VIEWS IN HOUSE OF LORDS

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

VIEWS IN HOUSE OF LORDS

Labour Peers’ Criticism REPLY BY FOREIGN SECRETARY Profitless Accusations (British Official Wireless and Press Assn.) LONDON, May 8. Speaking in the House of Lords, the Labour Peer, Lord Strabolgi, said that the Government’s conduct of operations in Norway was a symptom of a disease which must be treated quickly or become chronic. The holding of Narvik and the abandoning of the rest of Norway was like holding John o’ Groats and the Orkneys and abandoning the rest of the Kingdom, including all its wealth, industries, and resources. He added that the Grand Fleet could have gone into Oslo Hord and driven away the lighter German forces in the two days between the capture of Oslo and the arrival of German reinforcements. Lord Birdwood said he hoped the Air Force would raid the German communications in Norway by day and by night, because nothing would upset the enemy ’ troops more. Norway was not a disaster, and he believed it would result in a great success for Britain. The Opposition leader, Lord Snell, said that in spite of apologetic statements the Government was weaker today than yesterday. They had rehabilitated Hitler in the minds of the German people. Hitler missed the bus, but took a plane; it was quicker. No nation except Britain would select the present Government to fight its enemies. “It is something like a sleepwalker who always goes slowly and never knows where he is going,” Lord Snell went on. Mr. Chamberlain had said that the country did not realize its danger. It was the Prime Minister who did not realize the danger. Lord Salisbury said there was much in the Prime Minister’s speech which was encouraging. He saw signs of initiative, of decision and of a demand for national union. “Amateur Strategists.” The Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, said: “It is impossible for anyone to draw a distinction between the Prime Minister and the other members of the War Cabinet, who share the full responsibility. We have only one purpose—to win the war. lam not under any delusion about Germany’s strength. Our war effort will impose an immense strain on our staying power. We must marshal our efforts without dissipation of vital energy. ‘"Nothing is more likely to lead to disaster than amateur strategists who shout for immediate action.” Lord Halifax spoke of Lord Snell's sharp attack on the Prime Minister. He said he was in no way disposed to appear with the apologetic gesture of a defendant. It was possible to look back and say that some other action might have been better, but that would never be proved. One decisive factor was that the Germans denied to the British air bases in Trondheim. He was under no temptation to minimize the damage brought to the Allied cause as a whole, but the war was going to be won by hard facts and not by prestige. He thought it true to say that tlie damage effected by the withdrawal was largely due to exaggerated expectations.

He insisted that criticism by neutrals and of a neutral should be seen in the proper perspective, emphasizing the extremely difficult position in which the neutral States were placed in the great whirlpool of war. Lord Halifax added: “When the effect of criticism is to suggest to the country that its war effort is misconceived and misapplied by those responsible for its direction, then I think the criticism defeats its own end and can only add unnecessarily and unproiitalbly to the inevitable strain of the war.”