ADMIRAL SATISFIED, CABINET DISTURBED

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30535, 2 September 1964, Page 17

ADMIRAL SATISFIED, CABINET DISTURBED

(N.Z. Press Association —Copyright) SYDNEY, September 1. Australian naval officers did not recent “reasonable and horough” civilian findings of the Royal Commission into the Voyager tragedy, Rear-Admiral O. H. Becher, commander of the Australian fleet, sa d today.

“I am very satisfied with the efficiency of the Australian Navy. We are always learning,” he said.

Federal Cabinet Ministers are disturbed by indications of complacency among Australian naval officers about Sir John Spicer’s findings, the Melbourne “Age” says today. Cabinet has directed the Naval Board to report on the findings. Ministers want the board either to show tinmistakeable determination to remedy the deficiencies Sir John Spicer has noted'—or produce very good reasons for doing nothing. Admiral Becher returned today in the aircraft-carrier Melbourne, after two months and a half in the Far East. It was the first exercise the Melbourne had since colliding with the Voyager last February when 82 lives were lost. Tricky Problems The Melbourne “Age” says that the report of the inquiry into the loss of the Voyager has raised some tricky problems for the Federal Government. Ministers are disappointed in the report which Sir John Spicer presented. Ministers were also disturbed by implications of complacency among Australian officers to the findings. No-one questions Sir John Spicer’s finding that a turn by the Voyager beyond the course set by the Melbourne was the primary cause of the disaster, the newspaper says. Sir John Spicer also noted, as possible contributory causes, what to ministers seem to be serious departures from the standards of efficiency expected of the Navy. What worries ministers is that Sir John Spicer suggested neither reasons nor

remedies for these apparent shortcomings. He noted Inadequacy in watch-keeping, inexperience, among officers, lack of prior consultation about the exercises in which the Voyager and the Melbourne were engaged, and a difference of opinion . in the Navy about the meaning and effect of certain tactical instructions. The newspaper says Sir John Spicer suggested that prior consultation “might have been undertaken with

advantage,” and that ships should first practice in daylight the movement which the Voyager and the Melbourne were trying to perform at night He also suggested earlier training of seamen in open sea swimming, and the storing of lifejackets in more accessible places. “But generally, Sir John preferred to direct attention to deficiencies rather than recommend remedies,” the "Age” says. “Ministers may be unreasonable in their resentment of this. Like them; Sir John is a layman and may well have decided he should not offer advice op technical matters. “But his reticence has left

Cabinet in a quandary. “Ministers feel Sir John’s report has raised too many doubts about naval efficiency for the Government to take ho action, but they are uncertain about the action to be taken. Dismissals Unwanted “They reject the idea that senior officers should be dismissed as an incentive to naval efficiency down the line. “They reject also the suggestion that some senior British dr American naval officer should be asked to make an independent assessment of the Royal Australian Navy's professional standards.”

If the navy tries to adopt a policy of "least said, soonest mended,” ministers may move for an independent technical inquiry—perhaps by some retired Australian naval officer. Observers believe the navy would benefit, technically and politically, if it now set up its own expert inquiry and announced publicly any changes in training methods and tactical procedures. This would reassure Parliament and the public, and—more important, perhaps—assure allied navies that they do not take undue risks when they exercise with the R.A.N.