§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the official German statement that, from the date of the official order to the date of commissioning, the building of the German "Dreadnought" "Nassau" occupied forty months ending 1st October, 1909; the German "Dreadnought" "Westphalen," thirty-seven months ending 16th November, 1909; the German "Dreadnought" "Rheinland," thirty-seven months ending May, 1910; and the "Posen," thirty-six months ending April, 1910; whether he has any reason to believe that any German "Dreadnought" either has been, or could be, built in a less time than thirty-six months; whether he still adheres to his statement that, from the first order to the commission, British "Dreadnoughts" can be built in twenty-four months; and whether the "Dreadnought" herself was so built in eighteen months?
§ Mr. McKENNAAn extract from the "North German Gazette," in the sense of my hon. Friend's statement, appeared in "The Times" of 24th March. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. There is no doubt in my mind that a German vessel of the "Dreadnought" type could, if it is desired, be built in a less time than thirty-six months. My views on the point raised in the third part of the question, are given in my statement explanatory of the Navy Estimates, 1909–10, under the heading of Shipbuilding and Repairs. With regard to the last part of the question, the 1453 "Dreadnought" was laid down on 2nd October, 1905, and commissioned on 11th December, 1906, but orders had been given for some considerable time in advance of the first-named date.
§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESDo I understand that the right hon. Gentleman does not believe the statement made in the German newspaper?
§ Mr. McKENNANo; I should not like to be put to the alternative of saying whether I believe or disbelieve any statement in any particular newspaper, but the statement was not an official one, and I do not accept the complete accuracy of what was stated.