§ Mr. YERBURGHasked the Prime Minister whether, in stating in his speech on our standard of naval strength on 26th May, 1909, that the end was to ensure for this country in any conceivable condition, and against all possible hazards, unassailable naval superiority which would give us complete command of the sea, and make any attempt to interfere with any part of the Empire or sea-borne commerce an impossibility, he is to be understood as ruling out of calculation, in computing our requisite naval strength, the fleets of any other Powers with whom we may, at the time, be on terms of intimate friendship?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI do not think that matters of this kind can be conveniently or adequately dealt with by question and answer. I can only refer the hon. Member to the speech which he quotes and to the speech made on the same occasion by the First Lord of the Admiralty.
§ Mr. ARTHUR LEEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in his absence an entirely new definition of the two-Power standard was laid down by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not aware of that.
§ Mr. YERBURGHMay I ask whether or not we are to understand that the Government arrived at no decision upon this particular question? Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that this is a question of supreme importance, and that in arriving at our standard of naval strength previous Governments had regard to the power of the fleets of other countries?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI think this question shows the inconvenience of dealing with these matters by way of question and answer.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEMay I ask whether it takes a longer time to make a battleship or an enemy?