asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty when it is intended to reappoint a British Naval Attaché at Oslo.

We are discussing with the other Departments concerned the possibility of appointing an Assistant Naval Attaché to Oslo as an alternative.

Would not my hon. Friend agree it is high time that the Treasury reconsidered this, issue, bearing in mind that the Norwegian Navy is rebuilding? Is not this a great opportunity to get some of these orders for the North-East Coast at an early date? I hope that my hon. Friend will advise the Treasury to rethink this matter out again.

I am aware of those facts. Oslo is not without naval representation, for we have a vice-admiral, a captain, four commanders and eight junior officers at the N.A.T.O. headquarters in that city.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what consideration he is giving to the placing of the proposed Admiralty orders for replenishment ships to yards on Tees-side, in view of the present high level of unemployment in the area.

Tenders for the two new Fleet replenishment ships were invited in February. These ships are designed to full warship standard and this did not make it possible for us to invite tenders from firms on Tees-side. Three firms of the warship group on the North-East Coast were invited to tender.

I hope that my hon. Friend will reconsider this issue, bearing in mind that Furness and Withy, although outside my constituency, is very close indeed to it. Will my hon. Friend consider this issue as a special case, bearing in mind that we have surplus labour at the Hartlepools from Grays & Grays (Tees), which is now facing a difficult time?

I am well aware of the very considerable difficulties of the shipbuilding industry in the North-East. This is a matter not only for the Admiralty but also for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty the estimated number of new jobs which will be created in the Rosyth Dockyard, consequent on the implementation of the recent decision to refit nuclear submarines there.

I would refer the hon. Member to the replies which I gave on the 15th March and 3rd April to the hon. Members for Dunfermline Burghs (Dr. A. Thompson) and for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis).

I think that it is said that this project will create 400 jobs. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in so far as the project is part of the nonsensical idea of an independent British nuclear deterrent, the Labour Party would be utterly opposed to it, but that, in so far as it is part of the general nuclear programme for constructive purposes, we would welcome the establishment of this kind of nuclear project in Scotland?

No doubt the House of Commons and the country in general will note the hon. Gentleman's views.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty (1) what weapons, apart from carrier-borne aircraft, are available for surface action by cruisers, destroyers and escorts of the Royal Navy as a counter to the surface-to-surface guided-missile systems fitted in the Kynda, Krupny, Kildin, Osa and Komar classes of Soviet warships;

In our view, the best answer to this threat is the carrier-borne aircraft, bearing in mind that seaborne aircraft can be employed in many other offensive and defensive rôles.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the serious situation which could arise if surface forces of the Royal Navy were faced by missile-armed Soviet surface forces in the absence of carrier-borne aircraft?

My noble Friend the First Lord and I are very well aware of that fact. I am sorry that my hon. and gallant Friend is out of breath. He must have run all the way from the Savoy Hotel.

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's point about the efficacy of carrier-borne aircraft, but is it not the case that they cannot operate in thick weather? Can the hon. Gentleman say why it is that cruisers and destroyers of the Royal Navy are so much behind equivalent vessels in the Russian Navy in their armament?

If the hon. Gentleman would like to spend a day at sea in thick weather he would see that our all-weather aircraft can operate under the most extraordinarily difficult conditions. [HON. MEMBERS: "He has been".] Perhaps on that occasion the weather was not as thick as it can be. I concede that the Russians have specialised in missiles and we have not. We must bear in mind that the Russians have never had any aircraft carriers in their Navy.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty the amount of pension now received by the widow of a leading rating who was pensioned after maximum service and died in August, 1950; and how much it would be if he had been pensioned and died this year, assuming in the first case that the widow is 65 and in the second case 45 years old.

The widow of a leading rating who was pensioned and died prior to 31st August. 1950, receives no naval pension.

The widow of a leading rating who had been pensioned and died this year would receive 22s. a week. This is based on 22 years which is the normal maximum service for a leading rating. The ages given in the question have no significance in the award of naval pensions to widows. These naval pensions do not debar her from drawing ordinary civilian benefits.

Does the Minister think that what he has told us reflects a just state of affairs? Is he aware that, while the ex-Service associations appreciate what the Government have done to step up Service pensions, they cannot he happy as long as this unjust anomaly remains between the widow of the older rating and the widow who benefits by the present system? Will he seriously consider whether he can provide fair and equal widows' pensions for the widows of older ratings?

I am sure that the hon. Member, who is very fair in these matters, will understand that it is not a matter for a single Service but is really a matter for all State pensioners, both civil servants and uniformed pensioners. It is, therefore, a matter which goes rather wider than merely the Admiralty alone.

Will the hon. Gentleman discuss this matter with the other Service Departments so that it might be raised with the Treasury?

Yes, certainly, these matters are discussed inter-Service-wise. It is, however, a matter which goes a good deal wider than merely the Service Departments. It includes civil servants also.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty the value of orders placed with North-East shipyards during 1962; and what is the estimated expenditure for 1963.

None for the calendar year ending 31st December, 1962, but they secured the orders worth nearly £10 million for the three fast replenishment tankers placed in February this year.

In addition to these three new tankers, there are under construction or on order in North-East shipyards two 6,000 ton guided missile destroyers, two frigates and a tanker.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that I am breathless, not because of running from the Savoy, but because of the Answer which he has given to the Question? Will he remember that while we are appreciative of these orders in the North-East, there are also small yards as well as large yards and that many of the small yards arc in development districts? Will he pay attention to this matter?

Yes, I certainly am well aware of the difficulties in the area. The total value of the ships which I listed in my reply is something like £47 million. There is, therefore, a substantial amount of naval work in the area.

Would my hon. Friend welcome support from certain members of the Labour Party for an independent British defence policy?

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty the value of ship-repairing work placed with North-East shipyards during 1962; and what is the estimated expenditure for 1963.

During 1962 contract ship-repair work amounted to £6 million of which £780,000 was placed with North-East shipyards.

As far as possible ship-repair work is normally carried out in the Royal Dockyards and we shall continue this practice during 1963. Repair work which we place to contract during the year will in most cases be by competitive tender and the North-East shipyards will be given the opportunity to bid for suitable orders.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if the international fleet of exploratory research vessels, including the £800,000 oceanographic research vessel built in Aberdeen, now exploring the southern oceans are equipped with the new type of 10-ton undersea research vehicles capable of reaching depths of 6,000 feet with a range of 20 miles and endurance of 24 hours; and what results have so far been achieved by this exploratory research expedition.

None of the ships taking part in the International Indian Ocean Expedition is so equipped and, so far as I am aware, no such vessel is yet in use.

The expedition is not yet in full operation and its research programme will not be completed until 1964.

In view of the international character of this expedition, its unusual character and its great expense, will the Minister say what arrangements he has made for periodical reports to this House of the progress of the expedition?

We must, I think, await the full findings of the expedition. If, however, the House were sufficiently interested, perhaps, the hon. and learned Member would put down a Question in, say, six months' time, when I should be happy to answer it.

Will the Minister bear in mind that this is an unusual expedition with regard both to its expense and its scientific character? Will he bear this in mind with a view to making periodical reports to this House?

Yes, I will bear it in mind. Even in the preliminary results, Her Majesty's survey ships have helped to define the Carlsberg Ridge and have obtained gravimetric observations in the area which are extremely important.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what proportion of Vote 4 of the Navy Estimates for 1963–64 is to be spent on anti-submarine techniques.

It is not the practice to specify the proportion of effort as between separate fields of research and development connected with naval warfare; but I can assure the hon. Member that the effort on antisubmarine techniques is considerable.

Can the hon. Gentleman say, first, whether these figures include anything in connection with the research work at La Spezia; and, secondly, in view of the urgency of getting a new break-through in anti-submarine techniques, whether he is satisfied that sufficient is being spent?

As far as I recall, the work at La Spezia comes under N.A.T.O. auspices and, therefore, would appear not on Naval Votes but under Ministry of Defence Votes. In reply to the second point, it is true that we have been devoting more and more of our research development effort to this vitally important aspect. It would be unwise to give facts and figures, because to do so would be to tell a potential enemy and give him warning, which might be up to ten years of warning, of just how much effort we are devoting in this direction. I assure the hon. Member that the Board of Admiralty takes this matter seriously.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that the most skilled anti-submarine techniques are quite useless without an adequate number of ships to operate these techniques in view of the very large number of potential enemy vessels with which we are faced? Is it not deplorable, therefore, that the hunter-killer submarine programme has been cut back?

Yes, of course, one needs ships—and, incidentally, submarines—to operate these anti-submarine techniques. It is equally important to give them adequate practice and operational practice with our allies, an aspect to which we are devoting a great deal of attention.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what will be the extent of the delay in the hunter-killer submarine programme brought about by the Polaris programme.

There will be no interference with the construction of Oberon hunter-killer submarines. There will be a hiatus in the programme of nuclear hunter-killer submarines which will mean that in the short term we may lose three boats, as compared with our planned rate of build-up. How soon this hiatus could be made good must depend on a number of factors, especially (a) the number of building streams employed on Polaris submarines; (b) whether Her Majesty's Government decided to have four Polaris submarines or five; (c) how fast Her Majesty's Government decided to make good the arrears of hunter-killers. But in broad terms the gap could be closed and the programme of nuclear hunter-killer overhauled by a date somewhere between 1972 and 1975.

Does not that Answer make complete nonsense of what the Minister of Defence told the House about this programme? As the hon. and gallant Member for Harrow, East (Commander Courtney) has just said, is it not deplorable that we have to stop this programme, which is extremely urgent in our anti-submarine preparations, to carry on with Polaris?

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence said, I believe, that in the long term there would not be any interference. I tried to make clear in my reply that it was perfectly possible by between 1972 and 1975, if the Government of the day so willed, to make up the gap or the hiatus which will exist.

In his reply, my hon. Friend mentioned the Oberon class of hunter-killer submarine for, I believe, the first time in this House. Is he aware that this class of submarine has an underwater speed which is, perhaps, slightly over half that of the nuclear submarines which it is designed to hunt and kill?

I am equally aware that the vast threat which is now coming from the U.S.S.R. is, at this date, mainly in conventional submarines. I am also aware that not only this country, but Commonwealth countries—Australia in particular is buying Oberon submarines from us—have great faith that the Oberon submarine has a very useful and economic rôle to play for a considerable time to come.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what changes in the financial and contractual procedures in relation to research and development contracts have been made as a result of the recommendations made by the working party appointed in May, 1960.

The working party reported in December, 1962. Decisions on the recommendations have not been taken yet by the Board of Admiralty. I hope, however, that we shall conclude our consideration very shortly and I will then write to the hon. Member.

In view of the suggestions made in the Report of the Auditor-General which led to the setting up of the working party, which was set up three years ago, may we have an assurance from the hon. Gentleman that things will really move a bit faster in this matter, because large sums of money are involved and it is essential to do something to try to cut down possible excess of expenditure on various aspects of the work?

I agree. Equally, however, I think that the hon. Member would agree that the control of research and development is an immensely complicated problem. We have twenty-two research and development establishments in which over 7,000 people are employed and total annual expenditure amounts to £26 million. The matter must, therefore, be seen in perspective. It is an extremely intricate problem to solve.

As yesterday the Prime Minister said that the Government were hesitating about the expenditure of £90 million for a Scottish power station, is it not time the Admiralty considered this huge, astronomical expenditure on something which is likely to be obsolete and not so useful as a power station?

I feel that most of the country would think that the defence of our country was the greatest necessity of all.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what is the present annuity and the annual allocation of money for the Meritorious Service Medal for Royal Marine other ranks and naval ratings, respectively; what is the number of Royal Marine and Royal Navy holders of this medal, respectively; and what allocation would be required to pay the annuity to all holders of the medal when pensioned.

Ten pounds, which, after adding various pension increases, amounts to an average of just over £20. The annual allocation of money is £400. This is for Royal Marine other ranks only, naval ratings not being eligible for an annuity. The total number of medal holders now alive is not known, but there are 236 Royal Marine other ranks eligible for the annuity. Payment of the annuity to all these would require a total sum of about £4,800 a year, including pension increases.

With Navy Estimates at over £400 million, why does not the Civil Lord increase the allocation for this medal and pay all these old sweats the petty sum of six pennies per day with their pension in the same way as with the Distinguished Conduct Medal? Why are naval petty officers who served with the Army under the same conditions during World War I in France and others awarded the medal for their meritorious war service not paid the annuity in the same way as the Army and the Royal Marines? Why award a Meritorious Service Medal for which Queen Victoria provided an annuity of £20 to petty officers for war service with the Army if they are then to be the only ones denied this paltry annuity of £10?

I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman will know that it would not be just for the Royal Marines, but the Army would, of course, have to be given the same annuity, and this would cost £95,000. I also think it is right to say that this is a nice medal and many people who win it like to have it for the value of the medal and not for the annuity. I think it is not a bad arrangement.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how many Royal Marine and Royal Navy holders of the Meritorious Service Medal were awarded the annuity in the last five years; what was the average age in each Service; in which years World War 1 and World War 2 lists are likely to be completed; and when the last of the present holders of the medal is likely to receive his annuity.

The answers to the first two parts are four Royal Marine holders and 77 years respectively. No Royal Navy personnel are eligible. Awards of this medal were not confined to war time, and the names of holders who satisfy the conditions for annuity are on a common list. As new grants depend on vacancies arising, I am unable to give a specific answer to the last part of the Question.

Why has the annuity for the Victoria Cross been increased from £10 to £100 if, according to what the hon. Gentleman said in reply to my previous Question, the value of the medal is more important than the annuity? When this medal was introduced, the annuity was double the value of that of the Victoria Cross. Why should these old sweats, after 22 years' service, have to wait another 30 or 40 years for this paltry annuity of 3s. 6d. a week? After a long race of life against death with the odds against winning, is not the payment at the age of nearly 80 more of a death benefit than an annuity, as few men draw the annuity for any length of time?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

There is no point of order, because I am now sitting down.

Does the hon. and gallant Member for Down, South (Captain Orr) rise to a point of order?

I was merely going to ask, Mr. Speaker, whether, as the supplementary question contains a number of figures, it could be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I am afraid that I have lost count. I could not deal with that.

I note the point of view expressed by the hon. and gallant Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Commander Pursey).

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether he will make a statement on the loss of the "Green Ranger" off the North Devon coast last winter.

"Green Ranger" left Plymouth in tow in light seas and fair weather on the 15th November but had to seek shelter in a heavy ground swell north of Clovelly during the afternoon of the following day and anchored there that evening. Difficulty in weighing anchor delayed until next morning the attempt to reach Lundy Island for shelter. During this time the wind increased, finally to force 9. Assistance was called during the afternoon but the tow parted and the ship drove hard ashore near Hartland Point in the evening. The runner crew was taken off by breeches buoy at 0300 the following morning, 18th November.

In subsequent gales the ship broke in two and is a total loss—she will be offered for sale as she lies in the near future.

Will the Civil Lord take into account that many people will think that the Admiralty was grossly incompetent in permitting this vessel to be taken in tow round Land's End at a time when she could, as after all she did, meet a gale of either force 9 or force 10? Will he and his right hon. Friend take into account that there is no harbour and no breakwater at Clovelly, and that the men who manned the beach lifeboat risked their lives to succour the men concerned? Will he also take into account that on that very same day there was an accident with another beach lifeboat at Seaham and nine lives were lost? Is it not time we spent some money on safeguarding our seamen instead of wasting hundreds of millions on Polaris missiles which may never be used?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman is quite fair to suggest that this was a naval responsibility. The vessel was under tow by a commercial firm. I have been under considerable pressure to place just this kind of repair work in South Wales shipyards, and one of those shipyards won this tender, which included the towing of the vessel from Plymouth to South Wales. The weather forecast at the time was reasonable, but in this case it was not completely accurate.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if he will make a statement on action taken by the Royal Navy to prevent British territory from being used as a base for hostilities against Cuba; and what consultations have taken place with appropriate United States authorities with regard to such preventive actions.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if he will make a statement on recent incidents in the Bahamas, in which Royal Marines have been involved, arising out of the activities of anti-Castro Cuban émigrés.

Because the reply is somewhat lengthy I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Briefly the Senior Naval Officer West Indies has arranged for patrols of the Bahamas Cays over the last six weeks in consultation with the Governor of the Bahamas and the United States Administration and local co-operation with the United States Coastguard Service.

While I appreciate that there are considerable difficulties and that it is necessary to patrol hundreds of islands, in view of the grave diplomatic issues involved will the hon. Gentleman ensure that the utmost vigilance is maintained?

Yes, Sir; I will. The hon. Gentleman is very fair in saying that this is a difficult problem. There are also 88,000 sq. miles of sea to be patrolled. Consequently, it is not easy to find these very small boats.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether it is correct, as has been reported, that in one case a number of these émigrés were captured and were then allowed to retain the weapons which they had illegally in their possession?

I will look into that question. I do not think it is one for me. I think it is a matter for the Attorney-General of the Bahamas to go into.

They were captured by the Royal Marines.

With regard to Question No. 19, does the hon. Gentleman realise that personnel are being recruited and trained for these hostilities on United States territory? Will he take that point up also with the appropriate authorities?

I do not accept that as a statement of fact, and if I did, I should not be responsible for it.

Following is the reply:

In consultation with the Governor of the Bahamas, the Senior Naval Officer West Indies has arranged for patrols of the Bahamas Cays over the last six weeks. There has been full consultation with the United States Administration, and local co-operation with the United States Coastguard Service.

During searches in early March, a small schooner and a quantity of arms were seized. On 31st March, H.M.S. "Londonderry" arrived off Norman Cay and conveyed 17 men, who had been arrested by Bahamian police, to Nassau. Their launch was towed to Nassau by a crew from H.M.S. "Londonderry".

On 5th April a Royal Marine party, operating with Army and police officers, searched William Island. Two armed men were arrested, and a further party of five men escaped in a fast dinghy and were subsequently apprehended by a United States Coastguard cutter. Dumps of arms, food and fuel were discovered on William Island. In addition, nine Cuban exiles were captured on Andres Island and were transferred to H.M.S "Londonderry".

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if he will make a statement on the progress made by the Royal Navy on the suppression of piracy off the North coast of Borneo and in the adjacent waters.

Her Majesty's ships are continuing to undertake frequent anti-piracy patrols in co-operation with the local authorities in British North Borneo. These patrols have contributed to a marked reduction in the number of incidents reported in the area, involving either piracy on the high seas or armed raids by bandits attacking coastal villages from the sea. Her Majesty's ships will persevere with their efforts to suppress such lawlessness on the high seas and in the territorial seas of British North Borneo.

Is it not the case that piracy still flourishes off the coast of Borneo? Is it not highly unsatisfactory that scenes reminiscent of the days of Henry Morgan should take place in waters over which the Royal Navy is responsible?

This is no new problem to that area. Piracy has been in existence in the China Sea for very much longer than I have been at the Admiralty. But we will look at this matter.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what measures are being taken to improve the recruiting of electrical officers to the Royal Navy.

We have just introduced more attractive conditions for short-service and medium-service commissions. There will be a greater variety of commissions available; a five-year short-service commission which can be extended up to ten years and a sixteen-year pensionable commission. In addition the upper age limit for entry has been raised.

Does my hon. Friend think that the new conditions will attract people from industry? What is the lower age, and is there any marriage bar to entry?

There is no marriage bar to entry. The age limit has been raised from 36 to 39 and we seek to attract people from industry, to whom we give seven years' credit for suitable civilian experience and up to one year in addition for professional qualifications. This is a considerable incentive.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how many of the 7,140 staff employed in the Royal Naval Scientific Service on 1st April, 1963, were employed in Scotland; and whether the proportion is likely to increase in the near future.

The number employed on 1st April, 1963, was 552. No significant increase is foreseen in the near future.

In view of the very well-known inventive and mechanical genius of the Scottish people, does not the hon.

Gentleman think that the Royal Navy is depriving itself of most valuable manpower? Will he ensure that the number of research workers in Scotland is vastly multiplied by the next time we ask a Question such as this?

I cannot promise to do that, though as a Scot, albeit a Sassenach by habitation, I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's comments. There is a great deal of engineering skill in Scotland and there are three important research establishments which contribute to our research and development effort in a vary well worth while way.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how much of the £18,832,100 provided in the 1963–64 Navy Estimates, Vote 4, Subhead B, for other expenditure on research and development, will be spent in Scotland; and whether this figure is likely to increase in the future.

Approximately £3·1 million. No significant increase is expected in the future.

How much was spent at the establishment to which the former torpedo experimental station at Greenock was transferred?

If the hon. Gentleman is referring to the work transferred to Portland, I cannot answer him without notice. In any case, I doubt if it would be wise to give an idea to our potential enemies of exactly how much we are spending in each of our research establishments.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how much of the £15,681,900 provided in the 1963–64 Navy Estimates for research and development contracts will be spent in Scotland; and how this figure compares with that for each of the last five years.

It is estimated that approximately £2·9 million, which will be about 18 per cent. of the total expenditure on research and development contracts in 1963–64, will be spent in Scotland. With one exception, this sum is higher than in any of the past five years.

What special steps are taken by the hon. Gentleman's Department to attract this kind of contract to areas of high unemployment? Is a continuing effort made?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, if we have a massive contract—a repetitive contract—there are special provisions far directing a proportion, up to 25 per cent., to development districts, But, apart from that, in giving out tenders, we have to look after the taxpayers' interests and the need of the Navy for prompt delivery.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what proportion of the £5,947,000 provided in the 1963–64 Navy Estimates for the purchase of certain naval stores and equipment will be spent in Scotland; and in particular how much of the £1,215,000 for motor transport will be spent in Scotland.

There will be very little expenditure in Scotland for motor transport. This apart I would expect the proportion of this subhead to be spent in Scotland to be at about the same level as it was in 1961–62—about 16 per cent.

Does not the hon. Gentleman appreciate that 16 per cent, is a very low proportion of the amount of money which should be spent in Scotland? In considering the amount to be spent on motor transport, will the hon. Gentleman re-examine the position with a view to giving a greater proportion to Scottish factories?

I understand that ray right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has stated that the motor factories in Scotland are not yet in full production, but we will take account of the merits of their products when we consider the next tenders.

What proportion is to be spent in Wales? Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that I should like the same answers about Wales as he has given to all these Questions about Scotland?

I will bear that in mind. l will even answer Questions if the hon. Gentleman likes to put them down.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how much of the £32,899,000 provided in the 1963–64 Navy Estimates for the purchase of electrical and electronic stores and equipment will be spent in Scotland; and whether it is his policy to increase such expenditure in areas of high unemployment.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how much of the £18,431,000 provided in the 1963–64 Navy Estimates for the purchase of general stores will be spent in Scotland; and whether he will indicate the nature of these stores, showing which are purchased in Scotland.

All Scottish firms which are capable of supplying the various stores we want will be invited to tender but the contracts will be awarded on the merits of price and delivery offered.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply, but may I ask him to do his best to extend opportunity for electronic equipment to be supplied by Scotland, since 60 per cent. of the science graduates in Scotland come to England after university training?

We will certainly bear this in mind. I think that I am right in saying that between 8 and 10 per cent. of our electronics expenditure goes to Scotland.

Will the hon. Gentleman take note that Northern Ireland has certain claims, although none of the Ulster Unionist Members opposite seem to be interested?

rose—

I will take note of what the hon. Member who sits for Bermondsey (Mr. Mellish) says.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty when he will announce where an operating base will be constructed for the Polaris submarines.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether he will consider making Devonport the operational base for Polaris submarines.

I am not yet able to make a statement but we hope to do so soon after the Easter Recess.

While operational considerations in this matter are obviously of paramount importance, may I ask my hon. Friend to continue to appreciate the advantages which Scotland has to offer, particularly in view of the Answers he has given, which show that the Admiralty appreciates the importance of Scotland?

Yes, I am aware of these facts. But, as my hon. Friend says, it is speed which is of paramount importance, together with the operational advantages which we have to take into serious consideration.

In considering this, will my hon. Friend remember the service given by the dockyard at Devonport during the last 300 years? Will he ensure that the present level of employment there is maintained? If it cannot be an operational base for these submarines, will he see that the aircraft carriers, for which this port is eminently suitable, are sent there? Frigates could also be based there, and there is the possibility of building further ships so that the dockyard can be kept fully employed.

I will certainly bear that point in mind.

Will the Polaris submarines, when they arrive—if ever—be put under the control of N.A.T.O.? If they are, will N.A.T.O. decide on the operational base or will this be a unilateral decision?

The hon. Gentleman is not right in his assumptions. We are making plans at the present time about these submarines. If there are talks at a higher level on an international agreement concerning them, that is another matter. At present the Admiralty must get ahead with plans for the operational base.

Before complying with the request of the hon. Lady the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Miss Vickers) to make Devonport an operational base for Polaris submarines, what steps would the hon. Gentleman take to ascertain whether the inhabitants of Devonport desired it?

I am sure that the inhabitants desire to remain part of a free country, I am sure that they will wish to make their contribution to defence.

asked the Secretary of State for War if it is still the policy of Her Majesty's Government to regard the Royal Ordnance factories as a vital strategic reserve and as a preferred source for certain equipment.

There is no change in our policy towards the Royal Ordnance factories.

While I am very glad to have the Minister's assurance, may I ask how he can reconcile that statement with the fact that in the Nottingham factory shop after shop has been closed and more than 400 men are threatened with redundancy? Cannot he make some renewed effort to ensure that these 400 skilled men are retained?

The hon. Gentleman knows the circumstances under which this redundancy arose. I am afraid that it arose out of an order not going to the Royal Ordnance factory which we expected would go there. Because of the disparity in costs, the preferred-source policy, as he knows, cannot apply.

Is my hon. Friend in a position to give a categorical assurance that it is not the intention to close the Royal Ordnance factory at Nottingham?

We are, as I think my hon. Friend knows, conducting a review of the capacity in the weapons and engineering group, and I am not yet ready to make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for War if during the past year contracts have been placed with private enterprise for work which the Royal Ordnance factories are equipped to undertake and for which they have not been asked to tender.

Yes, Sir.

As the hon. Gentleman says in a recent letter that the Royal Ordnance factory at Nottingham is at a disadvantage in competing with industry because all its labour force is highly skilled, and it is not given the design and development experience, will he say what kind of jobs Nottingham is likely to get, except short-run production, which is extremely costly, and which private enterprise does not want?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, Nottingham is heavily engaged on a substantial programme of gun manufacture. The Question asks whether orders have gone outside the Royal Ordnance factories for which they had not had an opportunity to tender. These mostly relate to ammunition components which are in a different field from that in which the hon. Gentleman is interested.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is particular concern at Nottingham Royal Ordnance factory because it feels that it is not getting a chance to do design work for which it is well-equipped; for instance, in regard to a recent mobile anti-tank gun which it is felt could have come to it but which did not?

I take note of what my hon. Friend has said. The question of what work goes into Royal Ordnance factories has always been subject to the design rights, as they are called, of the parent firm.

asked the Secretary of State for War what orders have been placed in foreign countries during the past six months for armaments which the Royal Ordnance factories in this country are also equipped to make.

None, Sir.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that if such orders have not been recently placed they are about to be for about £550,000 worth of anti-tank guns from Sweden and £10 million of orders from the U.S.A. for 175 mm. guns? If that is so, in view of those orders being placed and of the recent orders that have been placed with private firms, would he not agree that all these orders are of a type which could be carried out by the Royal Ordnance factories in this country? Whatever the reasons may be for the placing of these orders, would he not agree that, when they take place at the same time as the staff of the Royal Ordnance factory in Nottingham is being cut by 30 per cent., it must create the impression there that the factory is on the way out—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."]—and, in spite of what he has said to my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, West (Mr. Tapsell), cannot he say something to allay these fears?

I fully understand the uncertainty which the recent redundancies have created at the factory, but I cannot add to what I have said in reply to my hon. Friend about the review of what is to happen. In reply to the first part of my hon. and gallant Friend's supplementary question, our research and development effort cannot be deployed in a wide enough field to cover every possible Army requirement. The reason that these weapons have been ordered from abroad is that there are no British designs from which the weapons could be built, so we have to go abroad in order to get the Army the equipment which it needs.

asked the Secretary of State for War if the Royal Ordnance Factory, Woolwich, is still a preferred source for the production of conventional weapons; and if he will set up an independent committee of inquiry into the fairness and efficiency of present methods of tendering by Royal Ordnance factories.

Yes. Sir, and the Royal Ordnance Factory, Woolwich, receives its due share of such Royal Ordnance factory production orders as it is equipped to undertake.

I do not consider that an independent committee of inquiry into the methods of tendering by the Royal Ordnance factories is required at present. The problem that must be decided first is the scale of Royal Ordnance factory capacity that needs to be retained. I am at present examining this very important and involved question and before taking a final decision I have asked Sir Eric Mensforth, the Chairman of Firth Brown Tools Ltd.

and Westland Aircraft Ltd., to give me his views on the outcome of this examination.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great concern in Woolwich about this subject? Can he say why, if the Arsenal remains a preferred source in the production of conventional weapons, the Minister constantly gives these orders to private enterprise?

It is not true that we constantly give these orders to private enterprise. The hon. Member, with other hon. Members interested in the subject, will know that in this case we bent over backwards to try to pursue the preferred-source policy, but there was such a discrepancy in the tenders that we were unable to do so. It is for that reason that we are having an inquiry and I hope that when Sir Eric Mensforth reports to me we shall be in a clearer position.

The Minister will accept that he is himself responsible for the efficiency and competitiveness of Woolwich Arsenal?

Certainly.

asked the Secretary of State for War why it is proposed to move the Scottish Infantry Record Office out of Scotland.

The amalgamation of the Perth Record Office with that at York where there is new specially designed accommodation and new punched card machines will produce very substantial economies. I regret therefore that my right hon. Friend has had to decide to close the Record Office at Perth.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the bad effect on morale that this will have and that it will be regarded as removing yet another part of the independence of the Scottish regiments? Will he not look again to the alternative, which was put up and looked upon favourably about two years ago, that at least some of the work should be maintained in Scotland?

We are confident that the Scottish infantry regiments will get from the office at York every bit as good a service as they have had from Perth. Many Scottish units are already administered with regard to their records outside Scotland at the moment. I am afraid that, for reasons of economy which I have mentioned, it is impossible to reconsider this decision.

While I appreciate some of the reasons given by my hon. Friend, I wonder whether he could make his answer still more convincing by letting us have some figures of the economy that will be effected as a result of this change?

The estimated economy is about £40,000 in a full year.

Does not the hon. Gentleman, in making this decision, consider that the Records Office could have been just as suitable at Perth as in the English location that he has now given to the combined operation, and can he say whether his right hon. Friend has the figures of the actual numbers which will be removed from Scotland to York as a result of this transaction?

We considered that, but what weighed with us was the fact that the volume of work and the number of staff employed in York were more than three times that of the Perth office, and new accommodation to house staff and machines had recently been specially built for the Records Office in York. The effect on employment, I am glad to say, although any effect is regrettable, will be comparatively slight.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will investigate the circumstances, of which details have been supplied by the hon. Member for Brixton, in which a model was permitted by the military authorities to use a sentry box outside St. James's Palace for a fashion display; and if he will make a statement.

The photographer who used this sentry box as background for a fashion advertisement did not ask to be allowed to do so. The box is in a public street and it would be difficult to stop members of the public being photographed against it when the sentry is away from it.

Why is the Under-Secretary answering this Question instead of the Secretary of State for War, who knows more about these things? Will the Under-Secretary say whether this kind of thing really helps to preserve the dignity of the Services?

I think that I might answer both parts of that supplementary question by asking why the hon. Gentleman is asking it at all.

Would the Minister give this further consideration? Has it occurred to him that St. James's Palace would look very much more attractive if we replaced the soldier in the sentry box by the model?

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) what consultations he had before deciding to discontinue the Apprentice Training School at Woolwich;

I am in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour to see whether we can arrange for the Apprentice Training Shop to be used by non-Government apprentices. I would like in this way to be able to make use in some measure of the staff and facilities of the workshop. There are however practical difficulties—for example, questions of security arise because the shop is in the middle of a defence establishment—but we shall of course do our best to overcome these.

While greatly welcoming that decision, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will consult also with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Education? One of the finest technical colleges in the country is there, and colleges of further education in the adjoining areas are very good indeed. Would my right hon. Friend consult the Minister of Education to see if he might supplement the work that is being done there?

Certainly, Sir. I want, however, to make it clear that I have not discontinued the apprentice training school. I have simply decided to suspend the normal intake for one year.

While I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman can solve the security problem, may I ask whether he would agree to pass on the means of solving it to the First Lord of the Admiralty who seems to be having difficulty in solving a similar problem at Greenwich?

All these problems are very difficult, and if I can solve them it will be only because the security aspect is not too big.

asked the Secretary of State for War what was the maximum retired pay received by a lieutenant-colonel who retired in 1935; and what is the comparative purchasing power of the amount he now receives, assuming that he is now 77 years old.

The maximum retired pay received by a lieutenant-colonel who retired in 1935 was £543 a year. With pensions increases he would now be receiving £877 a year. The comparative purchasing power of £877, in relation to the cost of living in 1935, is £331.

Does not this indicate that these officers have not only failed to participate in the increase in the standard of living enjoyed by the rest of the community, but have dropped behind?

The hon. Member moved certain Amendments in this sense during the Committee stage of the recent Bill, but, at the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, the Committee rejected them. I do not think that we can take that debate any further today.

Are we not at some time to do something about this gross injustice to a lot of old men who have given valuable service? Are we not to adopt the honest policy of the same retirement pension for the same service, which is the only decent way to do it?

What this boils down to is the amount of the national resources afforded by the taxpayer which the Government think it right to allot to these various charges. Within the limit of what is thought to be proper and what is available, I believe that our method of successive pensions increase Measures is the proper way of dealing with the situation.

Why does not my hon. Friend just give the straight answer that the Minister of Defence and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury are having an examination of this, whole matter? Why does not the Army stand up for its own people? If it had done so a little earlier, we would not be in this position today. That is my view of the subject.

rose—

May I have an answer?

With every respect to my hon. Friend, I think that she is oversimplifying the situation.

When the hon. Gentleman speaks of continued increases of pensions, does he not appreciate that that does not affect these old gentlemen who gave their services a long time ago, since when money has depreciated? Cannot we allocate something to honesty, which is what it comes to?

Go on—be honest.

There must be a limit to the amount of resources which can be allocated to these Service and other pensions, and judgment has to be made as to the proper way of doing it. I think that the present policy is the best that can be done.

asked the Secretary of State for War what action he is taking to dispose of surplus unused Service motor cars; whether, such cars are being made available to other Government Departments; and what are the arrangements for such purchases.

The War Department has no surplus unused motor cars. We buy cars for Service use each year.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will now make a detailed statement on the recent discontent in the 1st Battalion, Scots Guards, at Pirbright; what were the guardsmen's grievances; and what action has been taken.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a statement with regard to the investigation ordered by him of the Pirbright mutiny.

A very thorough examination has been made into the circumstances leading to this incident.

The complaints made by the men, though numerous. were for the most part individually trivial. They concerned the internal affairs of the unit, and whilst I do not propose to give details, they have been very carefully considered and action is being taken on any which have proved justified.

As I have already said, the battalion is at low strength and the examination has shown that, apart from guard duties, it was trying to do too much. The local amenities are not entirely satisfactory and the normal channels for dealing with complaints were not always being used.

Nevertheless, the incident should never have occurred but for a loss of contact between some of the officers and their men, and I am afraid that there can be no doubt that there were failures in administration and man management in the unit. In addition to other necessary measures, certain changes in the personnel of the battalion have been made.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that very candid reply, may I ask him whether, when he says that the usual channels for complaints were "not being used", he means that they were being blocked at some point and, if so, where? Secondly, when he says that the complaints were "individually trivial", does he not realise that a very large number of individually trivial complaints can accumulate into something quite big? Is it, therefore, broadly his conclusion that there is, or was, too much "bull" in this battalion and that there ought to be less of it?

There are channels for complaints to officers in every unit and, of course, there were in this, and officers are bound to deal with these complaints. In some cases these channels were fiat being used properly and in some cases protests were not being properly investigated. But I do not think that there is any need for me to add anything further to the rather full Answer I have given, which shows the failure in man management.

Is there not some method of finding out trouble of this sort before a mutiny takes place? A mutiny is not a very good precedent as a method of drawing attention to grievances and getting them remedied.

I must challenge the hon. and learned Member's use of the word "mutiny". This was not a mutiny. Nobody was charged with mutiny, or with attempted mutiny, or with incitement to mutiny. There were grievances and a number of guardsmen went absent without leave, some for less than twenty-four hours, but then came back of their own accord. There is no question of there having been a mutiny.

Will my right hon. Friend reconsider the burden of public duties carried out by the Household Brigade in London? Does he feel that this burden was in any way responsible for some of the troubles with this battalion of Scots Guards at Pirbright?

I do not think that that was one of the problems which was responsible, because the battalion, as I have said earlier, was capable, although at low strength, of carrying out public duties if not pushed too far in other directions. It could have called on London District for assistance if the commanding officer or the lieut.-colonel had felt that necessary. There is a later Question about public duties.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us when collective refusal of duty ceased to be a mutiny?

The hon. and learned Gentleman is perhaps more versed in the law than I and I can only tell him that there was no question of mutiny or incitement to mutiny. The commanding officer, or lieut.-colonel, when speaking to the men pointed out that there was a narrow line between what might develop into some form of mutiny as compared with what happened in this case.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the record of this regiment is without peer in the British Army and that the best thing that can be done now is to leave it alone to put its affairs straight?

I agree, and I think that everybody would wish to do the same. It is our job to see that the commanding officer is given every sort of help and that the battalion builds up its strength.