§ 14. Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty the size of the proposed floating dock at Singapore; what size of vessels it will be able to take; when construction will be commenced; and where it will be built?
17. Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the estimated ultimate cost on all counts for the construction of the Singapore naval base when fully completed?
§ 20 and 28. Mr. MORRISasked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether the sum of £787,000, stated to be the total proposed expenditure on the Singapore base up to the end of the year 1927–28, includes the cost of a graving dock; and, if not, whether it is proposed to dispense with this type of dock;
(2) the estimated cost of the proposed graving dock at Singapore?
§ The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Bridgeman)I propose to make a statement to-morrow which will cover all the points raised in these questions, and I will ask the hon. Members to wait for my statement, as I think it will be more convenient than dealing with the matter piecemeal.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI know that the right hon. Gentleman is always very anxious to help Members with information, but his proposal is not convenient, as this information was required for the Debate to-morrow. If the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to give me some information in reply to Question No. 14 I should be very much obliged.
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANAll the questions are so much interlocked that I should have to make a very long statement to make it quite clear. If I can give the hon. and gallant Gentleman outside any information that he wants, I shall be very glad to supply him with it, but to answer these four questions now, I should really have to make the speech which I shall have to make to-morrow.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYMight I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that if I could have a letter by to-morrow morning it would be useful? In Question No. 14 I am only asking for certain details. If it is contrary to the public interest I do not press it, but, if it is not, I really would like this information now.
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANPerhaps the hon. and gallant Gentleman will speak to me this afternoon on the subject.
§ Mr. MORRISWith regard to Question No. 20, could we get the estimated figures in the Paper which has been issued?
§ 19. Mr. PERCY HARRISasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the protection of the proposed Singapore Base will entail the building of an increased number of submarines?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANThe answer is in the negative.
§ 16. Mr. MacKENZIE LIVINGSTONEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is yet in a position to give any estimate of the size and the cost of the garrison necessary to protect the proposed Singapore base?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Captain Douglas King)I have been asked to reply. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State gave yesterday to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy).
§ Mr. LIVINGSTONEDoes that mean that the Minister and the Government have not the slightest idea?
§ Captain KINGI think that if the hon. Member will refer to the reply, he will find that the subject is still under consideration by the Committee of Imperial Defence.
§ 25. Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any saving on the Dockyard Vote for other dockyards is expected as a result of the establishment of the new dockyard at Singapore; and, if so, at which dockyards will a reduction be possible?
§ Mr. BRIDGEMANThe cost of such work as may in the future be carried out at the Singapore base to the ships of the Fleet will afford corresponding relief to the dockyards now existing. It is not, however, at present possible to say where, and to what extent, this relief will be afforded.