FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1917
1917 - 1237.PDF
NOVEMBER 22, 1917. be found in the wish to place ftie Department on a similar basis to the Admiraltyor the Army. I do not think that that is a good reason. Major Baird : I have said there is no idea of appointing this FinancialSecretary until the Under-Secretary is completely overworked. Amendment negatived. , Further Amendment made, in Sub-section (3), leave out the word " the "[" in addition to the "], and insert instead thereof the word " an."—[Major Baird.]Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 12.—(Application of Army Act to Air Force.)Colonel Gretton : I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), after the word " Force " [" be cited as the Air Force Act "], to insert the word " discipline."This is quite a simple matter of drafting. I propose that the Act referred to at this point in Sub-section (1) shall be called the Air Force Discipline Act.We are in this dilemma, as was pointed out earlier in the debate, that the whole of this Bill is called the Air Force Bill, but that in Clause 12 it is intended to setup an annual Act, to be renewed in the same way as the Army Act, to carry torward the rules of discipline and the regulations affecting discipline and othermatters of that kind, in the same way as is done with the Army Act. There would be the greatest possible difficulty in differentiating between the wholeBill, which sets up the Ministry, in its organisation and matters of that kind, and the limited Bill, which has to be renewed yearly in the same way as theArmy Act. I therefore propose that the smaller measure, which is subject to annual renewal, should be called the Air Force Discipline Act. There is, ofcourse, an alternative. It might have a different name, and be called the Air Force Council Bill; but clearly some step h^s to be taken to differentiate betweenthe whole Bill and the limited part. I think it would be convenient to call it the Air Force Discipline Act. Major Baird : I hope my hon. and gallant friend who has moved this Amend-ment will not think it unreasonable if I ask permission to consider it. I have only at this moment heard of it, and perhaps he will allow me to bear it in mindand have it examined with a view to dealing with the matter on Report ? Amendment negatived. Amendment made : At end of Sub-section (2) insert the words, " And duringthe present war the number of the forces mentioned in the preamble to the Army Annual Act shall include the number of the Air Forces."—[Major Baird.]Mr. Billing : I beg to move, in Sub-section (3), to leave out the words, " sub- ject to such modification and exceptions as His Majesty in Council may declareto be necessary for adapting the same to the Air Force." The reason I move this Amendment is that there seems to me considerablelicence allowed in this Bill for all sorts of changes. The Bill says, " Such modifications and exceptions as His Majesty in Council may declare to benecessary for adapting the same to the Air Force." Earlier in the Bill power has been taken, in Clause a, to alter discipline by Orders in Council, and perhapsthe hon. and gallant Member will explain why it is necessary again here. Why should modifications and exceptions be made in all these matters purely by Orderin Council ? I do not know whether tnere is any other method of doing it which is more constitutional. Major Baird : If the hon. Member will look at Part II. of the First Schedulehe wil] see the kind of modification which is meant. If you accept the principle of the Army Act, it is necessary to have some such provision as this in order tocarry out the necessary modifications. The word " soldier " does not cover " airmen" and " airmen " does not cover " soldier."Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 13.— Application of other Ads.)Mr. Billing: I beg to move, at the end, to insert the words " for confirmation before being enforced." This is similar to an Amendment I moved previously.It seems to me to be rather useless to lay those Orders in Council before the Houses of Parliament if the matter is purely formal. If there is any meaningin doing so I think the House should have the right to say whether it approved or not. Lord H. Cecil: This is purely a provision for making these Orders in Councilknown to Parliament. They are made for the information of Parliament and do not require confirmation.Amendment negatived. Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.Clause 14.—(Short Title) ordered to stand part of the Bill. New Clause.—(Power to Alter and Revoke Orders.)Orders in Council, Orders, and Regulations made under this Act may be varied and revoked by subsequent Orders in Council, Order, and Regulations madein like manner.—[Major Baird.] Brought up, and read the first and second times, and added to the Bill.New Clause.—(Air Council not to Order or Conduct Warlike Operations.) The Air Council shall not order warlike operations or make war by itself, butthe Air Council shall transfer and attach to the naval and military forces of the Crown such corps, units, officers, and men of the Air Force as may be determinedin consultation and agreement with the Board of Admiralty or the Army Council, or both of them, and the Board of Admiralty and the Army Council may attachand transfer such corps, units, officers, and men to any part of the force subject to their orders, respectively.—[Colonel Gretton.]Brought up, and read the first time. Colonel Gretton : I beg to move, " That the Clause be read a second time."This Clause, and the one following that I have on the Paper, are different parts of the same large and wide subject. Hitherto the Air Board has been aBoard of Supply. This Bill is drawn in such a way that it is by no means clear that the new Air Ministry is intended to be limited to supplies. There isto be a Secretaryship of State set up with a complete Council, and there is nothing in the Bill, as it is dratra, to prevent this Department being set up as a separateWar Department, conducting operations of war independently, it may be, of either the Army or the Navy. If that is intended by the Government it is quite clear that some explanation should be given. If the Air Ministry is intended tohave its own leaders and to be under the command of its own officers, subject to the general direction of strategical operations, if we are going to have a newdivision in future, instead of talking of the Army and Navy we shall talk about the Army, Navy and Air Service. It is by no means clear what the operationsof the Air Service are, or what, in fact, is being handed over to the new Air Board. We gather that aeroplanes and all the necessary administration andrepairs of those aeroplanes are to be handed over to the new Air Board. It is not clear whether dirigible balloons, or any developments of that kind, are goingto be handed over to the Air Board. It is not at all clear whether anti-aircraft defences, whether stationary or moyeable, are to be under the Air Board. Surelyif you are defending or attacking it is necessary that all the means of defence should be under the general direction of one man and one control. Nothingcould be worse in war than divided control. It is very necessary that this matter should lie cleared up. I draw attention to another aspect of the Bill as it stands. There is nothingto prevent—and certain expressions used on behalf of the Government to-day lead us to expect it is intended—that an Air Force shall be employed from timeto time at the direction of the civilian Government—this Air Council—independ- ently of either Army or Navy control. Mr. Billing : I should like to oppose this new Clause, and it seems to me to bepractically a negative. We are going to all this trouble to introduce a Bill for the purpose of doing a definite thing, and the hon. and gallant member is pro-posing what seems to me to be a negative to the whole Bill. One thing that is essential is to have one supreme command outside the Army and Navy. Thereis one point which I have persistently made in this House and it is the necessity of getting this one control, and in creating this great Air Service not to trespasson the essential section of aviation which has directly to do with the Navy and the Army. Sir F. Smith : My hon. and gallant friend (Colonel Gretton) is fully entitledto have his views on military subjects considered, because for a good many years he has given a good deal of time and consideration to these matters, and thatat a time when such consideration was not as fashionable as it is to-day. At the same time he must really do the Government the justice to suppose that thisBill has not been introduced without constant weekly and daily discussions between the best brains of the War Office, the best brains of the Admiralty, andthe best brains of the infant Air Service. These problems have been considered, received, and discussed, and re-discussed. It is not saying, I hope, anythingin any way offensive to my hon. and gallant friend if I tell him that neither the Army Council nor the Admiralty want this Amendment. This Bill is the result jA an agreement between the Army Council, the Ad-miralty, and the Air Board as to the functions which shall be allotted to this new Air Council. I, for one, can hardly conceive anything more insane thanthat this House of Commons, in the day in which the term " amateur strategist " is already open to a considerable degree of obloquy—and if we presume todescribe ourselves as strategists we must rightly agree that we are all amateur strategists—I cannot conceive any way in which the House of Commons couldcover itself with greater ridicule than when the most distinguished officers of the Army and the most distinguished officers of the Navy have come to anagreement that we should take it upon ourselves to give directions to these Departments which do not correspond to their desires and" do not correspondto this Bill, which represents their desires. I do not believe that the House of Commons will do anything so foolish. I attempted to explain in my speechon the Second Reading that it is intended, and clearly intended, that when the new Air Ministry has discharged its function of making provision both for theArmy and the Navy, and when it has lent a contribution, if I may use a non- military term, either to the Army or the Navy, while that contribution is servingin either the Army or the Navy it must be in military subordination to the force to whichiifcis lent. To lay down more would be absurd ; to lay downless has never been'o.^^n-tc1- I hope the. Committee will not accept the new Clause. ... Colonel Gretton: I understand now that the Air Service, acting with theArmy, will be under Army orders in general combination for military purposes, and the same as regards the Navy. That is entirely satisfactory, and what Ianticipated. What I want to ascertain, and what the Attorney-General has avoided answering, is, Is it intended that the Air Council shall retain under itsown control and its own command, and send forth for operations of war, any portions of the Air Force, or is the Air Force to be at the disposal of the navaland military authorities and will not make war on its own account ? That really requires answering. Sir. F. Smith : The hon. and gallant gentleman is entitled to assume from whatI said exactly what I said, and nothing further. I said when contributions were made, either to the Army or Navy, they would be under the command ofthe Army and the Navy. If there remain independent operations which dp not take place because specific contributions have been made either to the Armyor the Navy, these will take place under the direction of the Air Ministry, and the most distinguished soldiers at the War Office have assented to and recommendthat course to the House of Commons. Colonel Gretton : The Attorney-General assures us it has the highest militarysanction, and I take it that includes naval sanction. I put down these two new Clauses for the purpose of eliciting information. The matter requires somelittle delay, and will be brought up again on Report. I ask leave to withdraw. Motion and Clause, by leave, withdrawn.First and Second Schedules to stand part of the Bill. The Chairman: Amendments to the Title can only be made if it is necessaryto bring the Title into accordance with the Bill. No Amendment has been made in the Bill at this stage requiring that to be done.The Chairman : The question is, " That I report the Bill, with Amendments, to the House." Question put, and agreed to.Bill reported, as Amended, to be considered upon Friday. AVIATION IN PARLIAMENT. Air Services Organisation. MAJOR D. DAVIES in the House of Commons on November r3th asked theUnder-Secretary of State for War whether the new scheme for the reorganisation of the Air Services provides £or any system of correlation between the defensiveoperation of aeroplanes and other flying craft and that of the anti-aircraft batteries and guns in this country ; and whether it is proposed to place both ofthese Departments under the same administrative control ? Mr. Macpherson: The hon. and gallant member will see that these mattersare dealt with in the Air Force Bill now before this House. Enemy Air Raids (Compensation). MR. TILLETT asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the schemerecently announced for compensation for damage due to enemy air raids includes compensation for damage to furniture or other personal effects and also forpersonal injury ? Mr. Bonar Law : The scheme in question deals only with damage to property,including furniture and personal effects. As regards cases of personal injury, I made a full statement as to compensation in reply to the hon. member forEast Edinburgh on the 28th June last, and I am sending the hon. member a copy.Aircraft Manufacturers. SIR HENRY COWAN on November 15th asked the Parliamentary Secretaryto the Air Board whether he has any information showing that a ring has been formed by aircraft manufacturers with the object of keeping up the prices of aircraft material ? Sir W. Evans : I have been asked to reply to this question. The answer is in the negative. Reprisals.COLONEL C. LOWTHER asked the Prime Minister whether he can now announce any definite policy with regard to the adoption of reprisals against airattacks upon our unfortified towns, seeing that several air raids have been carried out with impunity upon London and the Eastern Coast since his announce -ment of the adoption of a policy of reprisals ? Mr. Bonar Law : I can add nothing to the previous statements on this subject. Colonel Lowther: Can the right hon. gentleman say why no reprisals havebeen undertaken on German towns, bridges, or forests as a direct answer to the two last raids on London ? Mr. Bonar Law : If the hon. and gallant member will look at the newspape rreports, he will find that there have been air operations on German towns, but much depends upon the weather, and I think there is a danger that our airmenmay undertake these operations at a time when they ought not to do so. Mr. Pringle: Will the right hon. gentleman see that no airmen are with -drawn from more necessary work in order to carry out these raids ? Mr. Bonar Law : I have already said many times that the Air Service is usedas our advisers consider best. 1237
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
