§ LORD D'ABERNON rose to ask His Majesty's Government what measure they have taken or contemplate for the provision of safe, economical, and rapid sea communication with the Empire after the war; whether the enlargement or reconstruction 618 of harbours along the great ocean routes has been or will be considered in this connection; and if so, by what Department.
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, the object of the Question which stands in my name is to ascertain the attitude of His Majesty's Government on the subject of sea communication within the Empire after the war, particularly in relation to the enlargement and improvement of harbours along the great ocean trade routes and the provision of adequate dry-dock accommodation. In the course of the inquiry made throughout the Empire by the Dominions Royal Commission two conclusions stood out as being of vital importance to the development of the future trade of the Empire. First, that safety, economy, and speed in sea communication deserved far greater consideration and more scientific forethought from the Governments of the various States of the Empire than they had hitherto received; and, secondly, that it is impossible to create or organise efficient ocean transport unless, as a preliminary, the harbours of the Empire have been developed under a co-ordinated and scientific plan.
§ In last analysis, it is the size and particularly the depth of harbour accommodation which determine the dimensions of the vessels which can use a given route, and both the speed and economy of transport depend upon them. If any one harbour on a given ocean route is inadequate to receive vessels of deep draught, this fact involves a reduction in the maximum size of vessels using the route, or prevents them being loaded to their full capacity. A reduction in size carries with it a reduction of speed, increased cost of carriage, and diminished safety. It cannot be made too clear that size and deep draught are essential both to speed and to economy. It is important that this should be clearly recognised at a time when small vessels are advocated on the principle of splitting risks. As I say, size and deep draught are essential, and I think that all maritime authorities recognise the importance during war of having large vessels with a great steaming radius carrying coal sufficient to carry them large distances to the next coaling station.
§ I would urge the noble Lords who take an interest in the technical side of this question, which is very complicated, to devote their attention to the Report of the Dominions Royal Commission on this subject, and to the special Memorandum 619 of Sir H. Biles, who is, I think, one of the highest authorities on the design of shipping. There are two reasons why it is urgent to bring this matter to your Lordships notice. Firstly, because under the stress and pressure of war necessity a large number of standard vessels are being pressed forward towards completion in order to meet the immediate exigencies of the submarine situation. These ships, although probably the best that cm be constructed in the present circumstances, will certainly prove inadequate to the requirements of the great ocean routes after the war. The public are apt to expect too much from mere standardisation. The word has a reassuring sound, but its real merit depends entirely upon what you standardise. Considered by itself, standardisation is rather a retarding than accelerating force; so that more standardisation is not sufficient to produce progress on scientific lines. I have full confidence in the practical commercial ability of the Shipping Controller, but it is impossible for him or for anyone else to devise really suitable ships for the future traffic of the Empire unless the harbour conditions of the Empire have been previously determined. Designing ships in ignorance of the future harbour conditions is akin to specifying rolling stock for a line without knowing what the height of the tunnels and bridges is to be. You may hit off the best type of vehicle, but it is immeasurably improbable.
§ The second reason why I have brought the question forward is the increasing importance which attaches to high speed in commercial vessels owing to the submarine menace. The comparative immunity of fast vessels is, I believe, one of the most remarkable features of recent experience, and it is clear that if convoying is adopted speed will play even a greater part than now. High speed postulates and compulsorily involves larger vessels, and large vessels are obviously impracticable without large and deep harbours. On this count, therefore, we are again brought to the conclusion that no wise decision is possible on ship design until harbour conditions have been determined.
§ I do not propose on the present occasion to go into details regarding the harbours either of this country or of the Dominions or Colonies. It will suffice to say that a comparatively small expenditure now on scientific lines would repay itself many fold in the interests of the Empire by increasing the safety, the economy, and the 620 speed of Imperial communications. Perhaps I may be allowed to give one instance. On the great route from the United Kingdom to New Zealand and Australia, via the Cape, a route which has been increasingly used since the war, a maximum expenditure of £5,000,000 would fundamentally alter the capabilities of that route, so that the cost of transport could be largely reduced and the speed of vessels considerably increased, increased speed carrying with it increased immunity from attack. The total cost would only equal that of a few hundred miles of railway, and be less than the cost of one day of war. Of this maximum expenditure of £5,000,000 I think about £3,000,000 would have to be spent on the harbour at Capetown, and a very small portion of the balance would bring the other harbours along the route to accommodate vessels of 38 feet draught.
§ On another route—from Australia and New Zealand to the United Kingdom via the Panama Canal—an expenditure of less than £250,000 would make this route much more practicable than it is to-day for large and fast vessels, so that liners using the Cape route to Australia could complete their voyage round the world calling at Jamaica and Halifax. It would on these lines be easy to create a new Imperial mail service round the world, connecting the United Kingdom with South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, the West Indies, and Canada. Owing to the foresight of those responsible for the Panama Canal, that waterway has been already brought up to the required standard. Noble Lords know that the Panama Canal was designed on much more far-seeing lines than any previous work of a similar character, and it is probable that the original design will not have to be enlarged, as is necessary in the case of the Suez Canal.
§ I venture to think that when you can get a great mail route for the Empire far superior to anything now in existence and likely to lead to the construction of vessels far more useful during wartime than any now sailing, the matter should be examined into closely, and, if feasible, the work should be put in hand at once. Every day of delay means loss of money and of efficiency. I hope that His Majesty's Government will take steps to have the problem considered promptly, and that consideration may lead to rapid and effective action on broad and far-seeing lines.
621§ EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTONMy Lords, nobody can fail to realise the capital importance of the Question to which the attention of your Lordships has been called by the noble Lord who has just addressed you. The improvement of sea communications throughout the Empire, and the provision of suitable harbours along those routes—either by the construction of new harbours or by the enlargement of existing one—is clearly an Imperial necessity. It is so now; it has been so for long; and, for the reasons which were mentioned by the noble Lord in his short but apposite speech, it will be even more so when the war comes to an end.
The noble Lord alluded with great modesty to the labours of the Royal Commission over which he himself presided, and which, in the years immediately preceding the war, visited almost every part of the Empire in discharge of the duty which had been laid upon them. I do not know whether the Report of that Royal Commission has received more attention at the hands of your Lordships than commonly awaits similar Reports from Commissions not less useful; but I can say, having made some study of the document itself, that it seems to me to be one of the most important contributions to Imperial solidarity in the future that has emanated from any source during the last decade. The noble Lord alluded more particularly to the Memorandum by Sir John Biles, the well-known naval constructor. But I might call the attention of your Lordships to the chapter in the Report which deals with this subject specially—chapter 9—where, in twenty or thirty pages of print, the whole case made by the noble Lord is clearly stated. There you see demonstrated to what extent the life of the Empire depends on its sea communications, and it is clearly shown how the development of these routes and the cheapening of transport upon them will have a double effect. First, it will give a great impetus to Imperial trade; secondly, it will add to the strength and cohesion of the Empire as a whole by strengthening the links and accelerating the rapidity of communication between its different parts.
Nobody knows better than the noble Lord that, valuable as were the labours of his Commission, this is not the first time that the matter has been considered 622 by Governments in this country. Resolutions upon the subject were passed at the Imperial Conferences that were held in London in 1907 and 1911; and, looking through the Report of the Imperial War Conference which was held the other day in London and at which the Prime Ministers or other representatives of our leading Dominions assisted, I find that a resolution was there carried, on the motion of Sir Robert Borden, the Prime Minister of the Dominion of Canada, advocating concerted action in the provision of an adequate food supply and arrangments for its transport when and where required. A little later in the Report of that Conference—which has been laid as a Parliamentary Paper—you will find notice of a resolution in the name of Sir Joseph Ward (which was not discussed and passed only because there was no time to include it in the proceedings, but about which I believe there was absolute unanimity on the part of the members of the Conference) in favour of improved mail services and harbour accommodation in the different parts of the Empire.
Therefore the noble Lord, in presenting his Report to Parliament and in bringing it to our notice this afternoon is, I can assure him preaching only to the converted. At the same time nobody will realise more quickly than he that this is a matter which cannot be dealt with off-hand or all in a moment. There are a good many things going on in connection with the war, and a good deal of labour is placed upon the shoulders of those who belong to His Majesty's Government. Further, this question is not one which can be settled, so to speak, by a stroke of the pen by His Majesty's Government alone. It requires careful consideration with the various Departments of Government that are concerned at home and also with the Dominion Governments in different parts of the world.
In reply to the last part of the Question of the noble Lord, to which he did not allude in making his remarks just now, in its purely British aspect this work will no doubt fall within the purview of the Ministry of Reconstruction which your Lordships are about to set up. In its Imperial aspect it will provide a matter for consideration between the Government here and the various Administrations of the Dominions in all parts of the Empire. The matter will not be lost sight of; and, if we exhibited 623 any inclination to forget it, I am sure that we may trust the noble Lord to bring it again to the recollection of the Government and of this House.