§ 43. Mr. HALL-CAINEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government will consider the desirability of subsidising the building of three 30,000-ton ships rather than another 90,000-ton sister-ship to the "Queen Mary," seeing that this would be more economic in subsidies and also allow the work to be spread over a wider area, in that the ships could be constructed in different yards?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI think it would be premature for me to consider such matters as that mentioned in the question until I have received the proposals of the Cunard-White Star Company on the subject.
§ Mr. ARTHUR GREENWOODIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that actual proposals for the building of new 30,000-ton ships are well advanced, without any question of subsidy arising?
§ Mr. GREENWOODThe question I am putting to the right hon. Gentleman is, should subsidy be given in respect of 30,000-ton ships, and is he not aware that proposals are now in an advanced stage for building 30,000-ton ships for the Atlantic trade without a subsidy?
Mr. CHAMBERLAINI understood that the right hon. Gentleman referred to the building of such ships by the Cunard-White Star Company.
§ Mr. ATTLEEDoes it not occur to the right hon. Gentleman that if there is any question of subsidizing 30,000-ton ships, other people, who are able to build them without subsidy, will be discouraged from doing so?