CONDUCT OF THE WAR

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 192, 10 May 1940, Page 9

CONDUCT OF THE WAR

Further Attacks On Cabinet Members (British Official Wireless and Press Assn.) • LONDON, May 8. The Dominions High Commissioners, including Mr. Jordan (New Zealand) were in the crowded galleries when the debate' was continued. Resuming the debate, Mr. Herbert Morrison (Labour} prefaced his criticisms by declaring that on neither side was the House actuated by .partisanship or personal considerations. The issue was far too serious for that. The Government, however, ought to have known enough of the ways, habits, probabilities, and intentions of Hitler to have anticipated the attack upon Norway. “In the eyes of the world Britain’s prestige has been badly let down,” he said. “I wonder whether the Government, instead of taking this business seriously, is merely discharging a moral obligation and protecting themselves from criticism. How near must we get to disaster before the Ministry tries to understand Hitler’s psychology? We must understand that we are fighting an enemy who is not worried very much about neutral rights. It was most unwise to tell Hitler that we were going to lay mines before laying them. We should have laid the mines first and told the world afterward. Is the First Lord of the Admiralty being used as a shield for the Prime Minister? It is unfair to overburden Mr. Churchill with responsibility for policy.”

Criticizing the personnel of the Government, he said it was felt that the whole spirit, temper, and temperament of the Ministers had been wrong, inadequate, and unsuitable. He referred particularly to Mr. Chamberlain, Sir John Simon, and Sir Samuel Hoare. More than any other three men, they were responsible for not avoiding war. They lacked the courage, initiative, imagination, and liveliness in the conduct of foreign policy, and lack of these qualities was again manifesting itself in the actual conduct of the war. “I feel that if these men remain in office we will run grave risk of losing the war,” he said. When Mr. Morrison announced that Labour would divide the House, Mr. Chamberlain declared: “This challenge has made the occasion graver still. I accept the primary responsibility for the actions of the Government, and my colleagues will not be slow to accept their responsibilities.” But this, he said, was not a case of any personal consideration, because no one would for a moment desire to hold office a moment longer than he retained the confidence of the House. “This is a time,” he added, “when we are facing a relentless enemy who must be fought, witli united action.” No Government could prosecute the war efficiently unless it had public and Parliamentary support. He welcomed the proposal to divide the House. “At least wo shall see who is with us and who is against us.” he added. “Serious Coiidemnalion” Mr. Lloyd George ( Independent Liberal), referring to Sir Samuel Hoare’s statement that there were no

air 'bases available unless they were captured,'declared that picked men ought to have been used and measures taken in combination 'between the Army and the Navy to guarantee success. The conduct of operations, he'claimed, constituted a most serious condemnation of the Government. “After a good deal of reflection,” he said, “I say deliberately that there is in my judgment no cause for panic, but there is grave cause for pulling ourselves together. You cannot do it till you tell the country the facts. They must realize the magnitude of our jeopardy.” Mr. Lloyd George said: “The Prime Minister has appealed for sacrifice. The nation is prepared for sacrifices as long as you show clearly what you are aiming at and as long as you make it have confidence in its leaders. And/1 say now solemnly to the Prime Minister that he should give an example of sacrifice, because I tell him that nothing would contribute more to victory than that he sacrified his seals of office. “We want real action,” said Mr. Lloyd George, “and not sham action. Hitler’s greatest triumph is that he has put Germany in a better strategical position and put us in greater jeopardy. The Prime Minister has met Hitler in peace and in war and has always been worsted (Loud cheers). We were too late in Norway, though we ha'd a warning. “Norway brings the ' German planes and submarines 200 miles nearer. It is a grave menace. We are infinitely worse off. Our promissory notes are now rubbish in the market. We must restore our prestige if the war is to be won. We are in the worst strategic position In which this country has ever been placed. We were proud to read of the gallantry of the troops and it Is all the more shame that we make fools of them. Everybody is dissatisfied at knowing that everything was done ha !f--heartedly, ineffectively, and unlntelligently.”

At one point of Mr. Lloyd George’s speech Mr. Churchill Interposed that he took full responsibility for everything done by the Admiralty, to which Mr. Lloyd George retorted: “I hope Mr. Churchill will not allow himself to be converted into an air-raid shelter to keep the splinters'from hitting his colleagues.” Mr. Lloyd George sat down amid loud Opposition cheesr and Government counter-cheers. Government Critic. Mr. A. Duff Cooper (Conservative) said: “I will vote against the Government. This is not a time when any man has the right to wash his hands like Pontius Pilate and take neither side.” He added that it would be far better not to have a division. “I had hoped the Government would be sufficiently impressed by the debate to make some of the drastic reforms whicli are so urgently needed.” Discussing Mr. Churchill’s new position, Mr. Dull Cooper said: "It is fundamentally unwise to put one service Minister in a superior position to others. How can a dispute between two departments be referred 'to an arbiter who is the head of one of them?”

Referring to Italy, be said: “I am very sorry at the denial of the report that an Ambassador had been sent to Signor Mussolini with a stern message. It is over three weeks since Count Grandi said that Italy could not long remain an observer. If a man of such importance makes such a statement, our Ambassador should go to Signor Mussolini and ask the meaning of the statement. (Loud cheers). We should send a leading

statesman to the Balkans to tell them that their salvation lies in co-opera-tion between England and France.”

Sir Stafford Cripps (Independent. Labour) said: “I found In Ihe United States nothing but scathing criticism of the British Government. Here there is no conviction of success but only doubt, despondency, and uncertainty. I am certain that Mr. Churchill intended to risk surface vessels as well as .submarines in Norway, but there was a change of policy, influenced perhaps by fears that the loss of capital ships might bring in Signor Mussolini.”