HC Deb 08 April 1936 vol 310 cc2756-7
21. Mr. DAVID ADAMS

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what was the tonnage of Government orders allocated to the Clyde and Tyne, respectively, during the last three years, giving figures for each year?

Lord STANLEY

During the calendar years 1933, 1934, and 1935, warship orders allocated to the Clyde district amounted to approximately 20,200 tons, 31,800 tons and 19,650 tons respectively, and to the Tyne district 8,200 tons, 23,400 tons and 11,700 tons respectively.

Mr. ADAMS

In view of the very unsatisfactory comparison between the Clyde and the Tyne, can we have an assurance that the Government will endeavour to rectify the position by using their best influences to ensure that the second Cunarder shall come to the Tyne?

Miss WARD

In view of the answer to a supplementary question the other day, would the Noble Lord consider calling a conference of shipbuilders of the Tyne and the Clyde, in order to ascertain why there is this difference of tenders, and to get an equal allocation between the two, as in pre-war days?

Lord STANLEY

It is possible that in answer to a supplementary question I laid too much stress upon the price of the tenders, but there are other reasons besides price which affect the allocation of orders. I would like to point out that the Clyde, with six shipbuilding firms, has 45 slips, whereas the Tyne, with three firms, has 28 slips.

Miss WARD

Can the Noble Lord tell us the relative position of the shipyards on the two rivers in pre-war days?

Mr. MAGNAY

Is it not because the Clyde is obviously suffering from an inferiority complex that the Government give it preferential treatment?

Mr. LOGAN

Will the hon. Gentleman take the Mersey into consideration?