BRITISH LABOUR'S ARMAMENT POLICY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 238, 7 October 1936, Page 7

BRITISH LABOUR'S ARMAMENT POLICY.

LIVELY DEBATE. Strength Equal to Country's Responsibility. LARGE majority recorded. United Press Association.—Copyright. (Received 11.30 a.m.) LONDON, October 6. "I am going to speak bluntly. Britain in 1931 was secure in the military, naval and air sense. To-day that security has gone. •, If a Labour Government was to assume power tomorrow it would be compelled to proceed with the increase of British armaments." These views were expressed by . Dr. Hugh Dalton, M.P., Bishop Auckland, during the Labour Conference in Edinburgh. The executive resolution, submitted to the conference,- declared that the armed strength of any country, which remains loyal to the League, must be conditioned by the armed strength of a potential aggressor. Therefore, the executive reaffirms the policy of maintaining forces consistent with Britain's responsibilities as a member of the League, but declines responsibility for a competitive armaments policy. The resolution promoted a lively debate. Dr. Dalton proceeded to say that treaty breaking had bccome a daily Fascist habit, and the British Government had a crushing responsibility for what had happened.

The sly evasions of Sir John Simon, Home Secretary, the prim -pretences •of Sir Samuel Hoarc, First Lord of the .Admiralty, and the feeble amiability of Mr. Anthony Eden, Foreign Secretary, the lazy lack of leadership in Mr. Baldwin, and the senile vanity of Mr. Ramsay Mac Donald had contributed to the plight of Britain and the world. Limits to Fascism. The time had come, he said, when Britain must tell Fascist States: "There is a limit—so far and no farther," but must also say: "Come and join us and state your grievances." Mr. Arthur Henderson, son of the late Labour leader, seconding the resolution, said that raw materials of the world must be pooled. Lord Strabolgi said that the time had come when democratic and Socialist Powers must be armed for . mutual support. "I do not want a Labour Government weak and open to Uullying, blackmailing threats of Fascist Powers," he added. Mr. George Lansbury opposed the resolution. He said that armaments could not save the world. Even dictatorship nations must be brought to the round-table and led along the road to peace.. Mr. Charles Dukes said: "Dictator nations should be told that if they want a decision by the sword we will not flinch." Mr. C. R. Attlee, winding up the debate, denied that the resolution committed the Labour party to the Government's rearmament policy. Labour ■would continue to criticise the armaments programme and would decline to give a blank cheque. That did not mean that they said 110 arms were required. Collective security must be backed by sufficient force to deal with an aggressor. "We are not prepared to be conquered by Fascism either from without or within." A card vote resulted: For the resolution, 1,738,000; against, 057,000. adequate defence. Australian labour stand. i (Keceived 12 uoon.) * CANBERRA, this day. The leader of the Federal Labour party, Mr. J. Curtin, announced the party's allegiance to "A defence scheme commensurate with Australia's ability to maintain it and adequate for Australia's Heeds." He declared that no other ( country, not even Britain, could come to the rescue in time if Australia was attacked. 1 Australia's defence had to be assured by herself. It was a realisation of this , fact which dictated the whole consideration of defence policy by the Australian Labour inoveiirent.

SPANIARDS ARRIVE.

WARM LABOUR WELCOME,

(Received 12.30 p.m.) LONDON, October G. A scene occurred at the Labour Conference at Edinburgh before lunch when the secretary announced the arrival by air of two envoys from Spain. Delegates rose and cheered the visitors, Senor Asua and Senora Isabel de Valencia, who ■will address the conference,later.