ROYAL NAVY (BUILDING PROGRAMME). (Hansard, 14 September 1931)

§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I gave notice at Question Time to-day of my intention to raise a matter with the First Lord of the Admiralty. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not misunderstand me if I begin my remarks by congratulating him on his courage in entering the present Government. I have had the pleasure of seeing the right hon. Gentleman in this House as Chancellor of the Exchequer, Leader of the House, and Foreign Secretary, and now as First Lord of the Admiralty, and I hope to give him more trouble as First Lord of the Admiralty than I did in all his other offices.
At Question Time I asked the right hon. Gentleman whether any information could be given with regard to the naval shipbuilding programme. This is a very important matter, because, if this programme is to he postponed, it is necessary that a decision should be come to, as otherwise contracts will run on, and heavy compensation will have to be paid to the firms. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, that has happened on previous occasions. If it is possible to came to a decision with regard to the pay of the officers and seamen of the Royal Navy with such celerity as the right hon. Gentleman did, what is the delay in also reaching a decision with regard to the naval programme? I have no doubt, from what I know of my right hon. Friend the ex-First Lord, that the necessary data were prepared and ready for the right hon. Gentleman when he assumed his high office.
The shipbuilding programme totalled, very approximately, and not on the excessive side, £20,600,000—not, of course, in one year. The actual amount in the present Navy Estimates which were passed by the House in the spring was £5,293,00. There are waiting to he built or laid down—some of them, we know, have not been laid down for various reasons—live cruisers, three flotilla leaders, 23 destroyers, seven submarines, and eight sloops. I think that the time has come when the Navy 650 and the country and all who are asked to make sacrifices have the right to know the intentions of the Government with regard to this admittedly substantial programme. It may be said that the May Committee did not recommend any cut of the sort. The May Committee said that they had been to the heads of the three Service Departments and that certain confidential information had been placed at their disposal which completely satisfied them. They said to the cobblers, "Are you prepared to cut down the use of leather?" and the cobblers said "No!" That is the end of it, so far as the May Committee is concerned. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not fall back on the May Committee. He may say, "If you stop the building of ships, even if they cost £26,000,000, you cause unemployment." But all the Measures we have been discussing earlier to-day will cause unemployment, as the Home Secretary and the Minister of Health admitted. If he says that this is the defence of the country I would remind him that Oliver Cromwell said that "the Royal Navy was to prevent foreigners fooling us."

Vice-Admiral TAYLOR
It was not Cromwell at all, it was Blake.

§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I knew it was one of the great Puritan admirals. I am obliged to the hon. and gallant Member. The British Navy is highly efficient and loyal, but it has not prevented foreigners from fooling us on this occasion, and Blake's great reason for it no longer holds good. Under all these circumstances, with a Disarmament Conference coming next year, and with the proposal of the Italian Foreign Minister at Geneva for a postponement of fresh commitments in armaments until the conference, I think the right hon. Gentleman must give the House some more information. The country is entitled to it, and I look to him, with his usual frankness and diligence, to give us the information for which I ask.

§ The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Sir Austen Chamberlain)
I will be perfectly frank with the hon. and gallant Gentleman. I cannot promise that I will give him the information that he asks because I myself do not at present possess it, nor have I had time in conjunction with the Board of Admiralty to examine 651 the consequences of the cuts which have been rendered necessary by the extravagance in other directions of previous Governments, the reactions of which are now so severely felt by the Navy.

§ Mr. EDE
Are you alluding to de-rating?

§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN
No, I am not and the hon. Member knows that I am not.

§ Mr. EDE
It seemed very appropriate.

§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN
I do not quite know to what the hon. and gallant Member desired specifically to allude. He spoke at one moment of the programme of vessels now under consideration and the possible consequences of breaking contracts on those vessels at a later time. There is no intention of interfering with any contracts which have been entered into. To what extent cuts which have become necessary and which the Government have thought it necessary to impose upon the Admiralty may affect the programme of vessels not yet commenced, I cannot say until the Board of Ad- 652 miralty, including myself, have had time to examine the various methods by which we can contribute to the necessary safety, but I can assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that we shall be extremely reluctant to interfere with the programme, which is well within the terms of the London Naval Treaty and which was fixed by the late Government and by the right hon. Gentleman who preceded me, as the minimum that we ought to undertake in order to be in a position which it was recognised by those with whom we negotiated that we ought to be in at the period when the London Treaty terminated. I shall give the House and the Navy information about these matters at the earliest possible moment, but the hon. and gallant Gentleman will see that these are not matters to be decided in a few weeks. They require careful examination, and there has not yet been time to make such examination.