HC Deb 23 December 1929 vol 233 cc1898-900
46. Commander SOUTHBY

asked the Prime Minister if he can now state the terms of reference for the forthcoming Naval Disarmament Conference?

The PRIME MINISTER

It is not contemplated that there should he any specific terms of reference other than those explained in the invitations to attend it which were issued to the Governments of France, Italy, Japan and the United States on 7th October last.

Commander SOUTHBY

Can the right hon. Gentleman not give the House rather more detailed information as to what will be discussed at this Conference, observing its great importance to this country and the Empire as a whole?

The PRIME MINISTER

I am under the impression that the document of 7th October states very clearly what is to be discussed—the whole scope of the business which will be considered by the Conference.

Major ROSS

May I ask whether it would be possible for the British representation at that Conference to entertain proposals involving the use or possible use of the British Fleet in other people's ware?

The PRIME MINISTER

Certainly not. The question of naval policy as apart from naval strength will not be considered at the Five-Powers Conference.

68 and 69. Mr. L'ESTRANGE MALONE

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether His Majesty's Government has under consideration any modification of Articles 5 and 6 of the Washington Agreement relating to capital ships?

(2) whether His Majesty's Government has had under consideration the modification of Article 12 of the Washington Agreement of 1922, so that the maximum calibre gun therein stated may be reduced from 8 inches to 6 inches as previously advocated by the British delegate at the Naval Conference of 1927?

The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. A. V. Alexander)

Articles 5, 6 and 12 have all received the earnest consideration of His Majesty's Government. The Conference itself will deal with these matters.

70. Sir ROBERT GOWER

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the personnel in officers and men of the British Navy and the Navy of the United States of America, respectively?

Mr. ALEXANDER

As the reply contains a number of figures I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

The Naval Estimates of the respective countries for 1929–30 allow for approximately the following numbers:

— Great Britain, excluding Dominions. United States of America.
Navy—
Commissioned and Warrant Officers. 6,842 8,823
Midshipmen and Cadets. 1,272 2,000
Men 81,437 84,500
Marines—
Officers and Warrant Officers. 430 1,176
Men 9,819 18,000
99,800 114,499
R.M. Police 500 —
100,300 114,499

The figures are, however, not comparable as those of the United States include a complete Naval Air Service, Constructor Officers and Civil Engineers.

The United States of America also man their auxiliary craft with Active Service ratings.

71. Sir R. GOWER

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the strength of the British Navy and the navy of the United States of America, respectively, in ordnance (battleship guns and eight-inch guns), destroyers (vessels and torpedo tubes), and submarines (vessels and torpedo tubes), respectively?

Mr. ALEXANDER

As the answer involves a table of figures, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it with the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the table:

United States of America.
— No. of Guns. Size.
in.
Battleships 24 16
124 14
44 12
Total 192
Old Cruisers (No modern 8 in.) 8 8
— No. of Ships. No. of tubes.
Destroyers … … 295 3,342
Submarines … … 122 508
British Empire.
— No. of Guns. Size.
in.
Battleships … … 18 16
… … 100 15
… … 48 13.5
Total … … 166
Cruisers … … 88 8
— No. of Ships. No. of tubes.
Destroyers* … … 150 747
Submarines … … 53 276
*Includes 16 Leaders carrying 84 tubes.