was considerable confusion when the question arose and that the hon. Member and myself were evidently talking about two entirely different things. Old Members of the House are quite familiar with receiving slips if the Gallery does not hear quite clearly what has happened. I entered on that what I ought to have said, and that seems to have thrown the whole matter out. I am glad to have this opportunity of doing justice to the hon. Member and at the same time making the position quite clear with regard to the dockyards and myself.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

In view of the fact that I mentioned this subject to you, Sir, will you allow me to say that, of course, I entirely accept what the hon. Gentleman says, but the alteration made my supplementary question look ridiculous.

Sir B. FALLE

Will there be any saving in the Vote?

Mr. ALEXANDER

It is much too early for me to say that at the moment. At present, I am not contemplating asking for more money nor can I say if all the money already voted will be used.