HL Deb 23 May 1916 vol 22 cc101-26

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU rose to move to resolve—

" That this House considers that the development of aviation for purposes of war can no longer be efficiently carried on under the present system of the divided control and responsibility of two separate Departments; and that the time has now arrived when the supply of men and materials should be concentrated under single control, at the same time leaving the executive power over naval and military aircraft with the Army and Navy as at present."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I rise to-night with a sense of unusual responsibility. Owing to circumstances which I need not discuss here, there was a breakdown to a certain extent in the discussion of this matter in the House of Commons last week. That is all the more reason, I think, why we should consider this question in this House, and debate with great attention the Motion which I have placed on the Paper. There is another reason. Since the late Order in Council was passed it has become difficult to discuss this very important subject outside the walls of this Chamber. I am one of those who believe that the Government do not intend in reality to screw down the safety valve too far, because I think they realise that if they do they would only give rise to a sense of great public dissatisfaction. But it is, of course, on the floor of this House that this subject as part and parcel of the general policy of the Government must be discussed.

The last time that I spoke in this House was just after the noble Earl, Lord Derby, had invited me to join the Committee which has since ceased to exist. I may explain to your Lordships that at that time I made it clear, in a letter which I wrote to the Prime Minister, that I joined because I believed—and the noble Earl below me believed too—that out of that Committee might arise the foundations of something much more powerful which would have a distinct influence over the future of the Air Services of this country. But, as the noble Earl himself said in this House when describing the powers of that Committee, it was quite clear that it was a Committee which was to deal almost entirely if not wholly with the question of the allocation of machines and engines between the two Services. I resigned from that Committee for reasons slightly different from those of Lord Derby. In my letter to the Prime Minister I pointed out that I had joined the Committee because I thought that it was going to be the nucleus of something bigger, but that I found it impossible that it could ever become what I desired it should become. In reality and practice the Committee turned out to be useless except for the very limited purposes included in its Terms of Reference. Since that time there have been many events bearing on this subject.

When I spoke in this House a little more than two months ago I made certain statements which are going to be the subject of inquiry elsewhere by a Judicial Committee. I am going to that Committee most willingly and as a matter of courtesy. I hold very strongly, however, that any criticisms which we on this side of the House have to make of the Government on this or any other matter should be answered across the floor of this House. After all, where are you going to stop if the precedent is to be established that a member of this or of the other House who makes criticisms of a Government Department is to be liable to be asked to explain those statements before a Committee set up by the Department he is criticising? It is quite clear that if that were always to be the case there would be no freedom of debate, and people would not be free to assert that which they know or which at any rate they believe to be true.

This Judicial Committee consists mainly of gentlemen who do not pretend to be experts, but I have every confidence in their impartiality. Although they have been rather chaffed for being lawyers, a lawyer may yet be an impartial and honest person; and I am quite prepared to submit anything I have said to their dissection and examination—although I know that to a certain extent, not being a lawyer myself, I may be going into a den of lions. But still I remember that I have always this, the fairest and finest tribunal in any country to appeal to; and your Lordships will bear me out when I say that at any rate in my past utterances on this subject there is very little which has not come to pass, and that I have never failed to prove any statement I have made on the floor of this House.

I can quite understand that in this matter His Majesty's Government are in a difficulty. Frankly one cannot expect the noble Marquess (Lord Lansdowne), who so often answers for His Majesty's Government, to understand the intricacies of aviation. Neither can the noble Marquess the Leader of the House be expected to go into technical questions. I admit that is a difficulty. But I do say that in an important debate of this character the noble and gallant Field-Marshal and the noble Duke who represents the Admiralty ought to take up the cudgels to some extent on behalf of their Departments. I rejoice to know that in future we shall have the noble Earl, Lord Curzon, who has taken an immense interest in this question and who will shortly become no doubt an expert on it, to reply to criticisms. That is one of the advantages, I think, of the proposed Air Board.

There might be other ways of getting out of this difficulty of replying upon technical points. We might suggest to the Government that Admiral Vaughan Lee, the Director of the Naval Air Service, might be made a Peer. I could find all kinds of fancy names for him. On the other hand, Sir David Henderson might contest a vacated seat, say for East Kent, Lowestoft, or even for Newcastle. He might then enter the House of Commons and be able to extend criticisms to certain hon. members there. But I do not think, in all seriousness, that that would be a practicable thing. But I would like to make this one observation before I leave this subject. I have heard National Service, which we have seen passed this afternoon, advocated from those Cross Benches by Lord Roberts. If Lord Roberts had had on occasions in the past to submit his case to a Committee appointed by the Army Council to investigate his statements, I think he would very often have been condemned; but, as we now know, he would have proved perfectly right. Notwithstanding, I am prepared to go before this Committee. I intend to treat them with every respect and to give them every kind of information; and I shall be very much surprised if the verdict of the Committee is not favourable as far as my share in this matter is concerned.

Now I come to the Air Board which has just been appointed. Let me say that already I think this step has justified the part which I and others have taken in urging this matter upon your Lordships' House and the country. I would say at the outset that I am delighted that the noble Earl opposite (Lord Curzon) and Lord Sydenham are going to be members of this Air Board. As regards the noble Earl, I have known him for many years. I have seen his work in India, and I have great confidence in him. So far as I am concerned I ask myself, What should I do? It is clearly my duty to support Lord Curzon in every way I can, and if I have any knowledge of a special kind to place it unreservedly in his hands. Lord Sydenham also has great experience, and as Governor of Bombay he achieved a marked success. I am sure that those two noble Lords, the only two really independent members of this Board, will be able to do great service to the country in the functions they are about to perform. I know it has been said that the noble Earl opposite (Lord Curzon) is somewhat autocratic in nature. But he is a man of great character, and, what is more, of great imagination. I am delighted to think that he is autocratic in nature, for his tendency to exercise autocracy may be of great benefit in the work which he has to do.

As far as I can make out from reading diligently the speeches made in the other House, it seems to me that the Air Board is the Derby-Montagu Committee, if I may use the term, with some added, and I grant important, powers. First of all, it has a Cabinet Minister as its chairman. That is a great advantage. Secondly, so far as I understand, it can lay down an air policy; and it seems to me a somewhat melancholy comment on the want of foresight which has been displayed in this matter that now in the twenty-second month of the war we should be beginning to lay down an air policy. That fact alone would justify anything I might have done or said in the direction of getting a better administration of the Air Service.

I wish the noble chairman of the Board every success, but I want to point out to him where I am afraid he will be handicapped, though I hope he will escape from his shackles and prove himself a man in more ways than one. I will take this example. Lord Curzon, we will say, disagrees with the Air Board. What does he do then? Say that on an important question of policy, long-range bombing, the question of the construction of hangars, whatever it may be, he disagrees with his Board. I will not say whether he would be right or wrong. He would make representations to the Admiralty or the War Office. But these two great Departments would be advised by the very people who had disagreed with him on the Air Board. Now we go a stage further. He would then appeal to the War Committee, on which he would meet Mr. Balfour and Lord Kitchener, who are naturally also advised by the same technical experts with whom the noble Earl Lad already disagreed; and they would sit upon him also. As the next step he would take his case to the Cabinet, and then, perhaps, he would meet still greater difficulties—I hope I am not putting myself within the scope of the law by discussing the Cabinet—but in the Cabinet he would have to face the criticism of the heads of the two great Departments who had blocked his way upwards. I do not think that is a workable system. I want to see the noble Earl master in his own house. If this Air Board is to do any good at all, it seems to me that the noble Earl should be not only the head of a great supplying department, as he will be, but that he should have power to order supplies and base them upon the needs of his policy.

I notice that since I put this Motion down a fortnight ago there has been a distinct acceleration in many directions. It is the result of what is called "pressure." I do not say that the Government had not got it under consideration, but the pressure certainly stimulated their decision. Just as three or four days before I spoke in this House on March 9 Sir David Henderson was added to the Army Council and promoted, so a few days before we have these debates in this House and in the other House the Air Board makes its appearance. I am quite aware that the Cabinet have had some very thorny subjects to discuss, and this may or may not be in their opinion as important as many others which they have had to consider. But I do wish to say on behalf of those who complain—and there are some in official circles who complain about this subject—that we have found our justification. Our action has already done some good, and I hope that what is now to be done will be productive of further good.

This question of aviation has been the subject of many Committees. There was the Committee to which the noble Earl (Lord Derby) and I belonged. That did some good; I know instances in which it did decided good. Then there is Number 2 Committee, as I will call it, which is investigating the affairs of the Royal Aircraft Factory. I should not be surprised if that Committee reported in a sense favourable to the view I hold—namely, that the Royal Aircraft Factory has been conducted in an unsatisfactory way. Then there is this Judicial Committee, before whom myself and other members of this House are going to be asked to explain what we have said. Then there is the noble Earl's Air Board, which is the Government's last and final word for the moment at any rate. What we want in regard to all these matters is to judge them by one test—How far do they help us to win the war? Raking up the embers of the past, stirring up controversies which have very nearly died down, is a bad policy. I am not going to be guilty of it myself. But if I have to go into details before this Judicial Committee I shall tell the Committee—and I am sure your Lordships will agree that I am right—that every word I say before them I shall hold myself free to repeat across the floor of this House. Hearings in camera may have some advantages, but if these Committees are to be set up to judge us on what we say in the House, we must always reserve the right to which I refer.

In regard to what is to be done in the future, I am quite aware that I and others who think like me will have to justify fully our demand for a unified system of administration and for what we want to see set up—namely, an Imperial Air Service. I am always open to be convinced that there are difficulties in carrying out any very large change in time of war. I know that to be the case. But in this matter I think the Government may well take their courage in both hands. We have had many instances during the war of the Government being accused of being, and being in reality, too late. On this occasion let them try and be, if they so regard it, too soon, just to see what it feels like. I do not believe that in most cases there is as much risk in being a little previous as in being a little too late. Even if a mistake were made in giving the Air Board more power than it possesses to-day. I do not believe that that would be running half as grave a risk as we should be running by going with timid and faltering steps along the path which eventually we will be bound to take.

I detect in Government utterances of late a certain note of anxiety. I am glad to detect that note. It shows that the Government are beginning to realise that this is a very serious question. Already a step has been taken which has my approval and also that, I am sure, of the noble Earl, Lord Derby, because it is a step which we both advocated when on the Committee. The Royal Flying Corps have taken over de Keyser's Hotel. I congratulate them or doing it. It shows a desire for freedom from the trammels of Departmental influence, and I hope it shows that Sir David Henderson and his colleagues have in view the possibility of the Air Service being cut more and more adrift from Departmental trammels. I should like to see the Royal Naval Air Service do something of the same kind. I should like to see a Fifth Lord added to the Board of Admiralty—an Air Lord to represent on that Board the views of those interested in naval aviation. There are other hotels which might be taken. They might take, for instance, the Hotel Victoria; possibly even the Savoy. I suggest that the Royal Flying Corps' hotel might be called the "Sky-scrapers' Arms," while that taken by the Royal Naval Air Service might be called the "Skimmers' Rest."

Eventually a fully fledged Air Ministry must come out of this; and when that Ministry comes—and I think it will come much sooner than most people think—it will come owing partly to the efforts of myself and people who think like me, but it will also come from the inevitable pressure of circumstances, because the more you see of this war the more you realise that it is the combats in the air and what aircraft can do that may decide it. Then sooner or later the Imperial aspect of the Air Service will arise. I know that already Australia has taken the matter up, and that a great many of the leading men of Canada are seriously considering the idea. Thus the Air Service cannot be a Service for this country only. It must be an Imperial Air Service, and it must have its counterpart in the great Dominions. All over the world the question of the supremacy of the air is being anxiously debated. In America, for instance, there is a Bill now before Congress dealing with this question. Individual States in America are organising air services, and they have got a long way already with the personnel. All over the civilised world you see increased attention being paid to this subject. I say deliberately, so far as my opinion is worth anything, that the first nation which achieves anything like supremacy in the air will have an immense advantage in war over any other. I am not going to reveal or even discuss what might be done had we that supremacy at the Front; but I say again without fear of contradiction—and I am going to prove it when I go before the Judicial Committee—that we have not got that supremacy at the Front. I do not agree with Mr. Bonar Law's declaration in the House of Commons the other day that we had supremacy at the Front and have maintained it ever since. I prefer the more sober declaration of Mr. Tennant, who said in the House of Commons on March 28—and I think this is a very fair description—that at the moment the majority of the German aeroplanes are probably faster than the majority of our own owing to their higher engine power, but that this state of affairs was being gradually altered. I think Mr. Bonar Law went far beyond what he was justified in saying.

Then eventually you will have all your frontiers to protect by your Air Service. I am proud to say that I have taken part in helping India to get aeroplanes. Some day when I am more free to do so I will read you a telegram which was sent to me when I was at Simla last year through the War Office intimating that the needs of India were not Imperial needs and that there was no necessity to have aeroplanes on the North-West Frontier. I have kept that wire as a curiosity to show the narrow view of some of the great Departments of State. I look forward to the day when the frontiers of India will be patrolled by aeroplanes, when they will go up over the Khyber and Malakand Passes to discover where the enemy exist and whether they are coming down from the hills to attack the peaceable settlements below. I think the time will come when they will be used all over Australia for police purposes. They will guard your gateways of Empire at Singapore, at Malta, and Gibraltar; they will fly over the prairies of Canada as your frontier police there, as elsewhere. It is clear that the policing in time of peace of every frontier will be the work of the aeroplane. Later on, of course, we shall come to a time—I have not the opportunity of going into it this evening—when for commercial purposes, at any rate for mails and passengers, aeroplanes will become, quite common things of the day.

If you look at my Motion on the Paper you will see that it declares that— the development of aviation for purposes of war can no longer be efficiently carried on under the present system of the divided control and responsibility of two separate Departments. I think that is absolutely true. I do not know whether the Government will accept this Motion to-night, but if there is a Division I shall be proud even if I am in a minority of one, and I think the names of those Peers who vote with me will form a roll of honour in future years. I realise that it is difficult to move a Government Department. We all know the saying, "Now is the appointed time"; but in a Government Department, as a rule, "now" is never the appointed time. The result is that, whether you look back upon aviation or upon any of the great movements of the past, it has been the official world which has been the last to accept the facts of the day. We might have had the whole of the Wright inventions in this country for a paltry sum of money. I am going to explain that to the Committee. The same kind of official complacency and neglect, I am afraid, exists to-day in other quarters. In a time of war this state of mind is more serious than it would be in time of peace, because there is a great risk in delay. We are only on the threshold of great developments in aerial warfare. No one can tell how far it is going. No one dare say that it will not have an increasing influence upon the fortunes of the war. You cannot afford to wait much longer. It is my firm belief that the first nation which organises its Air Service, which co-ordinates production and intelligently sets to work to make the third arm a great arm and a great influence in the Army, will be the nation which will eventually out-distance its neighbours.

The more we look at this war the more we see that it is fast becoming a war of exhaustion and stagnation. We cannot deny that every nation is getting short of men; it is no good blinking that fact. Aerial warfare can be carried on with the least expenditure of personnel and the maximum of result. Supposing you had 5,000 aeroplanes at the Front; if they were, all two-seated machines they would want only 10,000 men. Of course, there would be reserve men and mechanics and the other people who attend to the machines; but with aeroplanes you could do more damage to the enemy with a smaller number of men than you could do in any other way. That is a very important point, which I know the Air Board will not leave out of consideration. Sometimes in this matter one feels depressed, because one sees around one an acceptance of ideas with no real thought behind them. I feel at times, I must confess, like one who is standing at the curtained window of a room in which a sleeper lies in bed. I try to draw the curtains back and let in the dawn, and the sleeper turns lazily over and says, "Don't draw the curtains yet; it will keep me from sleeping." That has been the attitude of many people in official circles to whom I have spoken. They say, "What a horrid thing war in the air will be. Don't talk to me of it. Why cannot war go on in the nice old-fashioned gentlemanly and courteous way?" The enemy will not wait for us to accommodate ourselves to new ideas. What I have just said has been said since the beginning of time. When the bow-and-arrow was superseded by the flint-lock, and the flint-lock by "Brown Bess," and so on, everybody said "Give us the old-time gentlemanlike fighting." They will now say, "How horrible it is to be attacked from above." But that is the inevitable force of circumstances; we cannot postpone it, and we have to accommodate ourselves to this new state of things.

There is no fortification throughout the whole Empire which is adequately protected from aircraft. You have to reorganise all that. Lord Sydenham, himself a distinguished Engineer officer, knows that every fort we have throughout the Empire is practically defenceless from above. What will have to be done? This leads me to so vast a vista that I cannot discuss it this evening. But it is clear that you must at once face this peril in the air and face it boldly, or we shall be left behind to our utter ruin. The longer the war goes on the clearer it becomes that we must pay more attention to this subject of aerial warfare. Whether you look to the daily increasing accounts of combats in the air or to the enormous strides which have been made in the development of aircraft you must see that this tendency is inevitable. You cannot successfully cope with that state of things so long as you have disorganisation and want of concentration and the present jealousy and friction between the two Services. I hope that the Air Board, under the noble Earl, will be able to do much; and I can assure the noble Earl that if he comes in contact with some of his official colleagues he will have the support of both Houses of Parliament and of the country as well.

I tell you once more, my Lords, that you cannot win in the air with divided forces. I tell you with all the sincerity of which I am capable that before long every nation will be forced to create an Air Ministry by that sheer necessity which knows no law, which regards no precedent, and which fears no Government. The immense growth of aircraft in all directions will compel the creation of a new Department. The realisation that war is going to be more and more aerial in nature will be another reason. You need at home just as much as at the Front more concentration, more courage, more foresight. If you do not organise properly I tell you that before the end of the war, certainly within the lifetime of most of us here, this country will, live in a state of perpetual dread of air raids taking place, which may bring death and destruction to your borders. Is that a prospect which you can face with equanimity? I believe that this country and the Government will awake to this danger. I am confident that if we realise this peril now, the Air Minister of the future will have an easier task than the noble Earl has now. He will be able. I hope, to echo that verse of the Psalm, "Thou shalt not be afraid of the terror by night, nor for the arrow that flieth by day," for your guardian angels, your own aircraft, will preserve your homes inviolate. I beg to move.

Moved to resolve, That this House considers that the development of aviation for purposes of war can no longer be efficiently carried on under the present system of the divided control and responsibility of two separate Departments; and that the time has now arrived when the supply of men and materials should be concentrated under single control, at the same time leaving the executive power over naval and military aircraft with the Army and Navy as at present.—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)

VISCOUNT MILNER

My Lords, in rising to second this Motion I have no intention of inflicting a speech upon your Lordships. The last thing I should wish to appear to be is a jack-of-all-trades, and I am most willing to confess that I approach this subject with all the intense interest which its immense public importance imposes upon all of us, but without any claim to be more than a layman on the subject. A number of noble Lords who are anxious to speak possess greater expert knowledge than I do, and I cannot imagine why none of them was willing to undertake the duty of seconding the Motion. I do so gladly for two reasons, which I will explain in a very few sentences. The first is the deep impression which I have of the importance and extreme urgency of the question, and the second is my conviction that the present opportunity is one which should not be lost for eliciting from the Government an authoritative statement of what their policy is and what the Board of which the noble Earl opposite is chairman is exactly intended to do. That is the practical point of importance at the moment, and it is in order to give him an opportunity of enlightening us on this point that the Motion is brought forward—at least that, in my view, is the most important object which the Motion can achieve. I hope we shall have a full statement from the noble Earl, in whose power and administrative ability we all have so much confidence. I hope that comparatively little time will be spent to-night in deploring the laches and neglect of the past, and that some progress will be made in seeing our way for the future.

THE EARL OF DERBY

My Lords, I am afraid I come somewhat under the category to which the noble Viscount said he did not wish to belong, and I desire to be associated with him in not myself wishing to be a jack-of-all-trades; but having been connected with the previous Committee I hope your Lordships will not think it amiss if I make a few remarks on the subject of the Resolution which my noble friend has brought forward. If I may say so, I think the noble Lord did quite right to bring this Motion forward, for two reasons. First for the reason mentioned by the noble Viscount (Lord Milner), that it will elicit a further statement as to the policy of the new Board from the head of that Board; and, secondly, because it shows a difference from the criticisms made in another place in that this is a criticism on the part of Lord Montagu intended to be of service to the noble Earl, to the Board over which he is now presiding, and to the Service which we hope to see him reorganise. The noble Lord said he hoped the Government would accept his Resolution. So do I; and I honestly cannot see why they should not accept it, because it seems to me only to express the view which they themselves have taken in appointing this particular Board. There may be one or two points on which they slightly differ, but the general principle of the Resolution seems to me to be one which the Government have already accepted, and accepted, as I believe, for the benefit of the country.

May I give your Lordships a reminiscence? When I had the honour of being the Financial Secretary at the War Office under my noble friend Lord Midleton there was at the time in the Service a General officer whom personally I have always looked upon as one of the most brilliant officers that have ever been in His Majesty's Army. The noble Marquess will know him well—I refer to Sir Henry Brackenbury. There had been a discussion—I do not know whether my noble friend remembers it—at the time when there was a reckless fit of economy after the Boer War, on the subject of the provision of sheds, I think at Aldershot, for dirigible balloons. I had taken the line of opposing them as being an unnecessary expense. Sir Henry Bracken bury came to my room and insisted. I have never forgotten the words he used. He said— I wish you would help me to get this through. I shall not lire to see it. You may. But I believe that England is more in danger from the air than she has ever been since the Spanish Armada. That seemed to me the most extraordinary foresight. I think I did support Sir Henry Brackenbury after that, but I am afraid I was rather in the position of the sleeper to whom Lord Montagu alluded. I turned over and went to sleep again, and did not take the active interest in the Air Service which the noble Lord himself has done.

Although there have been spasmodic attempts to improve the Air Service, nobody looking back can say that there was anybody in the War Office or in the Admiralty who really took a big view of what was necessary for aircraft or put it forward as essential for our welfare; and really if I may say so—it is only fair to say it—it was left actually to a particular portion of the public Press to bring the whole question of aeronautics most prominently before the public. In my opinion if it had not been for that spirit of emulation which was secured by large prizes and which gave the opportunity to firms not to cater for the Army or Navy but to cater for what I may call commercial and sporting purposes, I am perfectly certain we should not have been in the same position—even though it may not be as good a position as we wish at the present moment—for securing the aircraft that we have as a matter of fact got. I am certain that Lord Montagu would agree with me in paying a humble tribute to the way in which our airmen have performed their duty whether they be in the Royal Flying Corps or in the Royal Naval Air Service. The development that has taken place, considering the very meagre support received from the two great Departments, the Admiralty and the War Office, is extraordinary; and I think we ought to pay a tribute to those who, with very little encouragement, have done so much to make the Air Service the success it is at the present moment and to prepare the way for the far greater success that I think it will be in the future.

As to the future, may I say that I, in the main, entirely agree with Lord Montagu. I am not going into questions of detail. I have not the technical knowledge that my noble friend has. I am speaking only as to the general principle on which the organisation of the Air Service should be run, And here, as my noble friend knows, I differ a little from him. I am not so certain as he is that the change can be made at the present moment. I may be right, or I may be wrong. I see the goal that we ought to aim at, but I am a little doubtful whether we could arrive actually at it at the present moment without disorganising the two services to such an extent as perhaps to nullify the advantage that might be gained. I am certain of one thing, that eventually the Air Service is going to play perhaps the most important part, I will not say in this war, but in the future defence of our Empire; and I am certain that any Government would be very ill-advised if it did not give to this Service all the consideration and all the assistance that it may require. There is no magic in calling the body a Ministry. There is no magic in having a Minister at the head as long as you have a body that keeps to what it wants and a head who is able to secure from the Government proper consideration and assistance.

I wish to see amalgamation into one Service, with perhaps the two wings in a way kept apart—the Army and the Navy. But I frankly see the difficulty of carrying out such a proposal at the present moment. Let me say why. You would have to alter the whole of the rates of pay, and you would have to alter, I believe, the discipline. I am not sure that you could bring men from the Admiralty under Army discipline, or the reverse. You would have to think out more carefully than is possible at the present moment on what system men would be taken into the Flying Corps. The Flying Corps cannot make a vocation in life for a man. Except for very few, the flying life of a man is comparatively short. The noble Lord will contradict me if I am wrong, but I should say that a flying man as a general rule will have finished his actual flying by the time he is thirty.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

That is rather early. It depends very much upon the individual. Some men feel young at fifty; others feel old at thirty. I think that as a matter of fact there will be administrative work to do which will fit those sort of people.

THE EARL OF DERBY

I doubt whether you will have administrative posts enough to go round for the number of men who will have finished their actual flying.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I have suggested several times that these men should to a large extent be used in the Anti-Aircraft Corps. Let the bird shoot at the bird later on.

THE EARL OF DERBY

If you are taking men into the Service, it must be very carefully thought out beforehand what their future is to be. You cannot do anything so unfair as when a man is no longer fit for flying through no fault of his own then to turn him adrift without any vocation. So that this is a question which has to be thought of. I feel, therefore, that in this matter you must be content to go comparatively slowly as long as you go in the right direction, and personally I believe that the formation of Lord Curzon's Board is a step in the right direction.

If I may, I will say a word with reference to the Committee of which I was for a time chairman. I accepted that post with a full knowledge that I was absolutely unacquainted with anything connected with the air, and the Reference that we had clearly showed me that it would be possible to accept the chairmanship without such a knowledge, because our sole duty consisted, as far as I could make out, in preventing overlapping by the two Services in the competition for machines, and endeavouring as far as we could to provide for a further and a greater output. I endeavoured, on the first occasion after I was so appointed, to disabuse the minds of those who thought that the acceptance of that particular office meant that I had accepted the post of Air Minister. Later on my noble friend Lord Montagu—I happened not to be in England at the time, so was not able to be present at the debate—brought forward a Motion, and I think my noble friend Lord Lansdowne rather thought that I had underestimated the powers which the Committee possessed. Well, I thought after that, that probably I was wrong, and that I would see whether I had the powers which the noble Marquess thought I had. Lord Montagu then joined the Committee. I soon found that my own reading of my powers was right; and I was confirmed in that by a reference that I made to Mr. Balfour, the First Lord of the Admiralty, who took the same view as I did of these particular powers. My powers as regards an Air Ministry were nil, except to the extent of preventing overlapping which I am glad to say, owing to the common sense of those administering the Air Departments both of the Army and of the Navy, had already been overcome. Beyond that we had absolutely no power whatever. It was obvious, therefore, to my mind that we were, so to speak, serving under a false flag, and that it was much better to resign, as my noble friend and I did, and let the Government consider the desirability, indeed the necessity, of forming a Board with far greater powers; and if they could not then give the fullest powers, to be at all events prepared to consider the extension of those powers as might be thought necessary.

Let me show, if I may, how little power there was. First of all we were told to co-ordinate design and co-ordinate the placing of orders for output. It is absolutely essential, if you are going to have coordination of design or to co-ordinate the placing of contracts, to have the designing branch and the contracts branch of the Army and Navy in the same building working with each other. But instantly that arrangement was proposed it was negatived. I was able to secure one small advantage which I hope will be of benefit to the noble Earl. Sir David Henderson, who had far more power as representing the Army on the Committee than the Admiralty representative had, met me in every possible way, and at my request got the Army Council to appoint a Committee, of which at my suggestion Sir Richard Burbidge was the chairman, with Sir Frederick Donaldson and Sir Charles Parsons, to inquire into the working of the air craft factory at Farnborough, of which I confess I had not heard any too good accounts. But although I was chairman of the Committee, I could only get this Committee of Inquiry appointed by the good will of Sir David Henderson and the Army Council, although it was essential that such a matter should be inquired into. I hope, therefore, that the House will see that I did not resign from the Committee, in which I should have taken the greatest interest, without feeling that it was impossible to keep such a position without explaining to the country how powerless we actually were to perform the duties which they thought we were called upon to perform.

The chief difficulty with regard to my Committee, and the chief difficulty, it seems to me, which my noble friend opposite (Lord Curzon) will find, is that there is no definite air service policy laid down as to what the Army wing has to do and what the Navy wing has to do, and regarding the question of such things as long-distance bombing, and so on. Until that is definitely laid down I defy any Committee to carry out properly the haphazard policy which seems to exist at the present moment. I am therefore delighted to think that this Air Board is now formed with the noble Earl, a member of the Cabinet, as its president, and I hope by that means it will secure at once a definite policy to which both wings, Army and Navy, can work with all the energy which we know they can display. Lord Montagu said there were only two independent members of this Board. That surely is wrong. If I am not mistaken, there are three. There is the noble Earl, Lord Curzon; there is Lord Sydenham; and there is Major Baird, who is to answer for the Department in the House of Commons.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I did not include Major Baird, because to a certain extent he is an official. He is secretary to Mr. Bonar Law.

THE EARL OF DERBY

I do not think I should call that position official, and I should be prepared to accept Major Baird as a third independent person. But be that as it may, I hope the House will recognise, as I do, the great advance we have made in securing that in this House and in the other House there shall be Ministers directly responsible for the Air Service, to whom questions can be addressed and who can answer some of those rash statements that are occasionally made and prevent them spreading, and who will, I believe, be able to a very large extent to reassure the public, who are now undoubtedly—I will not say frightened; that is not the correct word—but somewhat uneasy with regard to the various statements that are being made detrimental to the Air Service.

We have not had the advantage in this House as yet of hearing an exact statement as to the position of all the members of the new Board, but it seems to me that what happened on the Committee of which I was chairman is to a certain extent happening to the noble Earl's Board—that is, that the War Office representative has more power and is more in touch with the higher authorities in the War Office than is the Admiralty representative with the Admiralty.

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON)

It is one of the conditions of the composition of the Board that the senior representative of the Admiralty is to be a member of the Board of Admiralty, just as General Sir David Henderson is a member of the Army Council. It was in that capacity that Admiral Tudor, the Third Sea Lord, attended yesterday the meeting of our Board.

THE EARL OF DERBY

I thank the noble Earl for his correction. I had understood from the statement made in the House of Commons that the representative of the Admiralty was only to attend the Board of Admiralty when air matters were discussed. As I understand it now, the two representatives have absolute equality of power. I confess that this to a great extent removes one of the objections that I entertained. May I, in conclusion, say that I am very glad that this matter has been brought forward, and is at last receiving the full attention of His Majesty's Government. I am glad that the noble Earl has been appointed to the chairmanship of the new Board. I am afraid I cannot offer him the same technical help and knowledge that Lord Montagu can, but he knows that anything I can do to assist him I shall be only too ready to do. There is one thing that I am sure he will allow me to say without thinking it impertinent, and that is that I wish him all possible success in his new office because I realise that his success in that office will mean success to our Armies in the field.

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE)

My Lords, I intervene for a moment in this debate in place of my noble friend beside me (Lord Curzon), because as the hour is late and I am aware that there are other noble Lords who desire to take part in the discussion, I think it might profitably be adjourned, and then my noble friend, at a more suitable time of day, will be able to make the full statement which he is prepared to give to the House. I trust therefore, after I have said a few words, and, if time serves, other noble Lords have taken part, that the adjournment of the debate until to-morrow may then be moved.

The noble Viscount (Lord Milner) stated that he had no desire to be regarded as a jack-of-all-trades. We, unfortunately, on this Bench are perpetually obliged to be jacks-of-all-trades and to do the best we can in a great many various capacities. But I have no desire to attempt to cover most of the ground that has been touched upon in the interesting speeches to which we have listened. Almost the only fault I had to find individually with the speech of my noble friend Lord Montagu was that he seemed, he himself being deeply, immersed in this subject, almost to assume that nobody on this side of the House recognises that it possesses any importance. He almost seemed to imply that the Government had shown and was continuing to show complete and most unworthy indifference to the future of the Air Service. My noble friend who spoke last gave us, I think, rather more credit for doing our best to bring about such improvement as we can, in particular by the appointment of the new Air Board with my noble friend Lord Curzon to preside over it.

As regards the composition of the Board, there are one or two points which I think ought to be made clear. Lord Montagu spoke of the position that my noble friend would be placed in if he did not agree with the other members of his Board. My noble friend cannot be placed in that position. This is not a Board that votes; it is advisory, as my noble friend knows, and there is no question of agreement or disagreement. If he disagrees with his colleagues, he has his own way. It is, of course, possible for the representative of one of the great Departments, assuming him to differ from my noble friend behind me, to take the case to the Secretary of State for War or to the First Lord of the Admiralty, and for the matter, at their instance, to be brought before the War Committee, whose decision in such a case is final. But there is no question of my noble friend being outvoted, as would appear from the way in which Lord Montagu put the case; and it is therefore not true to state that he is not master in his own house. He is absolutely master in his own house He is not completely master in other people's houses—the War Office and the Admiralty—but so far as his own Board is concerned he is supreme there, subject to the appeal to the War Committee which I have already described. Lord Montagu spoke of the appointment of the legally constituted Committee to consider certain statements that had been made. That Committee was appointed, as we know, in pursuance of a promise made by the Under-Secretary—

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

By Mr. Tennant.

THE MARQUESS OF CREWE

By Mr. Tennant—precisely—in order to deal with certain charges of a somewhat rhetorical and definitely damaging kind which had been made against the Department in another place, charges which, if they were to be taken literally, were of a most serious character. I have no doubt that valuable information will be brought out in the examination before that Committee, particularly as my noble friend opposite says that he proposes to give evidence there. But it has no definite bearing on the work of my noble friend's Board, and it ought, of course, to be considered as an entirely separate matter. I have no wish to go back upon the past history of the Committee which has been alluded to by Lord Montagu and Lord Derby. I confess I had been under the impression that their resignation of their functions had been somewhat hurried and might have been delayed or even altogether averted. I recognise the force of what both noble Lords said. They imagined when they joined the Committee that their functions would be somewhat more solid and far-reaching in character than proved to be the case. I do not know, and indeed I have no right to ask, whether either of the noble Lords made any attempt to get those functions enlarged in the direction in which they have been somewhat enlarged now that my noble friend behind me presides over the Board. But that is not an important point, except in so far as it may conceivably affect the opinion which may be held whether their resignation at the time was absolutely necessary.

Lord Montagu said that what was required was an air policy, and my noble friend who spoke last said something to the same effect. So far as I was able to apprehend Lord Montagu's point of view, he seemed to bass his opinion of the lack of a policy on the fact that the whole Air Service is conducted by two separate Departments, and not sufficiently unified. I think it is important not to ignore the example of other countries. What has taken place in France has become pretty well known to the public through the issue of various pamphlets and papers which have been largely circulated, giving an account of the formation of an Air Ministry there and the subsequent abandonment of that plan in favour of a return to a Military Air Director. As regards the case of Germany I am imperfectly informed, but my impression is that in Germany, whose conditions are, I take it, more parallel to our own than those of any other country, the two Services are kept entirely distinct, working, no doubt, with a certain degree of co-operation, but not, so far as I know, under any combined authority except, no doubt that of the Emperor himself.

THE EARL OF DERBY

Are they not under one common authority for supplies?

THE MARQUESS OF CREWE

I am afraid I cannot answer my noble friend's question. I mentioned the case of Germany, as to which I found it hard to obtain information, more in the hope that some noble Lord might later in the course of the debate be able to tell us precisely what the position in Germany is. Lord Montagu said, very truly, that the one single test of the merit of any system for the Air Service, as indeed for all other Services, is—How far will it help us to win the war? What is the plan that will show us the shortest road to victory? The noble Earl (Lord Derby) does not take precisely the same view of the possibility, or indeed the present advantage, of the completely unified Service that Lord Montagu does. He sees the practical difficulties in getting anything like a complete unification, which have no doubt occurred to most people who have considered the subject even superficially. There is the crux of forming an entirely new personnel wherein men cease to be either soldiers or sailors, losing all their pension rights, and losing, as the noble Earl pointed out, a vast number of opportunities which are open for men who have served in the Navy and in the Army. Those questions are obviously of very great difficulty, and it certainly does seem at first sight that to attempt to solve them in the middle of a war would be an act of great rashness, and one which, indeed, could only be justified by greater chances of success than appear on the surface likely to be attained.

My noble friend Lord Montagu puts the future of aircraft very high. I remember that in his last speech we were all greatly impressed by the visions that he held out of the possibility of the main conduct of futures wars being in the air rather than by sea or on land. He takes, indeed, as wide and enthusiastic a view of possibilities of the future as did the hero of Tennyson's famous poem written 70 or 80 years ago, when he foretold something of what is going on now in the air above us. It is quite true, of course, that one of the difficulties which in ordinary peace times would attend the attempt to increase our Air Fleet on a very large scale does not now exist. In ordinary times the country is willing to pay a certain sum towards national defence, but it will not pay an unlimited amount. In the old days, when we had discussions about Universal Service one of the arguments which always seemed to be the strongest against it was that if £10,000,000 or £15,000,000 or £20,000,000 were going to be spent on the Army, there would be a movement pro tanto, or at any rate to some extent, to diminish the Vote for the Navy; and I have no doubt that if my noble friend's visions were realised and the Air Service became the prime object of attention for purposes of national defence, both the War Office and the Admiralty Votes might be impinged on in order to bring the Air Fleet up to what my noble friend thinks adequate. It is quite true that now those considerations would not be borne in mind. If it were possible at this moment to create at short notice a large and overwhelming Air Fleet of the kind my noble friend hopes for, I have no doubt that the cost would not stand in the way, although, as we all know, we have to think, and we shall have to think as we go on, more and more, about the actual cost of carrying on the war even in the matter of military and naval supplies.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

I have pointed out in this House and elsewhere that you could build 1,700 aeroplanes for the cost of one Dreadnought.

THE MARQUESS OF CREWE

It is quite true, as my noble friend says, that the cost of the machines and the cost even of a large machine is a mere flea-bite compared with the cost of even a small cruiser. But there are all the other problems of a large Service which, my noble friend knows, would add greatly to the expense. But, as I say, in these times, supposing it to be found possible to increase the Air Fleet almost indefinitely, I have no doubt that considerations of cost would not be allowed to stand in the way.

One word as regards the terms of the Motion, which my noble friend Lord Derby seemed to think that it would be possible for us to accept. I fear that that is not possible. If the noble Earl will look at the terms of the Motion—" This House considers that the development of aviation for purposes of war can no longer be efficiently carried on under the present system of the divided control and responsibility of two separate Departments"—he will see that this suggestion goes considerably beyond what His Majesty's Government have done in appointing my noble friend's Board. I fear, therefore, that to accept the Motion on the understanding that it was merely a Motion of gratitude and praise to us for what we had done would be going beyond the mark. My impression is that my noble friend Lord Montagu means a great deal more. I am afraid, therefore, that it is not possible for us to accept the Motion, at any rate in the form in which he has put it on the Paper.

THE EARL OF DERBY

Does not the noble Marquess think that the last part of the Motion modifies it to a great extent—" at the same time leaving the executive power over naval and military aircraft with the Army and Navy as at present"?

THE MARQUESS OF CREWE

I am afraid it goes a great deal further. But no doubt my noble friend (Lord Curzon) will develop that more fully when he speaks to-morrow.

LORD NORTHCLIFFE

My Lords, I should not trouble your Lordships at so late an hour did I not feel that in all these discussions we have a little lost sight of the urgent need for speed in these matters. I am sure, however, that this somewhat shadowy Board must develop into an Air Ministry. As one noble Lord remarked, "It will come from outside pressure." Personally, I have criticised the composition of this Board, but I entirely agree with the noble Viscount, Lord Milner, that we must sink our differences and give it the utmost support in our power. For that reason I am attending the Board on Friday.

There are several things to my mind absolutely essential for the success of the Board. The first is that it should have its own Board of Inventions. At the present time, to my knowledge, doubtless owing to great pressure at Victory House, inventors who may have revolutionary and beneficent schemes under consideration have to wait for weeks and even for months before they can get a decision. It happens that the particular machine we are discussing to-night was invented, not by aeronauts, but by two young men who were bicycle repairers. They published their scheme to the world, they communicated with all the great aeronautical societies of the world, and no notice was taken of it. In the same way it is more than possible that one or two or three of the great revolutions necessary for the flying machine may be in the mind of some person in this country to-day, and we must remember that this machine is infinitely more important to us than to any other nation in the world. This machine has entirely changed the position of our kingdom from being an island to being part of the Continent. We cannot, therefore, model our Air Ministry on that of any other country. I would urgently suggest to the noble Earl who is undertaking this very arduous task that one of the first changes he makes should be to establish his own Board of Inventions and see that inventions are carefully and quickly examined.

Another suggestion I make is that much greater encouragement be given to manufacturers. A few weeks ago I knew of a factory that was crying for work. We cannot expect to build up establishments to enable us to cope with the comparatively small German output of aeroplanes—small by comparison with what we shall certainly require—unless the Government offer financial assistance to worthy manufacturers able to guarantee a proper output. People talk as if we shall require 10,000, 20,000, 30,000, or 50,000 aeroplanes. I conceive that it must be essential, and probably before the end of this war—for I take a rather longer view of the war than some of our friends—I contend it is essential that we put the aeroplane construction business on a footing where the new Air Minister will be able to get as many machines as he requires when and where he requires them. The system of construction in Germany is to give out the work in part to manufacturers all over the Empire. These parts are then assembled at great central factories, with the result that the whole of each part of an aeroplane is produced by a specialist. That is not the case here. We give orders for aeroplanes to numbers of manufacturers; and they turn out aeroplanes as good as any in the world. We know that. But they are produced to my knowledge more slowly, and I should imagine at a greater cost. The system of central assemblage of parts is one that is adopted in almost every great manufacturing industry in the world, and I think it is essential to the aeroplane industry.

Yet another suggestion I desire to make is better and increased provision for the training of flying men. This is the time of year when men can be taught flying in the greatest numbers, and in half the time that is required in the windy months of winter. I regard it as so urgent that we should increase our flying men, and as rapidly as possible, that I think we ought to adopt the policy inaugurated by the practical inventors of the aeroplane, who, when they came to Europe and found that ours was a difficult country to fly in by reason of our winds, took a careful look round the likely places in Europe and settled to teach Frenchmen to fly, and chose Pau, close to the Pyrenees, because they knew that it was almost the most windless place near any great military centre. I believe if we defer the training of large bodies of men until the autumn and winter we shall be lamentably short next year, when there will be a great need.

We have proved already in this war that the machines are sometimes inferior, and sometimes, it is true, superior; but we have proved that from the beginning of flying we have had a national aptitude for it. That was found by the inventors of the aeroplane directly they came to Europe. I knew them both well, and I knew their admiration and respect for the adaptability of our people. Because, probably, we are accustomed to the sea, we are able to navigate the air. They held our flying men in the highest esteem. Unfortunately we have not shown that interest in this most vital question to our nation that we should; but I do think that our new Air Minister, for such I consider him to be, such, I think, the Germans will make him, could do no better service than, first, to encourage inventors; secondly, to develop manufacture; and, thirdly, to provide far greater training facilities for our flying men.

Moved, That the debate be adjourned.—(Viscount Galway.)

On Question, the further debate adjourned till To-morrow, and to be taken first.

House adjourned at twenty minutes before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.