§ 45. Mrs. Mannasked the Prime Minister if, after further investigation, he can now give an assurance that the rearmament programme of £4,700 million 799 can be concluded within the original term of three years.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Winston Churchill)As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and I have informed the House, production is already behind schedule, and it is now inevitable that the programme should be spread over a somewhat longer period than was originally planned.
§ Mrs. MannDoes that mean that we have the right hon. Gentleman's assurance that the standard of living will not be unduly decreased in order to fulfil in three years what he now admits cannot be fulfilled?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is hardly a question of admission on my part. This was a set of decisions, with which I do not in principle disagree, left us by our predecessors. I may say that I have heard it reported that the re-armament programme of £4,700 million agreed to by the late Government would now probably cost something in the neighbour-hood of £5,200 million owing to the ever-increasing lack of purchasing power of the £ sterling, and that is a factor to be taken into consideration. We shall do our best to meet all these difficulties.
§ Mr. E. ShinwellThe right hon. Gentleman is, no doubt, aware that the prospect of completing the £4,700 million re-armament programme in three years was conditioned by a number of factors—the provision of machine tools, the availability of manpower in the right place and at the right time, and the provision of raw materials, and that it was made perfectly clear by the late Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, that unless these factors proved to be favourable it would be quite impossible to complete the programme in three years.
§ The Prime MinisterThere does not seem to be any difference between us on this point.
§ Mr. George ThomasCan the Prime Minister give us any indication of the period over which he is now spreading this target?
§ The Prime MinisterWe are pushing ahead to the best of our ability, but it is not possible to say exactly what delays 800 will be involved. Undoubtedly, there is a certain lag, and we shall do our very utmost to limit that as much as possible.
§ Mr. Sydney SilvermanDoes the right hon. Gentleman realise that the period over which this sum is to be spent has only to be extended from three years to six years in order to make the annual rate of expenditure exactly what it was before re-armament was begun? Is this what is intended to be understood by the urgency of the matter—that we shall then be able to buy less materials for more money?
§ The Prime MinisterI think the hon. Gentleman would do well, if I might make a suggestion, to discuss this matter with the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan), who was, I believe, responsible at the time when the proposal to spend £4,700 million in three years was proposed.
§ Mr. Cyril OsborneIs the Prime Minister not aware that the answer to the anxieties of hon. Gentlemen opposite is to do as the Americans have done and increase production so much at home that we can have both our re-armament programme and an increased civilian consumption?
§ Mr. ShinwellAs it bears on this Question, could the right hon. Gentleman now say when he proposes to present the Defence Estimates; and will there be a White Paper?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that is entirely irrelevant to the Question that is now asked me, but I will certainly devote my attention to it if the right hon. Gentleman will put down a Question.
§ Mr. Aneurin BevanWould the right hon. Gentleman like to make himself a little clearer, when he apparently said just now that I was responsible for the £4,700 million programme? If I may be allowed to say so, he will remember that when I made my speech in the Defence Debate I specifically called attention to the qualifying conditions, for which I was mainly responsible.
§ The Prime MinisterWe are all deeply interested—
§ Mr. Arthur LewisOn a point of order. I should like to ask your guidance, Mr. Speaker. I distinctly heard the hon. 801 Member for one of the Portsmouth Divisions say that my right hon. Friend had deliberately tried to sabotage the programme. Is it in order to accuse an hon. or right hon. Member of this House of sabotage?
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is an undesirable expression, which should not be used.
§ Mr. ShinwellIn view of the statement made by the Chancellor of the intention to present the Budget on 4th March, which is a very early date, will the right hon. Gentleman be able to say this week when the Defence Estimates will be presented?
§ The Prime MinisterMr. Speaker, may I have a ruling from you as to which of the two right hon. competitors I am to reply to?
§ Mr. SpeakerI think the right hon. Gentleman would be well advised to answer one questioner at a time.
§ The Prime MinisterTo the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) I say that I can quite understand his conscientious anxieties about the course he took. I am sure he will receive the most charitable consideration from the House in any exposition which the Rules of Order permit him to make.