Vote 15. Additional Married Quarters (Hansard, 10 March 1960)

§ Mr. Wingfield Digby
Before we let this Vote go I wish to ask two questions. After all, this is the main provision for married quarters in the Navy. Married quarters abroad, and very few at home, are provided for under Vote 10. This is a convenient moment to ask my hon. Friend what the present policy is. I see that £¾ million is to be spent in the coming year.
What is the present policy? Is it to provide further married quarters at the home ports or is this money intended to provide them at out-stations and more isolated places, the numbers there being increased?
737 Secondly, what is happening about redundant married quarters built under this Vote? There must be some of them now. Under the Acts to which reference is made in the Explanatory Notes there is provision that such quarters should be offered to local authorities, which are under no obligation to take them. It is obvious that some of the married quarters built very recently must have become redundant. For instance, I cannot believe that some of the married quarters in Chatham are not redundant. Has it been possible to dispose of them to the local authority, by agreement, and has it been possible to get rid of the financial obligation of continuing to pay interest on the loan?

§ Mr. C. Ian Orr-Ewing
The general policy in the coming twelve months with which we are concerned is to concentrate on married quarters on the airfields. This is a section of the Navy where our policy has been changing as our front line strength ran down to its present size— where I hope it will remain—and we have, I think, a little neglected places like Lossiemouth and Yeovilton. We wish to make up some of the leeway in replacing what until now have been temporary buildings and in improving conditions where people have been making do with a diminished number of married

§ Mr. Wingfield Digby
Yes—the former Royal Navy air station at St. Merryn.

§ Mr. Orr-Ewing
If my hon. Friend has a case in mind at St. Merryn, I will look into that and write to him about anything which may have arisen there.

§ Sir P. Agnew
I wish to raise a matter on Vote 13, Subhead R, where there is an item Contribution to Messrs. Bailey (Malta) Ltd., Superannuation Scheme—£250,000. In the Explanation, we are told that authority is being asked in order to finance the inclusion of certain formerly unestablished employees in the Malta Dockyard within the pension or superannuation scheme of Messrs. Bailey (Malta), Ltd. It would not be right for the Committee to vote this sum of money to the company without scrutinising the existing contractual relations between it and the Admiralty.
Those contractual relations exist by virtue of the lease which was granted by the Admiralty to Messrs. Bailey (Malta) Ltd. on 30th March, 1959, in connection with the turning over of the dockyard to civil use. I have no intention of going into them in any detail at this late hour, when we are already short of time, but within the terms of that lease there is one important matter in this connection. The company undertakes to carry out at its own expense certain works of major construction and improvement to what I will call the heavy facilities of the yard itself. These affect two of the graving docks, part of the wharfage, which is to be extended by 400 feet so that commercial ships can go alongside, and the completion of a large building required in connection with the work of the yard. The total figure involved is £1,675,000.
When I referred to the company undertaking to carry out these works at its own expense, I had it in mind to tell the Committee that, in order to assist Messrs. Bailey (Malta), Ltd., to do the work, there was a loans agreement signed on 11th September, 1959, under which the company is to be permitted to borrow from Her Majesty's Government, by stages, as and when required, a sum totalling about £6 million.
The matter is not as simple as that. All was not clear at that stage for the money to be borrowed because certain conditions were attached in the loans agreement to the right of the company to draw any money. One condition is particularly important. No advance was to be made by the Government to the company until £750,000 of the share capital of the company Messrs. Bailey 740 (Malta), Ltd. had been subscribed as ordinary shares and paid up in cash.
It is surely right in connection with this item to inquire whether this very important condition has yet been fulfilled. The last information I had, which was quite recent, was that only £300,000 of share capital had been subscribed and issued, virtually all of it being issued to Messrs. Bailey of South Wales, except for a very small part which had gone to individual directors.
It is open to doubt whether, on this Supplementary Estimate, it would be in order to do more than mention another fact, namely, that evidence is lacking that the announcement made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Bedfordshire (Mr. Lennox-Boyd), when he was Colonial Secretary, that an opportunity would be afforded to the people of Malta to participate in acquiring shares in Bailey (Malta) Ltd., has been fulfilled. If I am right in saying that the £750,000 has not yet been fully subscribed, then the loans under the agreement cannot be made and, therefore, the important works of conversion which ought to be going on now and which must under the terms of the lease be completed by 30th March, 1964, cannot have been started, unless, of course, the company is able to finance them itself.
These are matters with which my hon. Friend is directly concerned since, of course, these works have to be supervised by or carried out to the satisfaction of the Admiralty. Therefore, at a time when we are asked to approve the payment of £250,000 to this company, I feel it right to ask what is the position with regard to the carrying out of the terms of the lease and the other cognate matters to which I have referred.

§ Mr. C. Ian Orr-Ewing
My hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir P. Agnew) is quite right in drawing attention to the £250,000 which appears in our Vote. This £250,000 is specifically for pensions. It so happens that the quota of established posts at Malta has been very much lower in proportion to the number of established posts in similar dockyards in the United Kingdom. The result of this has been that, at the time of the transfer on 31st March, 1959, there was a large number 741 of older men still unestablished who, if they had continued in Admiralty service until retiring age and had not been transferred to Messrs. Bailey, would, in fact, have received an Admiralty pension.
When Bailey (Malta) Limited took over this commitment, they wanted to introduce a pension scheme for which employees of all grades would be eligible, and this was keeping faith with people who had served the Admiralty and the nation very well in Malta. It was right that we should allow them to draw up a pension scheme that should not necessarily fall on the shoulders of the new undertaking, but upon the Navy Votes, which had benefited over the years from the skill and the tuition which had been given.

Schedule
—	Sums not exceeding
Supply Grants	Appropriations in Aid
Vote	£	£
1.	Pay, etc. of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines	…	…	300,000	—
2.	Victualling and Clothing for the Navy	…	…	…	Cr. 300,000	250,000
4.	Civilians employed on Fleet Services	…	…	…	200,000	—
6.	Scientific Services	…	…	…	Cr. 650,000	250,000
8.	Shipbuilding, Repairs and Maintenance, etc.—
	Section I—Personnel	…	…	…	1,050,000	100,000
	Section II—Matériel	…	…	…	Cr. 5,250,000	1,250,000
	Section III—Contract Work	…	…	…	5,500,000	3,195,000
9.	Naval Armaments	…	…	…	Cr. 3,550,000	600,000
10.	Works, Buildings and Repairs at Home and Abroad	…	…	—	^*-300,000
11.	Miscellaneous Effective Services	…	…	…	700,000	^*-1,100,000
12.	Admiralty Office	…	…	…	550,010	—
13.	Non-Effective Services	…	…	…	1,450,000	—
15.	Additional Married Quarters	…	…	…	—	^*-245,000
	Total, Navy (Supplementary) 1959–60	…	…	£10	£4,000,000
^*Deficit

Schedule
—	Sums not exceeding
Supply Grants	Appropriations in Aid
Vote	£	£
1.	Pay, etc., of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines	…	…	300,000	—
2.	Victualling and Clothing for the Navy	…	…	Cr. 300,000	250,000
4.	Civilians employed on Fleet Services	…	…	200,000	—
6.	Scientific Services	…	…	Cr. 650,000	250,000
8.	Shipbuilding, Repairs and Maintenance, etc.—
	Section I—Personnel	…	…	1,050,000	100,000
	Section II—Matériel	…	…	Cr. 5,250,000	1,250,000
	Section III—Contract Work	…	…	5,500,000	3,195,000
9.	Naval Armaments	…	…	Cr. 3,550,000	600,000
10.	Works, Buildings and Repairs at Home and Abroad	…	—	^*-300,000
11.	Miscellaneous Effective Services	…	…	700,000	^*-1,100,000
12.	Admiralty Office	…	…	550,010	—
13.	Non-effective Services	…	…	1,450,000	—
15.	Additional Married Quarters	…	…	—	^*-245,000
	Total, Navy (Supplementary; 1959–60	…	…	£10	£4,000,000
^* Deficit.

Navy Supplementary Estimate, 1959–60
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £10, be granted to Her Majesty to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1960. for expenditure beyond the sum already provided in the grants for Navy Services for the year.