CONTROL CONDEMNED

Grey River Argus, 20 March 1940, Page 7

CONTROL CONDEMNED

Are Losses Understated ? A LABOURITE’S CHARGE. [British Official Wireless! RUGBY, March 18. Sir John Gilmour spoke in a debate on an Opposition motion in the House of Commons,, regretting the absence of efficiency and foresight in the administration of his Ministry of Shipping and calling for the speedy expansion of the shipbuilding programme. . The Labour spokesman (Mr Chinwell) severely criticised the Minister’s control of shipping which he distinguished from nationalisation —- and alleged that there had been serious misdirection of tonnage, and waste or misuse of specialised facilities. He voiced concern at what he considered the tardiness in full utilisation of shipbuilding resources, to make good more rapidly the losses inflicted by enemy action. While disowning any wish to bring comfort to the enemy, Mr Shinwell expressed the opinion that the Government statements of shipping losses gave an unduly favourable impression. On the one hand, the total was swollen by including a number of large liners, either laid up or of small cargo capacity, while on the other hand the | figure of the losses was confined to the I tonnage of ships actually sunk by the enemy, and overlooked many damaged, either in enemy attack or in other ways, while ships under repair were in effect lost as effective tonnage. Mr Shinwell, on this basis, argued that the total losses in the first six months of the war might amount to as much as 750,000 tons. Sir John Gilmour (the Minister of Shipping) in reply, paid a tribute to the wonderful spirit in which the men of the mercantile marine were responding to the calls made upon them, despite the violent and inhumane enemy attacks to which they were exposed. He described the measures taken to supply merchant vessels with more safety devices, with means of self-defence against illegal Nazi warfare, and more wireless operators. The Admiralty and War Office were giving every assistance in . arming merchantmen, and the best j progress possible had been made, con- . sistent with obvious difficulties of supply. Under the scheme for assistance to shipbuilding, which came into effect before the war, loans for over £4,750,00'0 had been granted in respect of 55 new vessels. Mr Graham White, for the Liberal Opposition, urged the necessity to j give means of self-defence, without j delay, to ail ships, large or small. Mr Geoffrey Shakespeare (Parlia- i mentary and Financial Secretary to[ £ the Admiralty), said that although.! the industry suffered a severe slump I after the last war, the much criticis- i ed rationalisation, which started in i 1930, had stood the industry in good f stead. He averred that the poten- e tial capacity of British shipyards was a not less than the highest peak in s 1914 to 1918. At the outset of the 8 present war, there was upwards of 900,000 tons of naval, and about 750,000 tons of merchant tonnage, under construction, and since then the Admiralty and Shipping Ministry greatly stimulated, orders of both , classes of ships. The Admiralty, having taken responsibility for shipbuilding as in the last war, was able to strike a balance between the country’s needs for warships and merchant j ships. J

Continuing, Mr Shakespeare stated that the services of Mr Westwood, general secretary of the Ship Construction and Shipwrights’ Union, had been secured by the Admiralty, for dealing with labour problems, and he added that his own experience of negotiations with trades union leaders had shown him that their purpose was identical with' that of the Government, in the prosecution of the war.

Mr Shakespeare explained that there were still 6,000 skilled men unemployed, and stated that negotiations were in progress to provide modern training for these men, with a view to their absorption in the industry, employment in which, he said, had grown from 9,000 to 131,000. This, he said, was a considerable advance, and did not call for too much optimism, as the men had been mainly engaged upon work consequent on the commission or conversion of ships, both naval and merchantile, to war purposes.

Questioned as to the maximum of the output of merchantmen aimed at Mr Shakespeare replied: “I want to give the broadest answer I can, without disclosing actual figures. I can say that we intend to achieve the maximum capacity of which the shipyards are capable, subject to the governing factors of labour and material, and we certainly hope to achieve a rate far in advance of the annual rate of sinkings to be expected from the enemy.” When the results of certain surveys now proceeding were known, the First Lord would make a statement. The debate is proceeding.