§ 48. Mr. Henderson Stewartasked the Prime Minister whether he has now been able to consider the full reports from the Service Departments on the Dieppe raid and, in particular, upon the support afforded by the Royal Air Force to the Army; whether he is satisfied that that support was adequate and effective; and whether any further measures are to be taken to meet the demands of the Army for still closer support from the air arm in future actions?
§ The Prime MinisterDuring the course of the operation the Military Force Commander made a signal which included the statement that air support was "faultless." The answer to the second part of the Question is "Yes." As regards the third part of the Question, the problem of air support for the Army is under constant examination.
§ Mr. ShinwellHas the right hon. Gentleman any information regarding the performance of the tanks that were landed, and is the report encouraging?
§ The Prime MinisterI have not in my mind at present any special information on the subject. I understand that they were held up by the altogether unexpected strength of blocks at the ends of the streets, which it had not been anticipated they would not be able to destroy by the fire of their guns. I have not any other particular item in my mind on the subject. They were, I believe, Churchill tanks, which no doubt explains the friendly interest in their performances, but I have not heard that they acquitted themselves with any marked lack of propriety.
§ Mr. ShinwellWill the right hon. Gentleman give some attention to the matter of the gun mountings of these Churchill tanks that were used in the Dieppe raid?
§ The Prime MinisterThey are under the most continuous study, change and improvement. A very large number in this country are being tested in every way, but the point that the hon. Gentleman has made will, I am sure, attract 769 the attention of the Service Departments concerned.
§ 50. Mr. Henderson Stewartasked the Prime Minister whether he will explain how the House should reconcile the announcement made on 8th September that most of the Dieppe invading force came back with the official statement of the Canadian Minister of National Defence that, of 5,000 Canadian troops involved in the raid casualties totalled 3,350, of whom 2,717 were killed or missing?
§ The Prime MinisterIn my Statement of 8th September, I was referring to the assaulting force as a whole, the greater part of whom were brought back by the Royal Navy. There is no inconsistency with the statement of the Canadian Minister of National Defence, who was referring only to casualties among the Canadian troops who took part.
§ Mr. StokesWill the right hon. Gentleman make any general statement on the total losses during the raid?
§ The Prime MinisterSome statement has been made in Canada. I do not know whether we need be so very meticulous in giving the exact figures. The enemy have made their statement, and they do not know how many we got back safe. I do not think there will be any advantage in it, but the losses were very heavy and went up to nearly one-half.
§ Sir H. WilliamsThe losses were five-sixths of the Canadian Force, therefore the total force was 6,000, and the casualties appear to be more than half.
§ The Prime MinisterThere seems to be some discrepancy in the arithmetic, but the facts that I have given are correct. When I say five-sixths, I am bound to say it might have been four-fifths. I did not myself divide the figures. It may be that between five-sixths and a half there might be some small discrepancy. If so, I greatly regret it.