HC Deb 30 July 1937 vol 326 cc3512-6
Mr. Attlee

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he has any statement to make with regard to the Fleet Air Arm.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Chamberlain)

Yes, Sir. The proposals which the Government have had under their consideration refer to two classes of aircraft. The first class includes all aircraft borne in ships of the Royal Navy. These are known as the Fleet Air Arm. They are under the operational control of the Admiralty, but as part of the Royal Air Force they are under the administrative control of the Air Ministry. The second class includes shore-based aircraft employed in co-operation with naval forces. These are under the operational as well as the administrative control of the Air Ministry.

Under one proposal which has been before the Government the Admiralty would in each case have been given both the administrative and the operational control, and the whole of the personnel would be naval. The Government have, however, decided that in the case of the second class, namely shore-based aircraft, which term includes flying boats, there shall be no alteration in the present systems. In the case of the Fleet Air Arm the Government consider that these ship-borne aircraft should be placed under the administrative control of the Admiralty. The necessary steps to give effect to this decision will be taken. The change can only be carried out gradually and with the fullest co-operation between the two Services. The same close cooperation between the Services is indeed vital in the whole strategic field where both ships and aircraft are concerned, and I am happy to give the assurance that this co-operation will be given without reserve.

I wish to make it plain that the decisions which have been reached do not reflect upon the present condition of the Fleet Air Arm where a keen and efficient service has been built up, but have been reached because the Government believe the lines now laid down will be the most satisfactory arrangement for the future. I also desire to express the Government's appreciation of the untiring efforts of the Air Ministry to make a success of the system for which they have been responsible.

I hope that these decisions which the Government have reached after full inquiry will be accepted in every quarter as a final and satisfactory settlement of a prolonged controversy which it is in the public interest to close.

Mr. Attlee

Was it not possible for the Prime Minister to arrange to make this statement to the House at a time when we could have discussed it? The whole question of the co-ordination of Defence was debated last Monday, and in view of the length of time which these proceedings have taken, is it only just to-day that a decision has been come to?

The Prime Minister

I regret as much as the right hon. Gentleman that it was not possible to come to a decision before. Of course, if we had we should have given the House an opportunity of discussing it. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that the decision was not delayed in order to deprive the House of that opportunity. It was reached at the earliest possible moment.

Captain Harold Balfour

Does the transfer of the administrative responsibility for seaborne aircraft include the setting up of a dual system of training and a duel system of supply, or will they still remain the primary responsibilities of the Air Ministry?

The Prime Minister

The question of training is one which will have to be worked out by the Admiralty and the Air Ministry in co-operation with one another, and at the present we have not attempted to define the exact lines of agreement. I think it will be found possible to combine control with a certain amount of responsibility on each side without in any way injuring efficiency.

Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon

May I ask whether the Prime Minister could not arrange for the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence to elaborate this decision to-day before we disperse, so that we may have a clearer idea of the subject?

Commander Sir Archibald Southby

In this transfer will there be any transfer of aerodromes to naval administration to be used by naval machines when they are flying off ships?

The Prime Minister

That is another point which, obviously, must be decided by the two Departments after they have had an opportunity of considering the matter.

Mr. Churchill

Are we right in assuming that in principle the Fleet Air Arm will, if necessary, be permitted to have the necessary shore establishments for the purpose of training their own pilots for the Fleet Air Arm?

The Prime Minister

There must be training of the personnel of the Fleet Air Arm on shore.

Mr. Churchill

Under the Admiralty?

The Prime Minister

Again, that is a matter for the Admiralty and the Air Force to consider what is the best plan. I should imagine, for example, that it might be that the Admiralty would have a portion of an aerodrome which is now under the Air Force, and that in another case they might have an aerodrome entirely on their own. I do not think we can say exactly what the decision will be at this moment.

Mr. Churchill

But in principle that is so, is it not?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Benn

Does not the Prime Minister agree, in view of the vital importance of this subject and the opportunity which presents itself to-day, that the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence should explain more fully exactly what is intended?

Mr. De Chair

Will there be an opportunity of discussing this at the beginning of next Session?

Mr. Churchill

It would be in order to raise it to-day.

Lieut.-Commander Fletcher

Is it not the case that after prolonged delay and prolonged inquiry only a broad decision has been arrived at, and that none of those details which are likely to give great trouble and difficulty have been settled at all?

The Prime Minister

That is what I have said. The broad principle has been determined, but a great many details have to be settled, and I have every reason to suppose that they will be settled amicably by co-operation between the Admiralty and the Air Force. There is no reason why hon. Members should not raise this question on the Motion for the Adjournment, and if they do I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence will be present.

Mr. Attlee

Is it the view of the Prime Minister that the decision come to by the Government has definitely settled this controversy, and will he use his influence to prevent it being continued as an internecine warfare between the two Departments? If it has not been settled it is no use pretending that it has, and we shall have this constant firing between the Departments over and over again.

The Prime Minister

The Government decision, as taken, and now made public, is final. As far as it can settle the controversy it has settled it. We cannot prevent individuals from still firing shots but we hope they will refrain from doing so, because it is desirable in the public interest that this controversy should be settled.

Mr. Attlee

I am asking the Prime Minister whether he is going to use his authority to prevent this constant firing between the Departments which has been going on for years now to the detriment of the Services. If a decision had been come to, is he going to insist upon it being implemented by the Departments?

The Prime Minister

I do not know why the right hon. Gentleman should suggest that the Departments are not loyally going to carry out this decision. I have had an assurance from both that they intend to do so, and I entirely accept that assurance. What I say is that I cannot prevent individuals over whom I have no authority firing shots if they think fit.

Mr. Attlee

Is the Prime Minister aware that this matter has been settled before and reopened again and again after settlement?

Sir P. Harris

Is it not the job of the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence to make the scheme work? Is not that what he was appointed for?

Mr. Benn

Does not the Prime Minister think, in view of what he has said about the matter being raised to-day, and in view of the fact that we do not know what has been decided beyond the statement he has made, that it would be better if the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence made a short statement to-day amplifying what he has said?

Mr. Gallacher

In view of the fact that this final settlement is only likely to be of a temporary character, would it not be advisable to call the House together to have a full discussion?

Mr. Montague

May I ask whether the Government in coming to a conclusion upon this issue have taken into account the question of the strategic control of the Air Arm in time of war?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Benn

I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter to-day. I would also further ask the Prime Minister to consider whether the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence can make a short statement so that we shall not be beating the air.