§ 13. Viscount CURZONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty which ships of the Royal Navy cannot use the existing dock at Singapore; and whether damaged ships could make use of the existing dock?
§ Mr. AMERYThe existing dock'at Singapore will not take
Damaged capital ships or aircraft carriers may draw up to 45 feet. We, 431 therefore, cannot rely in war on the dock the maximum draught of which is 33 feet taking damaged capital ships or aircraft carriers.
2 "Rodney" class (building). 5 "Royal Sovereigns." 2 "Renowns." 5 "Queen Elizabeths" (when bulged). 1 "Hood." 1 "Eagle." 16 (total).
§ 53. Mr. LAMBERTasked the Prime Minister whether, as the Foreign Office did not represent the necessity for a naval base at Singapore, he will say what representations were made that led to the Cabinet decision approving the project?
§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin)The development of the naval base at Singapore was recommended by the Admiralty in order to enable modern capital ships to be docked and repaired in Eastern waters and to increase the mobility of the Navy generally. This recommendation was endorsed, after exhaustive inquiry, by the Committee of Imperial Defence and by the Cabinet.
§ Mr. LAMBERTDoes the right hon. Gentleman mean that the Foreign Office was not consulted on this matter at all?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI do not know whether it was specifically consulted, but, of course, the Foreign Office is represented in the Cabinet.
§ Mr. LAMBERTDid the Foreign Office, as the Department responsible for foreign affairs, apprehend any particular danger in these waters?
§ The PRIME MINISTERHad that been the case, obviously it would have been brought to my notice.
§ Sir A. SHIRLEY BENNHas the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been drawn to the statement, reported in the Press, of a leading Japanese statesman in Tokio to the effect that the building of Singapore dock is, if the British Empire is to look after its interests in the Pacific, the natural sequence to the ending of the Japanese-British alliance?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have not seen that, but it seems to me to be a very sensible statement.
§ Commander BELLAIRSIs the Prime Minister aware that the only precedent for the Foreign Office establishing a base 432 was at Wei-hai-wei, and that the Admiralty wisely turned it into a health resort?
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in 1911 Lord Fisher recommended Singapore as a naval base for the Far East?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is giving information.