§ 61. Mr. J. Arbuthnotasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what steps have been taken by his Department to satisfy themselves that the loss of the submarine "Affray" was not due to collision with the trawler "Twilit Waters," which was in the Channel, was reported overdue on 19th April and wreckage from which has been recovered; and whether he can give an assurance that the area likely to have been traversed by this vessel is being included in the search.
§ Mr. CallaghanThe possibility that the two disasters were connected has been investigated, but the area in which the trawler was known to be fishing and in which wreckage from her was found is far west of where the submarine could reasonably have been. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport has ordered a formal investigation into the loss of "Twilit Waters." Meanwhile, I would point out that the trawler's last message was sent on 11th April, and that "Affray" did not leave Portsmouth until 16th April.
It is not proposed to extend the "Affray" search so far to the west, but to continue in the more probable areas to which my hon. Friend referred in his reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Gosport (Surgeon Lieut.-Commander Bennett) on Wednesday, 30th May. If there is no result in these areas the matter 180W will be reviewed and a further decision taken.
67. Surgeon Lieut.-Commander Bennettasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty upon what evidence his Department has satisfied itself that H.M. Submarine "Affray" was not lost in, or as a result of, collision.
§ Mr. CallaghanIt is unlikely that a heavy merchant ship could be in collision with H.M. Submarine "Affray" without being aware of it in the calm weather of the night of 16th April. Lloyds were asked on 19th April to investigate whether any of the ships which passed through the area at the time showed signs of damage. They have replied that 34 ships passed through the area, and that no report of damage has been received.
68. Surgeon Lieut.-Commander Bennettasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what further areas have been and are to be searched for H.M. Submarine "Affray"; what results have so far been obtained; and what information he has as to whether the recently discovered area of oil in the eastern part of the Channel is likely to have emanated from that ship.
§ Mr. CallaghanAbout half the new southern area mentioned by my hon. Friend on 30th May has now been searched. It is intended to search an area to the north of the main one when that to the south is complete. Diving on likely contacts continues, but all investigated so far have proved to be wrecks of surface ships. I do not consider that the oil found off the French coast can be from "Affray." It is over 100 miles to the north and east of "Affray's" last known position when she was on a westward course.