Defence League President Criticises Volunteer Scheme

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28920, 13 June 1959, Page 11

Defence League President Criticises Volunteer Scheme

!» HUGH ROBINSON, President of the New Zealand Defence League!

Uew Zealand is no longer an isolated country in the South pacific. Our security rests on carrying out the obligations we jjave undertaken in common with other countries, and in our ability to defend our own shores in case' of need. Thanks to 10 preceding years of voluntary training, we were nearly caught out in the last war. Now we have reverted to the voluntary system once more. Next time we. may not escape. What most people' fail to understand is the necessity for continuity in the training of an army, continuity which ensures being kept abreast of all the latest developments and guarantees the attainment of reasonable efficiency' on the outbreak of war, which can only be achieved as the result of years of peace-time effort.

By all qualified to judge, it has been declared that the compulsory military training scheme produced the "finest peace-time army New Zealand ever had. In the early stages, it was composed of considerable numbers of war veterans. These comprised officers and senior non-commissioned officers who undertook to serve for snecified periods. Their inducement was

that by C.M.T. they had'troops to tram with, the basic requirement m the creation of an army. These men have been largely replaced by excellent young officers and n.c.o. s trained by the scheme itself. m s° r T er .? y annual intakes, and, after the first three years by annual postings to the reserve they were assured that they were serving their country to some purpose. That voluntary service on their part has never been sufficiently recognised Now, in many cases, they and others trained under C.M.T. are continuing to serve in the hope that the C.M.T. scheme will soon be restored. But that is only hope, not an established fact. The fact v?J. ’, ev ! n “ the whole »t the 7000 volunteers are enrolled, the territorial force will have been cut down to less than a third of its former strength, and in consequence many o f the units must be reduced merely to skeleton strength. Thus these milts will be left in practically the same position as our volunteer force before the last war—practising "T.E.W.T.’s” (tactical exercises without troops). Is that what is now envisaged? It appears certainly a discouraging state of affairs. But that is not the only vital factor in which the new scheme fails. Under it there is to be no 10 weeks and a half of basic training—only a fortnight’s camp each year for threb years, plus six one-day parades each year. In 1957 the country was fnformed: “The Labour Party’s policy favours a highly trained force, and considers the present scheme is a waste of time, money and personnel, and should be discontinued.’’ Today we are told nothing of the progress that has been made in securing the “highly trained force,” or the details of the 4000 enlistments reported to date for the 7000 territorial force. We have not been told how many officers, non-commissioned officers and men comprise the total 4000. But we do hear of the numbers of “trained reserves” now available from the scheme that was “a waste of time, money and personnel.’ ’