HC Deb 15 March 1965 vol 708 cc927-49

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £15,492,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the expense of medical services, education and civilians on Fleet services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1966.

5.49 p.m.

Mr. Hay

I should like to raise a few questions on this Vote, which deals with the medical services, education and civilians on Fleet services. One of the most interesting features of the White Paper on Defence this year was the reference to a further approach to functionalism inside the Services. I should like to ask the Under-Secretary of State whether any thought has been given to the possible amalgamation of the various medical branches of the different Services as one way in which a functional approach might be used.

When we were discussing earlier Vote 1, my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Dame Joan Vickers) referred to Queen Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service, and we were subsequently told that it was on this Vote that the question of that Service might be raised. I should like to ask whether, if it were possible, the Government would consider the amalgamation of the three nursing services which are at present run by the Ministry of Defence. To remind the Committee, there is the Queen Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service, the Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps and the Princess Mary's Royal Air Force Nursing Service.

Of course, even to mention the possibility of amalgamation is bound to put up the hackles of the supporters of these very distinguished services, but it seems to me that if one is to secure any saving and any greater efficiency from the functional approach to defence, obviously, in branches such as nursing, and, indeed, in the whole range of the medical services, such questions must be put.

Another aspect of the medical services in which some kind of unified structure might be created, or, if it exists already, might be extended, is that of the medical and surgical consultants.

Mr. Snow

On a point of order. Sir Ronald. I merely ask for information. Under Subhead A it is said that the pay and allowances of medical and nursing staff come under Vote 1. Are we, therefore, in order in discussing consultants and medical staff under this Vote as well?

Mr. Hay

Further to that point of order, Sir Ronald. May I draw your attention to the first line of that paragraph, which makes clear that Subhead A provides for the pay and allowances of all staff employed in medical establishments?

The Temporary Chairman (Sir Ronald Russell)

It is quite in order to discuss the pay of staff of medical establishments on this Vote.

Mr. Hay

That is exactly what I was trying to do. It is very difficult, in the context of these individual Votes, to be quite sure that one is in order, but I think that I am.

I was asking whether there was the possibility of a more functional approach as regards consultants. There are various types of specialist employed by the Navy, the Army and the Air Force in hospitals abroad and, I think, in the United Kingdom, and I wonder whether it is possible for the Minister to tell us a little about the way in which the services of such gentlemen may be unified or made more functional so that one might have not the individual and separate Service consultants but a more unified medical service.

I take next Subhead B, Education. I have a question to raise here with regard to children's schools. I do not wish to talk about education in the Services generally here. Subhead B (3) relates to children's schools, and on page 65 of the Estimates an explanation is given. The education of children of Servicemen is given abroad on a tri-Service basis. I have seen the naval school in Malta, a school run by the Navy but to which children from Royal Air Force and Army families come. It is a very happy school. The same thing is happening, evidently, in Singapore and Mauritius, hut I have some questions to ask about it.

I understand that these children's schools suffer from a shortage of staff. There are great difficulties in the staffing of them, and in some instances wives of Service men who happen to be stationed there and who have teaching qualifications are brought in to act as teachers. That may be all right so long as they are there, but if a man is suddenly drafted away and his family goes, at once the school loses a teacher. This is not a very satisfactory way to run a school, and I am quite sure that, although they do their best, the principals of the schools have great difficulties in this respect. I should be grateful if the matter could be looked at.

Next, a question about the equipment for these children's schools. On the whole, the equipment of the school in Malta which I saw was good, but in my time I had complaints about unsatisfactory and delayed deliveries of equipment. I set in train certain investigations while I was at the Ministry of Defence. I hope that they have been carried through to a successful conclusion. Now that we have a unified central Ministry, it should be much easier for the Navy to beat the Air Force over the head and make sure that R.A.F. Transport Command is prepared much more readily than in the past to take urgently needed supplies of scholastic equipment, books, and so on, to these schools where appropriate.

I see the Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army in his place now, and I cannot avoid mentioning Greenwich College. This comes under the same Vote. Now that the hon. Gentleman has had the opportunity, since joining the Ministry, I hope that he has got to grips with the facts about Greenwich. Over the years, on many occasions from this side of the Committee, he has attacked me and my predecessors about what he called the inefficiency of Greenwich College, the appalling waste, and so on. I hope that the facts have been borne in on him now. Perhaps he would care to look up his own speeches in HANSARD to refresh his memory.

I have one question to ask here. Is there scope for more tri-Service courses? This is one point on which I always thought that the hon. Gentleman was right. In the years to come, Greenwich College might well be a tri-Service College, certainly at the higher level for really senior officers. A certain amount has been done along these lines, as the hon. Gentleman knows.

I entirely disagree with the Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army about the Navy side of Greenwich. I was always certain that it was right to keep Greenwich firmly in the hands of the Navy and not try to move the courses elsewhere or, as he suggested, vacate the building completely and hand it over to some unspecified body to run a kind of second-class university there. I always regarded that as a very bad suggestion, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman feels differently about it now. Nevertheless, on the point which I have raised, I should be glad to be told whether there is any prospect of tri-Service courses being held at Greenwich College.

5.57 p.m.

Mr. Geoffrey Rhodes (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East)

Subhead B(1) deals with the naval colleges. I raised this matter in Committee of Supply last week and I complained that, on the basis of evidence available to me, particularly on the basis of a Report published 10 years ago, the proportion of independent school entrants into the Royal Naval College, Dartmouth was, in fact, more than half the total each year. I was asked by hon. Members opposite to bring my researches up to date, and the hon. Member for Ilford, North (Mr. Iremonger) asked me whether I had looked at the names of successful candidates for entry into the Royal Naval College published in The Times each time an entry is announced. His words are reported in c. 725 of HANSARD of 11th March. The hon. Gentleman said that he had looked at the list in recent years and suggested that, if I had done the same, I should have seen that the ratio of successful candidates from Headmasters' Conference schools had been about one in five. Other hon. Members later on asked me to bring my figures up to date.

I responded by saying that, on the information available to me, my impression was that the maintained grammar schools had a far smaller proportion of places than would be suggested by the figures given by the hon. Member for Ilford, North, but I did not press the point then. I have done some further research, and I wish to draw these facts to the attention of the Committee.

The last list was issued on 23rd September, 1964. It shows about 230 names, and over half of those are of candidates from Headmasters' Conference schools. The proportion was not one in five. On the basis of this most recent information, I suggest that relatively little progress has been made in the last 10 years in recruiting a larger number of cadets to the Royal Naval College from schools other than Headmasters' Conference schools.

I am not at this stage suggesting why matters are as they are, although I did last week refer to several of the reasons which were given by the Committee which inquired into the matter 10 years ago and reported to Parliament. The proportion of about half the candidates successful coming from Headmasters' Conference schools is very similar to the proportion entering Sandhurst. It may be that there are some common factors here. I would draw attention to an interesting fact. On the first occasion when I complained that headmasters of maintained grammar schools were pressing upon me the difficulty of getting their bright and energetic boys accepted for commissions, right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite said that the grammar schools did not submit candidates in sufficient quantity and that places in these institutions could not be obtained unless sufficient candidates were submitted. The hon. and gallant Member for Harrow, East (Commander Courtney) made this point.

When I return to this subject in the debate on the Navy Estimates and point out that over a 4½-year period there have been 2,500 candidates submitted from the maintained grammar schools compared with 1,500 from Headmasters' Conference schools, which proves conclusively that it was not shortage of numbers but the high failure rate at the interview board stage which was responsible for the failure of the candidates, I think I have made my point.

In the previous debate hon. Members opposite said that my figures about successes were 10 years out of date. But I have brought to light more recent facts. I suggest that hon. Members opposite are so energetic in defending the existing position that they sometimes, in all sincerity, present wrong information in an attempt to defeat my case. I appeal to my right hon. and hon. Friends to investigate the causes of the heavy failure of boys submitted by the maintained grammar schools for consideration for commissions at the Royal Naval College, Dartmouth. I wonder whether my right hon. and hon. Friends care about the social inequality that exists here. The facts are overwhelming. I do not want hon. Members opposite to tell me that grammar schools do not submit candidates, because I find that they do, nor do I want them to suggest that the position has completely changed in the last 10 years, because the most recent pass list shows that a bias—I am not suggesting it on the part of the interview board—in terms of success is still operating.

Commander Courtney

The hon. Gentleman has given some very interesting and useful figures. Does he appreciate that we are all at a loss for such figures and are all, therefore, very grateful to him for his researches? As one who is extremely interested in the subject, I would point out that the Dartmouth entry lacks both numbers and standard, and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that if he can suggest an alternative source, wherever it may be, the Committee will be very grateful to him.

Mr. Rhodes

I am delighted to have that assurance. The point that I was making was that some hon. Members opposite had been only too willing to try to destroy the case which has been brought forward, sometimes by the presentation of information which has been proved incorrect. I welcome the assurance that there is strong feeling on the other side of the Committee that we should discover the nature of the problem. I hope that there will be an inquiry and that some evidence will be brought forward.

6.4 p.m.

Dame Joan Vickers

I want to refer to some hospital questions under the heading of "Medical Services". I pay tribute to the excellent work done by the Naval Hospital Service for all branches, not only for those in Her Majesty's Services but for civilians. It has been a tremendous advantage to those employed in that service that civilians should have been taken in inconsiderable numbers. Not only does it shorten the local hospital waiting list, but it also gives the Service medical officers valuable additional experience. I gather that in the Plymouth area the Service medical officers are encouraged to visit civilian hospitals to undertake gynaecological work, and this increases their knowledge and must be of benefit to them in their career.

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not adopt the suggestion made by my hon. Friend the Member for Henley (Mr. Hay) that the three nursing services in the Armed Forces should be amalgamated. I cannot see any reason why those services should be amalgamated, any more than that the three Women's Services themselves should be amalgamated. A tremendous tie is created through serving an individual Service, and I hope that the Minister will bear this in mind.

I should like to know whether it is the Government's policy to improve the standards of the hospitals. If the hospitals are to attract good medical staff with adequate experience, the facilities must be provided in which they can work. Some naval hospitals date back to the time of Nelson, and they certainly need to be brought into line with modern conditions. If there are long wards, with open coal fires in the middle of them, I do not think that this is exactly up to the necessary standards. When there are galleys which are a considerable distance from the wards, this does not improve the dietary standards.

The Government seem to be keen on reviews, and I hope that there will be a detailed review of these hospitals. If they are to be all-purpose hospitals, they must be brought more up to date. We have excellent people working in them, and it would be a great pity if they did not have facilities adequate to allow them to do the high grade medical work which they can do.

I should like to draw attention to the Royal Naval Hospital, Stonehouse, and would urge that the officer's mess should be improved. The Minister has indicated agreement with this, so I shall say no more now. He knows what a state it is in. It really needs the added facilities for which I have been asking.

I also suggest that these hospitals need their individual laundries. It has been suggested that in some cases the laundries should be amalgamated with local services. In view of the very quick turnover which is needed, I hope that it will be appreciated that individual laundries for these hospitals are absolutely essential.

There has been a considerable improvement in sick bays in ships, but I would hope that when future ones are built we might have a little more decoration, so that there will not be such a rigid disciplinary air about them or those ghastly counterpanes with anchors on them. I think we could make sick bays on ships a little more pleasant. If one is sick, it is nicer to have better surroundings. I have found an immense improvement in the sick bays of H.M.S. "Eagle." I hope that what I have said will be borne in mind when future sick bays are being designed.

I have been interested to hear what has been said about the Royal naval colleges. I see that the entries to Dartmouth have recently gone up considerably. I should like to know how many of the intake are overseas personnel. I know that cadets are coming in in fairly large numbers from the Commonwealth. Every Christmas vacation for six years I have taken into my home cadets from overseas—from Ghana or Nigeria. I find that some of them do not have adequate facilities for a full career in their own country. I suggest that we might recruit from Commonwealth countries more cadets who would be willing to come to Dartmouth and then serve in the Royal Navy. These people are very keen, but there are only small navies in their own country.

When I was once in Nigeria, and posts for Nigerian personnel in the Royal Navy were being advertised, about 5,000 men tried to enlist, and they had eventually to be dispersed, the police using tear gas to get them away from headquarters. I would not say that all these people are of officer quality, but there are a tremendous number of young men in the Commonwealth who are anxious for adventure and could learn a great deal from the Royal Navy and then be efficient administrators on returning to their own country. I should, therefore, like the Minister to consider whether we should not encourage further people from overseas to join the Royal Navy itself.

In paying tribute to the dockyard technical colleges, I should like to know whether the Under-Secretary does not think that the time has come, perhaps, to shorten the length of time to qualify. The educational standards in schools are much higher than when the qualifying period was originally set and I should have thought that a shorter period to qualify would be adequate.

As to the schools, I have found both in Singapore and elsewhere overseas that there are adequate education facilities, but I should like to know what proportion of the cost of these schools is borne by the Navy. Most of the schools are all-Service schools, but in the Estimates the Navy seems to be paying a rather high proportion of the cost of these schools overseas when I should have thought that the majority of them catered more for the Army or the Air Force.

I attach great importance to educational and vocational training, but I am not certain to what this item in the Estimates relates. Does it apply to people who are leaving the Service to take other careers, or does it relate to educational and vocational training for other jobs which personnel might take within the Service? This is a particularly important item and a large sum of money is involved. If this is to help people to settle down in future careers, I am all in favour of it—it is an admirable idea. I should like to know how this works out and how many people are settled in careers through this medium when they leave the Navy.

My final point concerns civilians employed in Fleet services. Regrettably, in this debate, I have been precluded from mentioning the dockyards, but I can get near to the subject on victualling and other services. Who is to be responsible for the conditions in which these people work in the future? Previously, the buildings were provided by the Admiralty, but in future this is to be done by the Ministry of Public Building and Works. I should like to know what authority the Minister for the Navy will have to ensure that employees have adequate working conditions and to what extent he works with the other Ministry.

I refer to this matter particularly because only the other day I visited a recently-built canteen which, to my astonishment, had no facilities even for people to wash their hands. Does the Department for the Navy specify the requirements which the Ministry of Public Building and Works must observe in building the buildings in which civilians are employed on Fleet services work? I understand that this service has been handed over to the other Ministry, but I should like to know whether the hon. Gentleman's Department lays down requirements concerning the conditions in which his employees are in future to be employed.

Mr. J. P. W. Mallalieu

Is the hon. Lady referring specifically to dockyards, or to all establishments?

Dame Joan Vickers

I was referring particularly to people employed in victualling and other services in the dockyards.

6.14 p.m.

Mr. Snow

I should like to ask a few questions of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary concerning Subhead A(2), medical stores. I should like to know what form of contracting for drugs is used in the Navy. Is it part of a defence Services contract with the Ministry of Health, or is there some form of split-up and a direct Navy drug contract? I ask this because the Committee will be aware of the disquiet that has been voiced from both sides of the House in recent years concerning the prices of the more sophisticated drugs and the big disparity between what is charged in the National Health Service and what is charged by some companies abroad. I should like, therefore, to know whether there is a separate Navy contract for the supply of drugs, whether the Department uses the Ministry of Health as its agent and whether it is satisfied that the Navy is getting not only good drugs, but drugs of reasonable price.

Stemming from that question, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health recently announced the institution of an inquiry into the pharmaceutical industry. Is it the intention of the Secretary of State for Defence to offer evidence on drugs and their prices to that Committee?

Reference has been made to the dockyard technical colleges and I join the hon. Lady the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Dame Joan Vickers) in paying tribute to the marvellous work that they have done. In the interest of economy, however, I wonder whether the time has not come to consider whether these colleges should not take in students from outside the shipping industry or, conversely, whether some of the work of these colleges could not be more usefully farmed out to colleges of advanced technology or other technological educational institutions. I have no particular desire to see these colleges abandoned, but there is, I think, a case for seeing whether economies can be made.

Reference was made by the hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Hay), speaking from the Opposition Front Bench, to the Royal Naval College, Greenwich. I confess that my knowledge of the naval aspects of the college are rather limited, but I should like to know whether any part of the cost of Greenwich is borne by the Ministry of Works. Speaking personally, when I go to Greenwich it is to see the buildings. I should like to know whether the whole cost, or part of it only, is borne by my hon. Friend's Ministry.

I rose earlier to a point of order which was, perhaps, construed as criticising the hon. Member for Henley about whether it was in order to speak about the medical services on this Vote. You kindly ruled that it was in order, Sir Ronald, which permits me to ask this question. How frequently are the surgeons in the Service given facilities for postgraduate courses? Although I would not expect a direct answer now, may I know what are the branches of medicine in order of priority in which advantage of these refresher courses is taken by the surgeons in question? There seems to be a feeling that more facilities should be given to keep them up to date.

This is a general criticism which could apply to the whole medical profession, but it is important when a surgeon has to have extremely wide knowledge of medicine which he must shoulder without recourse, which the ordinary general practitioner has, to the local hospital. He is there by himself, taking a tremendous responsibility.

I hope that hon. Members will not think that I am being whimsical in asking in connection with medical stores what is the policy, what is the research and what is the current practice about repellents to deal with sharks.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

What kind of sharks?

Mr. Snow

There are some interjections that I prefer not to hear. I am referring to the physical dangers suffered by people who have to swim for it when they get into the water.

I recently read a report issued by the United States naval authorities on the subject. I was interested to see that of the many shark repellents produced during the last war, it was more or less demonstrable that none of them worked, not only because insufficient research had been given to the problem, but because sharks are completely unpredictable in their behaviour.

Perhaps hon. Members have recently seen a picture in the Sun, which thrilled but slightly horrified me, of an unpleasant and vast tiger shark on which a brave Australian was taking a pick-a-back, if that is the right expression, in the water off Melbourne. If it is a fact that we cannot predict the behaviour of the shark, then I think that we ought to know about this. If, on the other hand, research is being carried out, we should like to know about that.

Dr. Wyndham Davies (Birmingham, Perry Barr)

May I ask the hon. Gentleman what is the date of this American report that he mentioned and whether it would not have been very much better for him to have read the report produced by the Admiralty in recent years which shows there are quite effective shark repellents? Considerable work is going on in this subject.

Mr. Snow

The report I read I read in the Library of the House in the place dedicated to new books. I read it about two months ago, and that is as far as I can go. If what the hon. Member has said—and, no doubt, it will be confirmed—is the case and the Royal Navy has an answer I shall be very satisfied, and I think that the Navy will be satisfied, but the fact of the matter is that we are sitting—or standing—in comfort in this Chamber and can afford to have a good laugh at this, but try jumping off a boat in tropical seas, and then we shall get very different ideas about it.

Commander Pursey

May I give my hon. Friend some practical experience, quite shortly? In my young days, in the Mediterranean, before one bathed from a battleship one exploded a guncotton charge to frighten the sharks away. After a period of trial and error the opinion was then expressed that the guncotton charge attracted the sharks—

The Temporary Chairman (Sir Ronald Russell)

The hon. and gallant Member is getting far away from medical stores.

Mr. Snow

I was about to say to my hon. and gallant Friend, hoping not to be out of order, that I was not really talking about pleasure swimming from a battleship in Valletta Harbour, and so on, but about having to swim for it from a large or a small vessel in tropical seas.

This is a serious matter—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] The hon. Member for Gosport and Fareham (Dr. Bennett) may rest assured that I do not speak entirely from experience of swimming in Chichester Harbour. I have swum considerably in tropical waters—in my youth, when I was a young man; and the more I think back on that experience the braver I think I was; but it was bravery born of sheer ignorance, because it is a fact, which I think is now widely accepted, that shark behaviour is unpredictable.

Our fellow-citizens in ships need protection, if such protection is available, and I hope my hon. Friend will give me his views on this matter.

6.23 p.m.

Captain W. Elliot

The thing which worries me about the Navy Estimates in general is the fact that the Navy, Army and Royal Air Force Estimates are all in one document. I wish that I had been able to expand on this last Thursday. This Vote is for medical services, etc., and civilians on Fleet services.

We know that there are more than 10,000 Royal Marines and there are going to be more, and we know how brilliantly they are fighting and have fought in Radfan, in the desert and in the jungle. We heard about that on Thursday. I should like to ask the Minister who is paying for all the necessary medical services for those wars. It is only a tiny portion of the problem, but I should like to know who actually is paying for these services. It may be a small burden, no doubt, on the back of the Navy, if it pays for them, but extended over all fields I believe that this is one of the reasons why the Navy experiences difficulties.

There is another question I should like to ask. There is no mention here of air medicine. I imagine that this is a very important aspect of these services and I should like to know whether we are training naval doctors. Do they work with the Royal Air Force? Is there a naval air medicine school, or are they seconded to the medical school under the R.A.F.? How does that aspect of medicine bear on the Navy Estimates?

6.25 p.m.

Dr. Wyndham Davies

I should like to add a little to the remarks of the hon. Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow), which I think were extremely important, in that he raised the question of auxiliary work for the Navy such as shark repellents and this type of scientific work. I should like to mention that a great deal of this is going on under Vote 5, particularly under Subhead A (3), Miscellaneous payments and services, I imagine through the Royal Naval medical school and the naval air medical school, which brings us to the point mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Carshalton (Captain W. Elliot).

I notice that the Vote has been increased by only £3,000 this year, but an extraordinary amount of extremely valuable work is going on in allied subjects, in science and in medicine, not covered by any research done in this country at all in any medical school or in any other establishment. I would hope that in time more and more facilities can be devoted to this work.

To give an example—and I must also declare an interest here, in that I was involved in this type of work myself only two years ago—the only survey into drowning going on in the entire British Isles is in the Royal Naval medical school. No other medical school and no part of our scientific services in this country is covering this field at all. So the Navy is doing great service not only for its own people but for the whole civilian population of the country, too. There are many other aspects of work going on in this field—shark repellents, diving medicine, air medicine—which is used in civil aviation, and so on. This is of value directly to the rest of the British population; it is of great value in training medical scientists, and, eventually, as the men retire from the Service and go into the universities and into industry, there, too.

I think that is the only point I would make on this Vote. It has been suggested by one hon. Member that unification of the medical service and the nursing service would aid economy. I think that this would need to be examined most closely. I do not think that unification of services necessarily adds to economy. Sometimes it merely adds another structure on top of an existing structure to co-ordinate the others and makes a lot of administrative jobs, not necessarily an economy in the services or an improvement in efficiency. I know that this Committee has been pressing for many years to unify the medical services, particularly of the three Services, but I think that we ought to examine that very closely before we rush into it.

6.28 p.m.

Mr. Wingfield Digby

I wish to raise three fairly short points. The first is under Subhead B on education, and I should like to refer to the naval colleges. The cost of them has gone up considerably. I know that it is difficult to keep it down. I do not know whether increased staff entry has anything to do with this, but I should like to inquire what is the ratio of staff to cadets at the present time.

The hon. Gentleman the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East (Mr. Rhodes) spoke at some length about entry and was concerned about the ratio of those from public schools and grammar schools. I think he has done his research very well. As he went on I thought he would finish by showing that the comprehensive schools were the ones showing up best of all. I thought it was the policy of the party opposite to abolish grammar schools which my hon. Friends and I wish to see preserved. It was refreshing to find somebody on the other side standing up for the grammar schools, and I hope he will continue to do so.

Mr. Rhodes

The most recent class lists show that there were two successful candidates from comprehensive schools.

Mr. Digby

I hope that they will do better in the future.

The dockyard technical colleges under B(2) have been mentioned. I regard them as of great importance to the Navy and I hope that this opportunity will be taken to tell us a little more about them. What is their intake going to be for the ensuing year? Is it to be stationary, or is it to go up, or is it to go down? Are there any staffing difficulties? Is the ratio of staff to pupils being kept satisfactory? Last, but not least, what is the loss ratio to industry?

I think it has always been accepted that a fair proportion of those who get this excellent training go to outside industry, just as many of the firms in outside industry which run the best apprentice schemes tend to lose a fair proportion to other people, and perhaps even to the Royal Navy itself. I should like to hear a little more about the dockyard technical colleges, because I believe that they are of the utmost importance to the Navy and that they do a very good job.

Lastly, I wish to say a word about Subhead C, Civilians employed on Fleet services. This is a pretty big Vote—more than £11 million—and it has gone up considerably. I do not wish to strike a discordant note, but a number of these men must be serving overseas, and, as foreign currency is of such great importance to this country, I wonder why it has been necessary to increase this Vote, and whether an effort has been made to cut down and to keep within limits these civilians employed on Fleet services overseas. It has sometimes been found in the past that this Vote has tended to drift upwards, and I should like an assurance that this has been looked at carefully from the overseas point of view.

6.33 p.m.

Dr. Bennett

Before discussing medical services, I should like to say that I am not concerning myself today with matters of medical stores, or medical comforts, even as discussed in to-day's newspapers, or with shark repellents. With regard to the little adventure of the hon. Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow) in Chichester Harbour, perhaps he remembers that the emblem of the Law Society Yacht Club is a shark—in this case he is more of a shark propellent.

I should like to say something about the medical services in confirmation of what was said by my hon. Friend. I know that from the Naval Air Medical School at least one distinguished doctor has continued in the service of aviation medicine ever since his service in the Navy. He is doing a lot of good work for the country as a whole, and I am glad that my hon. Friend mentioned it. The hon. Gentleman will not be surprised if I express a little concern about the remarks in paragraph 98 of the White Paper where it says: The Medical Branch still requires more qualified doctors, and it is hoped to increase the number of awards made under the medical scheme. Can the hon. Gentleman give us information about what he is doing, about what the awards are doing, to what extent they are to be increased, and indeed what is the shortage of doctors for the Navy? This is a serious matter and I am sure that we should all be grateful for information on this subject.

What I wish finally to draw attention to is the actual presentation of these Votes for medical services. I confess that I am a little puzzled. I may be very stupid, and perhaps the Minister can explain this. I see that the establishment provided for under this head in 1964–65 was 1,946, increasing to 1,950. for 1965–66 it goes from 2,019 down to 2,018, but from the last day of March, I presume to April Fool's Day, 1965, it seems to have gone up by 69. Can the hon. Gentleman explain that extraordinary leap when in each year there seems to be a reduction?

6.35 p.m.

Commander Courtney

I wish to ask two brief questions about Vote 5 B.(1), which refers to naval colleges. The Committee will have noted that the sum estimated has gone up by £150,000. My first question is whether any of this represents an increase in the facilities given to cadets of the Royal Naval College, Dartmouth in initial flying experience. I say this because, from an inspection on the spot, it seems that the cost effectiveness of the initial flying experience given to these cadets, at least last year, was lamentable by normal comparison because of the distance between Dartmouth and Roborough Aerodrome where these cadets get their experience. Has any progress been made in the extension of the grass area about a mile north-west of the college where there is already a helicopter landing ground, to allow the use of light aircraft for this purpose? This seems to me a far more economic, more useful, and cost-effective means of giving this necessary initial experience to cadets.

My second question bears on the same subject. There is a serious shortage of flying personnel in the Navy at the present time, for which I cannot see any immediate and effective counter. Has any allowance been made in the Estimates for an approach to University Air Squadrons from a naval point of view? I am thinking of a naval flight of the University Air Squadron, or perhaps one of the new university air squadrons. I have mentioned Sussex University and Shoreham Aerodrome. May we have an assurance that this has been looked into as a matter of urgency in view of the considerable shortage at the present time?

6.38 p.m.

Mr. J. P. W. Mallalieu

Reference has been made to the medical services and hospitals. I assure the hon. Lady the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Dame Joan Vickers) that we are doing a great deal to improve the standards of naval hospitals. The hon. Lady referred to the medical officers' mess at Stonehouse. I have never seen such a slum in all my life, and I am delighted that work on that has begun. As the hon. Lady knows, it is not only the officers' mess at Stone-house that needs improvement, but at Haslar there is need for improvement, and work there is proceeding fairly steadily.

There has been a tremendous change in the naval medical services during the last 20 years. We used to think, perhaps unjustifiably, that naval doctors were a bit out of date; that the Navy generally was so healthy that its doctors did not get the practice which they ought to have. That is not so now. I do not mean that the Navy is not healthy. I mean that the doctors get a great deal of practice because these hospitals play a tremendous part in the Health Service itself.

One of the hospitals in Portsmouth is now—not before time—closing its main operating theatres for a couple of years to renovate them. It has put in a request that Haslar should make available regularly a certain number of beds for the National Health Service, and I am delighted to say that that will be done. It is a tremendous help to the Health Service and it also helps our doctors to keep reasonably up to date.

My hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield and Tamworth (Mr. Snow) asked about drugs. We get the bulk of Our supplies from the Ministry of Health, which acts as our agent, but I understand that in respect of a small proportion of them we have direct contracts of our own. I know nothing, about the subject of shark repellents. I have learned quite a bit from what the two hon. Members have said so far, but I am still trying to extract some more information about it. Obviously, research is being done, and when I can get hold of further information I shall pass it on.

On the subject of rationalisation, I am not very excited about the idea of amalgamating the nursing services into one. In all this talk of rationalisation I do not believe that many people have thought of rationalising individual services into one. There is rationalisation of some services and of some supplies, and perhaps of some branches, but as far as possible the idea is to leave individual services as they are, while doing a great deal of rationalisation and integration at the top.

There is a tremendous amount of co-operation in medicine. I have seen hospitals run by the Royal Navy at Malta and Gibraltar not just for itself but for all three Services, and running them most efficiently. There is a great deal of interchange of patients, and so on. Occasionally we have joint units. There is a joint psychiatric unit in being. Wherever it can be seen that efficiency will be improved and cost diminished efforts will be made to combine, but this is not necessarily advisable in all cases. It does not always follow that combination leads to improvements in the Service.

My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-on-Tyne, East (Mr. Rhodes) raised once again the question of admission to Dartmouth. I have been greatly interested in this matter for a long time. Some years ago I had the experience of sitting in on one of the selection boards at Dartmouth for the best part of three days. I was absolutely convinced that there was no question of prejudice on the part of the board. It was anxious to get the best officers, no matter from what source they came. Being a Northerner, however, with some North Country bias, I did feel that those who had been at day school and were coming south for the first time—perhaps spending a night away from home for the first time—felt themselves at some disadvantage, however much the board leant over to help them.

There has been some evidence of this in the past, but the present figures—I hope that mine are right—are remarkably interesting. I have here an analysis of cadets entering Dartmouth, expressed in terms of percentages coming from independent schools and grammar and other State schools. In 1954, no less than 61 per cent. came from independent or public schools. During the years that percentage has dropped steadily until last year, when the figure was 40 per cent. In 1954, the proportion coming from grammar and other State schools was 39 per cent. During the years that proportion has increased to 60 per cent.—a tremendous reversal of the previous position.

We have done away with the written examination now, and I can give the figures only from 1961, but of those who were accepted at interview, 59 per cent. were from public schools in 1961. That figure has dropped during the following years to 46 per cent. in 1964. Fifty-eight per cent. of those applying from direct grant schools in 1961 were successful. That proportion has steadily increased to the present figure of 66 per cent. For grammar schools, whereas 47 per cent. were accepted in 1961, 53 per cent. were accepted in 1964. The trend is therefore very much in the direction that my hon. Friend would like to see.

Mr. Hay

It would be greatly for the convenience of the Committee if the figures, in a fuller form, could be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I believe that such a procedure is permissible. Will the hon. Member consider it?

Mr. Mallalieu

Yes. I think that the easiest way of doing this is to put down a Question for Written Answer. We will arrange that in one way or another.

Mr. Rhodes

I am grateful for the information that my hon. Friend has supplied. The figures indicate that the trend is in the direction that I wish to see. Nevertheless, two-fifths of the candidates are still drawn from a very narrow section of our schools. Only if the present trend continues over the next ten or 15 years will we have equality of opportunity in terms of entry to the Royal Navy.

Mr. Mallalieu

I agree. My Department and the Government are interested in spreading the net as widely as possible. That goes not only for public schools and State and grammar schools; it also applies in terms of geography. We want to spread the net as widely as possible over the whole country.

The number of boys coming from north of a line drawn from the Humber to the Severn was 25 per cent. in 1961, whereas it is now 31 per cent. That is some improvement. As I go round I find that an increasing number of people from Yorkshire and Lancashire—and, indeed, from the very centre of the country—are now officers in the Service.

I must revert for a minute to the subject of shark repellents. I understand that divers tie a small object about the size of a matchbox to their belts. It is supposed to let off a vapour which repels sharks. How successful it is in doing that I do not know.

The hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Hay) expressed a little concern about the staffing of the naval schools, the Service schools abroad. That has been worrying us and we are about to increase the teaching staff overseas by 13 new members in the course of the next few weeks. This is partly because of the need to increase the numbers in the schools but also to improve the pupil-teacher ratio.

I hesitate to mention Greenwich in the presence of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army—as the Committee will know, there are a series of investigations going on affecting the Royal Naval College. First, the departmental investigation into the proposals made by the Select Committee on Estimates, some time back. We are looking at those with great seriousness. Sir Ronald Melville's Committee is studying the effect of Lord Robbins' Report and all that on education in the Service. Finally, the Principal Personnel Officers' Committee is looking at the whole question of rationalising training throughout the Services.

All these have a direct bearing, or could have, on the future of the Royal Naval College, Greenwich. I cannot say now what proposals will emerge. I can say from my experience, and the feeling I have acquired in the Department, that whatever changes may be proposed for Greenwich there will still remain a function of enormous importance to the Royal Navy. One has only to look at some of the courses which go on there, apart from the War Office courses and the rest of it, to realise the tremendous amount of valuable work which is done and which will continue to be done.

The hon. Lady the Member for Devon-port asked what proportion of cadets from overseas were attending the courses at Dartmouth. The figure varies, it is something of the order of 10 per cent. to 20 per cent. The hon. Lady suggested that we might try to recruit some of these people into the Royal Navy. Some countries bar their nationals from joining the Royal Navy. Wherever there is no such bar they are very welcome and not only as officers, either. We are most anxious to recruit Maltese into the Service both as officers, if their educational standards are high enough, or as ratings. We are prepared to accept anybody who is likely to make a good sailor, provided that there is no security risk or anything of that kind. Not only are we prepared to accept them, we should be delighted to welcome them into the Service.

I have covered some of the points which have been raised in the debate. If I find there are points of importance upon which I have not touched, I shall make certain that the answers are provided for the hon. Members concerned. I will certainly undertake, by one method or another, that full tables of figures about the Dartmouth entry appear in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Dr. Bennett

Will the Minister provide an answer to the curious numerical discrepancies to which I drew attention?

Mr. Mallalieu

Is that about the Dartmouth costs?

Dr. Bennett

No, the fact that the numbers went down by one in one year and up by four in the next, but went up by 69 between the end of one year and the beginning of the next.

Mr. Mallalieu

I have not that information. I will find it for the hon. Gentleman.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, That a sum, not exceeding £15,492,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the expense of medical services, education and civilians on Fleet services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1966.