ARMY EXTRAVAGANCE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 9 May 1941, Page 6

ARMY EXTRAVAGANCE

’ SEVERE COMMENT IN LONDON. ' DEMAND FOR AN INQUIRY. Commenting on the fascinating review of work and waste within the Army, and efforts concerning the Army’s welfare, by the Secretary for War (Captain Margesson), “The Times,” in an editorial, says: “Confidence in the Army’s capacity to do its work does not blind the public to defects arising, and always liable to arise, in vastly expanded and rapidly expanding organisation. In particular the public is not ready to excuse waste in any form, and there are many forms of waste.” The newspaper continued: “One of the worst is in the building of militia camps, but that, it may be hoped, is largely of the past. In these days, when the main effort of the enemy seems to be directed towards starving us out, public attention naturally is directed most towards the waste of food.” The article proceeds: “There has been waste, both in the quantity of food allocated to the Army and in the use or misuse of it. Therefore it is pertinent to recall once again the review of ration scales which brought the feeding of the Army more into line with the feeding of and with the work actually done by the soldier. Everyone recognises that the combatants must be kept fit to fight and undergo great physical exertions, but it was illogical and wasteful that one man sitting at a desk should get more food than another just because he was in uniform. This form of waste has now been corrected, and, in the case of units, could always be corrected by an efficient messing officer.” “The next form of waste,” “The Times” says, “is bad cooking. Here again it may be hoped that the tenfold increase in the number of trained cooks since the outbreak of war is checking waste by misuse. Lastly, there is the more usual form of waste —dumping good food into the swill pail. It is good news that the volume of swill has been reduced by twothirds, though the figure in an alarming revelation of the waste which must have occurred already, and which must never occur again. Nothing impairs the reputation of the Army among its ownpeople more than waste. In the last war the Army abroad used to scandalise the thrifty civilian by carelessness about food. The results of similar carelessness would be even worse now that so much of the Army is in this country. Carelessness of another kind, namely, careless driving—has also offended the public, but statistics given by Captain Margesson seem to acquit the Army of any special, prominence in this res,- . pect."

“The Daily Mail," commenting on Captain Margesson’s appointment of a Controller-General of Economy, says: “There is plenty to occupy him. Allegations of waste in the Army have become so numerous that it is high, time some control was exercised. The Army must not be stinted of anything, but there is no excuse for needless extravagance. Captain Margesson’s statement coincides with the latest report of the select committee on expenditure, which reveals that militia camps estimated to have cost £21.000,000 were built for an actual cost of £80,000,000, This is scandalous, but the disclosure of what has been going on is not new. Some officers have made grave allegations, and state that by doing so they have been dismissed or threatened with dismissal. The committee finds that an inquiry into these matters is not within its province, but the matter must not be dropped. An exhaustive inquiry must be held, and proven guilt must be severely punished.”