FULL GALLERIES

Wairarapa Times-Age, 8 May 1940, Page 6

FULL GALLERIES

FOR HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER ON WAR POLICY. SMALLER WAR CABINET NOT FAVOURED. ■' (British Official Wireless.) (Received This Day, 12.20 p.m.) RUGBY. May 7. The Galleries of the House of Commons were crowded for the opening of the debate on Norway. Tenseness was revealed at one moment when the Premier invoked the Speaker’s authority owing to opposition interjections, but Mr. Chamberlain was cheered at the end. The Opposition leaders spoke immediately after Mr. Chamberlain, and the debate was continued by back-benchers. Paying a tribute to the magnificent gallantry of the British troops back from the campaign in Southern Norway, Mr. Chamberlain said they had carried out their task in a way which added still further to the great traditions of the Army, and in very hard fighting against a superior force, with superior equipment, had shown great courage and endurance. Dealing with the campaign, he said; “I feel myself that if we had refused to answer the call made to us from Norway, we should have justified the reproach that our only object in Scandinavia was the iron ores of Sweden, and that we cared nothing for the freedom of small nations.” Mr. Chamberlain intimated that his long experience of Cabinet procedure left him unconvinced by the arguments for a smaller War Cabinet, but no doubt other changes in the form of the Government, or in the functions of individual Minister, might be desirable. Replying to Mr. Lloyd George, the Premier said he was relying on Mr Churchill to let him know if he found that the new task imposed upon him made it difficult to fulfil his work at the Admiralty, and in such a case he would take steps to relieve him. ‘■l am bound to say,” Mr. Chamberlain added, “that whilst I think the implications of the Norwegian campaign have been seriously exaggerated, and whilst I regain my complete confidence in our ultimate victory,’ I do not think the people of this country yet realise the extent or imminence of the threat which is impending against us. We may, and if we are wise we shall, learn many useful lessons from Norway.” A PROFOUND SHOCK. When the Prime Minister stated that news of the withdrawal from Southern Norway had created a profound shock, there were shouts from (he Opposition: “And there still is.” Mr Chamberlain added: “We tried damp down unfounded reports, because we were anxious to avoid informing the enemy of the true situation. I am afraid that in these circumstances shock and disappointment were inevitable. I have no wish to extenuate anything, but we shall not exaggerate the extent or importance of the check we have received. The withdrawal is not comparable with Gallipoli. Large forces were not involved —actually not much more than a single division. The losses wore not really great, nor was any considerable or valuable amount of stores left behind. The Germans suffered far heavier losses in warships, planes, transports and men. I am aware that the result cannot be measured merely by losses on the spot. We have taken account of the loss of prestige. Colcur has been given to the false legend of German land invincibility and discouragement caused to our friends. We must accept that position for the moment, but we have no need to help enemy by worsening it. (Cheers). “The reaction is more serious in Sweden than elsewhere,” Mr Chamberlain added. “I regret certain polemical comments in the Swedish Press, because they will not help Sweden or the Allies. We are not concerned -with recriminations, but with measures that can be taken in future. If Sweden decides on a policy of neutrality, I trust it will be strictly impartial.” INTERJECTION AND REPLY. “For my part,” Mr Chamberlain stated, “I try to steer a middle course, between optimism and defeatism” (Opposition cries: “Missed the bus!”). Mr Chamberlain: “That is a good example of the way prejudiced people twist words from their meaning. When I said Hitler had missed the bus, I was not referring to the invasion of Norway which occurred three days later. I was referring to the fact that Hitler did not attack the Allies at the beginning) when the disparity of arms was greatest.” Mr Chamberlain concluded: “Let us, before the first trials come upon us. steadily increase our strength till we are able to deliver blows when and where we will." (Loud and prolonged cheers.) MORE ENERGY NEEDED OPPOSITION CRITICISM OF CABINET. (Received This Day. 12.32 p.m.) RUGBY, May 7. . Mr Chamberlain was followed by Mr C. R. Attlee (Leader of the Opposition) who, after paying tribute to the courage and skill of the Allied forces in Norway, said that although the withdrawal was a groat feat of arms it represented a setback. He said he was not in the least satisfied, despite what Mr Chamberlain had said, that the present War Cabinet was an efficient instrument for conducting flic war. Sir Archibald Sinclair also joined in the tribute to the fighting forces, but said that the withdrawal from Trondheim suggested that more energy and a stronger and more ruthless will to victory was required in the conduct of the war effort. Herr Hitler, he said, had taken time by the beard and struck quickly. Wo must show equal switness of action if we want to win the war.