DEFENCE OF NEW ZEALAND

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21792, 26 May 1936, Page 8

DEFENCE OF NEW ZEALAND

TO THE EDITOR 07 THE FREES. Sir, —I also would like to ask “Young Labour Party,” who, discussing this subject, says that “we can establish an effective air force for a start” Just what, in terms of aeroplanes (their number and destructive power, and the number of men—or women —required to manipulate and maintain them), an “effective air force” would be. I take it that “Young Labour Party” considers that we should also have an effective navy ‘and army, and I would also like to ask what, in terms of numbers and destructiveness, such should be. Further, New Zealand surely should be protected by some kind of land fortifications and by permanent mine traps laid well out to sea. But of what power? I would like to ask. And then, before New Zealand could be said to be properly defended, it would be necessary to have our people supplied with gas masks and protective suits, and gas and bombardment proof cellars,’ with efficient instructors. But again, just how many and of what kind? Now, if defence enthusiasts will answer these questions, perhaps we may begin to be able to discuss this question rationally. Personally, I am tired of such vague wailings that we must have more defence. How much and of what kind exactly do we need is what I and others would like to know. Let us have this information, if it can be calculated; and then we can calculate the cost and ways and means of raising the necessary. I think that many would agree with me that we should either be properly defended or not at all. Anything less than thorough effectiveness is so much waste. Better to haye no air force, navy, or army than to keep on playing at soldiers and sailors as we are now.—Yours, etc., GUNS AND GATS. May 24. 1936.