§ 14. Sir WILLIAM BYLESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that he informed the House last December that the Canadian contribution to the Navy was to be in addition to and not in any degree in substitution for the existing British programme, he will explain why that programme should be rendered in any degree inadequate by the temporary check in providing the Canadian addition?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLMy hon. Friend will see the reasons fully explained if he reads the Admiralty Memorandum of December last, Command No. 6513, to the Canadian Government, and the speeches which I made in this House on 26th and 31st March last. A further opportunity for discussion would occur on Vote 8 should the House desire it.
§ Sir W. BYLESIs not the acceleration in direct conflict with the offer of a naval holiday?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLIt is not in conflict with what I have said on the subject. It has been kept carefully within the limits of what I have said. It would be very difficult for me to discuss the matter with advantage or in a satisfactory manner at Question Time. Vote A always comes on in July, and I think that would be the best occasion for a Debate, which I agree with my hon. Friend ought to take place.
Mr. GILBERT PARKERDid not the right hon. Gentleman say that these three Canadian ships were necessary to complete the force needed for the defence of the Empire?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI think it much better that opportunity should be taken on the Vote in Supply to debate these matters.