BRITAIN’S DEFENCE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 56, Issue 126, 10 March 1936, Page 5

BRITAIN’S DEFENCE

THE GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSALS. LABOUR AMENDMENT MOVED. PREMIER REVIEWS POSITION. (United Press Association —Copyright.) (Received This Day, 1.10 p.m.) LONDON, March 9. “IT would be wrong to assume that our striving for peace is an indication of weakness,” said the Prime Minister (Mi* Stanley Baldwin) in the House of Commons, when moving approval of the White Paper. He added : “Neither the Government nor the people of Britain will ever be intimidated by threats from whatever quarter. Much as we regret the necessity for the proposals in the White Paper, they show we are seriously; in earnest in the determination to make a: full effort toward the deterrent of any would-be aggressor. We as a nation can go on longer than others, and if driven thereto shall not hesitate.’ ’ Mr Baldwin reminded the House that Britain was still the greatest naval power, hence it was inevitable that a heavy burden must fall on the British Navy in working out collective security, whether it meant only sanctions or meant war. The new programme represented the minimum in the present circumstances. There could never he permanent peace in Europe as long as suspicion continued between France and Germany. The only hope lay in the achievement of tri-partite friendship— France and Germany with Britain. “Defence depends on the foreign policy of all countries. One nation may make war, but it takes fifty to secure peace. Europe had learned much since July. Collective security was unable to prevent war in the case of Italy and Abyssinia. I am convinced you will be unable to prevent war on the part of an aggressor unless that aggressor knows that his advent into war will be met at once (Mr Baldwin emphasised “at once.”) “Europe- is a long way from a position to enforce that. Europe will have to consider, when the present troubles are over, what collective secxrffty involves, and make up her mind whether she will make herself ready to use necessary measures. I hope she will. It will not be done in a day. This is a horrible thing to have to say, but if the countries of Europe want to make "an aggressor realise that his action will bring all the other members of the League upon him, they will have to be more ready for war then they are today. It is a terrible conclusion, but you cannot get away from it. “The Government’s proposals did not go beyond what is necessary to fulfil the League obligations and, in the event of collective security not being achieved, to make the country and the Empire safe against aggression. Major Atlee (Leader of the Opposition) moved the following amendment :

“As the safety of the country and the peace of the world cannot be secured by reliance on armaments, but only by resolute pursuit of a policy of international understanding, adherence to the Covenant of the League of Nations, disarmament, progressive improvement of interna-: tional labour standards, and economic co-operation to remove the causes of war, this House cannot agree to a policy which, in fact, seeks security in national armaments alone and incites to a ruinous arms race between the nations inevitably leading to war, and the House .views with alarm the proposals for the reorganisation of industry on* a' war basis, which will enormously extend vested interests in arms manufacture and create a serious menace to organised labour and to trade union standards, and it has no confidence in his Majesty’s Ministers, whose unworthy and ambiguous foreign policy has largely contributed to the present state of world uniest.”

Major Attlee said that Mr Baldwin had failed to deal with realities. He had taken a short view. The Government had never tried to make-collec-tive security a reality but regarded it as something to which they could give lip service while they talked of disarmament. There had always seemed to be some reservation for what was called "our particular Imperial needs.” Mr Baldwin could at least have given the minimum cost of the proposals. Labour did not regard treaties as immutable, but they must be revised with the consent of the signatories. The White Paper contained nothing about the Empire. “We ask the Government, sard Major Attlee, ‘‘to make a new start and deal with the cause of wars and try to recall world sanity.” Sir Arthur Sinclair (leader of the Opposition Liberal) said that Herr Hitler had torn up a treaty he himself had undertaken to respect, but let us give calm study to his constructive proposals. ' The debate was adjourned.

ONE OF WORLD POLICE POWERS WELCOMED BY SMALL NATIONS. SUPPORT FOR- THE LEAGUE LONDON, March 8. Speaking of Britain's nevv defence proposals the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr Neville Chamberlain) , said: “A representative of one of the smallei powers in Europe, on hearing of these measures, remarked ‘that comes as a relief, because we know that England is one of the police powers oi the workl.’ ” , <|Ti Mr Chamberlain added: It may seem almost inconsistent that the most peace-loving country in the world should be embarking on this scheme to increase armaments; but we are living in a; time of great anxiety—of such great restlessness among the nations of the workl that the international situation has

been steadily deteriorating. Unless the forces that make for peace are strong they might yvell be unable to withstand others who, having acquired a giant's strength, might be tempted to use it like a giant. “If we now who stand for peace consider it necessary to increase the strength of our defensive forces,” he said, "and to make good those gaps and deficiencies which have been accumulating ever since 1919, it is because we feel that by putting ourselves in a position to fulfil our obligations under the league covenant we are making the greatest possible contribution to the cause of peace.”—British Official Mireless. 1 ADVOCACY OF A LOAN. RELIEF IN INCOME TAXATION. (Received This Day, 11.45 a.m.) LONDON, March 9. The Association of British Chambers of Commerce sent to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr Neville Chamberlain) a letter urging that the expenditure for defence be covered by a loan, enabling relief from income-tax in the next Budget.