§ VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOOD rose to ask what is meant by the abandonment of ratios and the substitution of a policy of programmes in reference to naval limitations; and to move for Papers. The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I desire to put the Question and make the Motion which stand in my name.
§ THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY)My Lords, I venture to give the noble Viscount the reply to the Question of which he has very kindly given me Notice, which is on the Paper and is more or less in the nature of a starred Question. During the conversations with the United States of America and Japanese representatives, beginning in October, 1934, His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom reached the conclusion that it would not be possible to make any agreement in replacement of the Washington and London Naval Treaties which contained an expression of the principle of ratios of naval strength. In the opinion of His Majesty's Government the only hope of preserving some form of quantitative limitation lies in eliminating from any future treaty figures which appear to constitute a ratio as between the various signatory Powers, and to substitute for these existing treaty engagements on this point a system under which each Power would make a voluntary and unilateral declaration of its construction programme for a period of years, say, 1937–1942.
It was proposed that these declarations should not have the force or form of contractual obligations. Nevertheless, the 881 construction figures appearing in the programmes would require to be concerted beforehand between the Powers, and it would further be necessary that each Power should undertake in its declaration not to modify its announced building programme without giving previous notice of, say, at least one year, to other Powers making similar declarations. This proposal was made to the Japanese and the United States of America's representatives before they returned to their countries and has also been described to the other signatories of the Washington Treaty.
There has been no change in the policy of His Majesty's Government, who, so far as they are concerned, would gladly see a continuation of the system of limitation embodied in the Washington Treaty, but if we are to avoid a race in naval armaments after Naval Treaties come to an end in 1936, account must obviously be taken of the desires and susceptibilities of countries holding other views. The purpose of His Majesty's Government in recent negotiations has been to evolve, in consultation with those Powers, a system of limitation which, while avoiding the expression in contractual form of a definite relationship of naval strength between the various naval Powers, would offer certain guarantees against the resumption of unrestricted and competitive building. In addition to this proposal for quantitative limitation, His Majesty's Government consider it to be of the utmost importance to reach agreement on qualitative limitations to replace those in the Treaties which expire on the 31st December, 1936.
§ VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOODMy Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Marquess for his answer. I understand that the Government think it would not be in the public interest to debate the matter any further, and therefore I ask leave to withdraw my Motion, but I hope my noble friends will not understand that as any profession of satisfaction with the policy which the Government are pursuing.
§ Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.