§ MR. J. M. MACDONALD (Falkirk Burghs)I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, in recently accepting the definition of the two-Power standard as meaning a preponderance of 10 per cent. over the combined strengths, in capital ships, of the two next strongest Powers, he intended to extend the definition given by himself earlier in the year to the effect that the standard we have to maintain is one which would give us complete command of the sea against any reasonably possible combination of Powers.
§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. ASQUITH,) Fifeshire, E.The two statements are, in my opinion, under existing conditions identical in meaning and effect.
§ MR. ARTHUR LEEMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether we are to understand from his reply that the policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to our naval strength is, and has been, for some time, to maintain the standard of power specified in the first part of the Question?
§ MR. ASQUITHYes, Sir.
§ MR. ARTHUR LEEMay I further ask, in order to dispel certain doubts which have been expressed, but not on this side of the House, whether by the words "the two next strongest Powers" the right hon. Gentleman means the two next strongest Powers whatever they may be, and wherever they may be situated?
§ MR. ASQUITHUnder existing conditions and under all foreseeable circumstances, I think that is so.
§ MR. J. M. MACDONALDMay I ask whether, in taking into consideration the two Powers, the right hon. Gentleman his had regard to any reasonably possible combination among those Powers against us?
§ MR. ASQUITHThe dominating consideration with us is that we should maintain our superiority at sea. As has often been explained by those responsible on both sides of the House, we regard the two-Power standard as a workable formula to give effect to that.