Vote 11. Miscellaneous Effective Services (Hansard, 10 March 1959)

§ Miss Vickers
I should like to congratulate my hon. Friend on the fact that the expenditure on telegrams, telephones 1174 and postage under this Vote is reduced by the large amount of £140,000. This is very creditable, considering that actually the cost of sending telegrams has gone up. I should like to know whether the increased allowance for ministers of religion means that the number has increased, or whether it means that individual ministers are receiving better pay, as I believe is the case with ministers who are not in the Services. I shall not repeat what I said yesterday, but I should be grateful if my hon. Friend could answer the questions, which I asked then about canteens.

§ Mr. Willis
I should like to have more information about Subhead J which is entitled "Finance of an Admiralty Company (S. G. Brown, Ltd.)." We are giving or advancing to this company a sum of £250,000 under terms and conditions to be decided in consultation with the Treasury. We are told that this is because of a change in the range of its products Will the hon. Gentleman tell us what this means? We want to know what are the changes in its range of products and also what is the present capital value of the company. Also it would be interesting to know the terms on which these loans to the company are negotiated.

§ Vice-Admiral Hughes Hallett
Can my hon. Friend say a word about the rather strange increase under Subhead MM, "Instruction of Naval Personnel at Outside Establishments"? Is it because there are more pilots to be trained this year or because the charge for training them has increased?

§ Mr. T. G. D. Galbraith
First, I will answer the question of my hon. and gallant Friend about training and the cost. It is a bit of both. The cost has gone up and also, as the result of improved recruiting, particularly for the Supplementary List, more pilots will have to he trained.
The hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis) asked me about S. G. Brown, Limited. for which we are proposing to provide some extra money. This is a firm of instrument makers which was acquired in 1940 in order to secure better production for instruments required by the Navy. I can assure the hon. Gentleman and the Committee that it is not our policy to hold on to firms of this kind which are not 1175 strictly connected with the naval service. Certainly 1940 seems a long way away.
As long as we remain in control, the company is owned by the Admiralty. I regret to say that I do not know its capital value, but obviously it is substantially in excess of what we are putting in. The firm needs this money in order to expand its business. It makes complicated and delicate instruments for which we think there is a good market abroad, particularly in America. However, I do not want the Committee to think that the Admiralty wishes to hold on to the firm for ever.

§ Mr. Willis
Why not?

§ Mr. Galbraith
One can understand hon. Gentlemen opposite asking that question, but my hon. Friends may wonder why it is under our control at all. The answer is that we try to divest ourselves of anything ancillary to defence whenever the appropriate moment comes. That moment has not come yet. The money is needed so that the business can make the most of its opportunities, and that is why we are putting money into it.
The hon. Lady the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Miss Vickers) asked me a question about ministers of religion. She is right. The capitation fee is going up. Last night she asked me also a question about canteens and I am grateful to her for not repeating her speech this evening. I will answer the point she made then. I agree absolutely with her that the condition of our canteens is not anything like 100 per cent. of what it should be. Again, this is the old problem of not having enough money to do what we want. It is much more important that the money available to be spent on shore works should be spent on accommodation, on galleys and on those places where the sailors actually spend their time. These canteens, important though they may be, are used only for about three-quarters of an hour a day, so I am advised.
Nevertheless, I do not want my hon. Friend to think that canteens are the Cinderella of the Service. The two in which she is particularly interested are those at Ernesettle and Bull Point. Plans to improve them are being produced at present but naturally I cannot give her any guarantee of when the work will be 1176 carried out. As my hon. Friend probably knows, a new canteen was built in her constituency in William Street last year, and to show the importance which the Admiralty attaches to this work in its right priority, I can tell her that an Admiralty Fleet Order was issued on the subject only this month.
There is one other point I want to make. Anyone listening to what my hon. Friend said last night might think that the canteens were in a shocking condition. I agree that aesthetically they leave a lot to be desired, but I would point out that they come up to the proper standards of health and the demands of the factory inspectors.