§ 2.35 p.m.
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask His Majesty's Government whether they are aware of the shortage of practice ammunition for armoured car regiments of the Territorial Army, particularly since it is apparently intended to shoot once in three years only; and what are the reasons which prevent a larger supply.]
THE MINISTER OF CIVIL AVIATION (LORD PAKENHAM)My Lords, issues of practice ammunition to Royal Armoured Corps units of the Territorial Army are made on the same scale as issues to Royal Armoured Corps units of the active Army. The present arrangement is that Royal Armoured Corps units of the Territorial Army are to attend firing camp every other year. The provision of practice ammunition is limited by the cost.
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANMy Lords, in regard to the noble Lord's statement that issues made for the Territorial Army are on the same basis as for the Regular Army, is he aware that a table has been issued to Territorial Armoured Corps units showing that whereas Regular soldiers have twenty-five rounds each for individual practice, the Territorial soldiers have not? Would the noble Lord be good enough to make further inquiries of his right honourable friend to ascertain whether the position is, in fact, as I have been given to understand? In regard to the latter part of the noble Lord's reply, would he also make it clear that it is no good paying lip service to the Territorial Army when practical measures to allow those who volunteer for it to train themselves for military service are lacking?
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, I cannot accept the implications in the last part of the noble Viscount's supplementary question. As regards the first part, I will certainly make inquiries. I can say only that the information supplied by the noble Viscount appears to be in superficial conflict with the information supplied to me, which I have always found to be infallible—and no doubt it was equally infallible when the noble Viscount supplied it during his days at the War Office.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, does the noble Lord really wish us to think that we can make gunnery efficient on the basis of firing guns once in two years? What has happened to the enormous surplus supplies of ammunition available at the end of the war?
LORD PAKENHAMThe noble Earl seems to be running rather wide of the Question, but I am always ready to enter into debate, if the noble Earl will give me proper notice.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, would the noble Lord please answer the first part of my question about gunnery? Surely, that is wrapped up in the Question on the Order Paper.
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, the answer I have given indicates the view of the War Office, which, may I say with the greatest respect, is perhaps even more likely to be accurate on these matters than that of the distinguished sailor, the noble Earl who has just put the question.
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANMy Lords, it should be understood that I was not quarrelling with the proposal to shoot once every two years. The point I make is that when the men do shoot, there should be sufficient ammunition.
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, I appreciate the point made by the noble Viscount. If I am to be "shot at" once every two seconds, I would rather be "shot at" by the noble Viscount, who is such an expert on the Army, than by the noble Earl, who is an expert on the Navy.
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord why he has to make a personal attack on me, when I have asked the question only in the public interest?
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, I am certainly not trying to make an attack on the noble Earl. I am merely trying to defend myself and the Army against the very well-intentioned remarks of the noble Earl, whose contributions on this subject are so extremely well-informed.