§ 25. Sir Ralph Glynasked the Secretary of State for War whether he will reduce by at least 50 per cent. the number of civilians employed in ordnance depots who 1514 on 1st July numbered 46,091; whether he is aware that prewar there were six central ordnance depots whilst on 1st July there were 12; and that prewar there were 10 command ordnance depots, whereas now there are 12; whether he will reduce the 3,309 military and 46,000 civilians employed at the 13 ammunition sub-depots; and whether, in view of the general reduction of the Army and the withdrawal of stores from overseas, he will indicate the consequential economies especially in civilian manpower employed at these various depots.
§ Mr. ShinwellThe authorised strength of civilians at ammunition sub-depots on 1st July was 460, not 46,000. The authorised strength on that date covering all types of ordnance depots was 44,042, as previously given to the hon. Member, but the actual strength was 38,528. I regret that a reduction such as that suggested in the first part of the Question is impossible. I am aware of the facts referred to in the second and third parts, but I would point out that the number of items now handled by ordnance is four times the number handled prewar. The number of ammunition sub-depots is now nine, at which there are employed 2,302 soldiers and 334 civilians. The general reduction of the Army, and the withdrawal of stores from overseas, results at, present in an increased load upon ordnance depots in the United Kingdom since they have to receive and condition all stores returned by disbanding units, and by overseas depots which are closing down, and arrange disposal of surpluses.
§ Sir R. GlynIn view of the shortage of manpower, could the right hon. Gentleman consider conducting an independent inquiry into the present methods of working, and the possible application of mechanical means?
§ Mr. ShinwellWe are conducting that inquiry at present.
§ Mr. Anthony NuttingIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in my constituency there are two ordnance factories which are the greatest possible drain of labour from the essential industries of agriculture and iron and steel?
§ Mr. ShinwellAs I say, we are inquiring into the matter of the use of manpower in these depots.
§ Air-Commodore HarveyWill the right hon. Gentleman ensure that where reductions are taking place development and semi-development areas like Congleton are last on the list to be affected?
§ 26. Sir R. Glynasked the Secretary of State for War how many of the 27,137 civilians employed at the central ordnance depots, the 11,693 employed on civilian clothing depots and the 9,797 employed at command ordnance depots, are persons over 60 years of age; how many are men and how many women; and whether he can ascertain the normal occupations of all these employees prior to being taken on the strength of the War Department, such as miners, agricultural workers, etc.
§ Mr. ShinwellThe figures for central and command ordnance depots quoted by the hon. Member were the authorised strengths for 1st July, 1947; the actual strengths on that date were for central ordnance depots 23,163 and for command ordnance depots 8,690. The number of civilians employed at 30th September in central ordnance depots was 22,920, of whom 5,669 were women, in civilian clothing depots 76, all men (not 11,693 as stated in the Question) and in command ordnance depots 8,186, of whom 1,848 were women. Information as to how many were over 60 years is not readily available. Nor is it possible, without undue labour, to ascertain the previous occupations of these employees.
§ Sir R. GlynCould the right hon. Gentleman, in consultation with the Minister of Labour, ascertain how many skilled people are doing unskilled work in these depots?
§ Mr. ShinwellIf it does not involve too much labour, I will do so.