RECRUITING FOR DEFENCE

Press, Volume LXXV, Issue 22768, 21 July 1939, Page 12

RECRUITING FOR DEFENCE

THE VOLUNTARY SYSTEM WEAKNESS SEEN BY MR HARGEST UNIVERSAL TRAINING ADVOCATED IFrom Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, July 20. Weaknesses in the voluntary system of recruiting for the defence forces were pointed out by Mr J. Hargest (Opposition, Awarua) during the' Ad* dress-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives to-day. Not only the Opposition, but tens of thousands of people behind the Government, he said, stood for a system of universal military training. New Zealand wanted manpower; but the men could not be obtained under the existing voluntary method. If New Zealand had a force of 50.000 trained men, properly armed, any enemy would pause before coming to tbi» country, *T hpve never set myself up as an authority on military questions,” said Mr Hargest. “I have, however, been a student of military history, and have alwa.vs been an impartial critic of defence measures, both under this Government and the previous Government '

‘The member for Waitemata has described talk of an invasion of New Zealand as ridiculous,” Mr Hargest continued. “The conviction of the Australian military staff is that, in the event of hostilities, Australia would be subject to a major invasion.” lie Minister for Defence (the Hon. F. Jones): How many territorials are there in Australia? Mr Hargest: They have 70,000; but they have factories for the manufacture of ammunition, howitzers; and other armaments, . including aircraft. In view of the opinion of the .military authorities in Australia, are %e' Justified in. saying that' we, in this; country, will not pe subject to anything more than a said, antMhat 18,000 men:will be capable of defending this country and its enormous coastline? The Minister for Defence, said Mr Hargest. had covered a great deal of ground in his speech the previous evening: but the basis of his argument was unsound, because he said, in effect, that a force could be created simply by writing cheques. , Mr Jones: I did not; but we have something to show lor our expenditure. Mr Hargest: The Minister told the House that for .an expenditure of £4400.000 we have 30 bombers. These machines would be annihilated if 60 enemy machines came here. The Minister for Education (the Hon. P, TVaser): The action taken was on the advice of the best experts in Britain- . . , ■ Mr Hargest: Is the Minister for Education an expert? . Mr Fraser: I can no more claim to be an expert than the honourable member himself. . . Mr Hargest said it would be interesting to know if the officers of the staff were hr, agreement, with the Minister s pollcyP * ■ Mr Jones: Yes, They are. Mr Hargest: Do they agree that the voluntary system meets. the position. Mr Jones: Yes. They are in complete agreement, and have/ never expressed an opinion otherwise. Members of the Opposition, said Mr Hargest. Jiad done as much to help recxuMtog as.hjiy member of the Government: -He resented ;th®. statement that because the Opposition did not agrerwSh the Government's defence policy It was endeavouring to damage, the recmiting campaign. T£®. Mmiste?, said that no reference had been made'TO the* Opposition during the election ■‘campaign to universal tary training. The reason was that the ; crisis had developed in the last week:, in September, in the latter part, of the campaign. and there was thea-nohme for theXeader of the Opposition to call, a caucus and discuss th& question-Th? Minister lor Defence vrasin the Awarua electorate on the Sunday of th® crisis looking at the ■post office 'yesideM?Fraser: The position-was watched Hargest’ said that the' mepibera of the national mllUarv: reserve coulj not be called up,: neither- could, they be trained, and It was difficult.to see what use they would he. The task ' was to obtain men of fightmg,age, uo to 40 vears There>could be no 'justification when youn«? men .were .evaome ‘ nei * responsibilities. ?t_\ras simply olaying to the gallery and meant nothing at all.