Evening Post WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1942. CRITICISM THAT LOOKS FORWARD

Evening Post, Volume CXXXIII, Issue 41, 18 February 1942, Page 4

Evening Post WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1942. CRITICISM THAT LOOKS FORWARD

Two very important statements — and very welcome statements—have come from the lips of the Prime Minister of Australia, Mr. Curtin. In the first of these he declares total war: Every human being in this countryis now, whether he or she likes it or not, at the service of the Government. Every material thing—mdney, machinery, plant, or whatever it may be—must, on the immediate direction of the Government, be diverted to the purposes of the war. That is clearcut and specific. The enemy rests upon a totalitarian basis, using everything. This country, therefore, will use everything in her resistance.

In this speech, well worthy of a war Prime Minister, Mr. Curtin added: "We have reached the stage when a new way of life is impelled on us all. Leisure must now be devoted to ihe service of our fellow-meiiV Then he went on to make an equally important statement which aptly fits the defeat in Malkya and the defeat in the British Channel (that is, the German naval dash from Brest to German,, ports). "He would eschew/ he said, "post-mortems and would not allow others to continue to dispute whether mistakes had been made, whether this thing or that had been done rightly or wrongly.. That chapter of controversy had ended." We take this to refer to all forms of controversy which use defeats for a "defeatist" purpose. For instance, to argue that the loss of Singapore is proof that the Allies cannot hold the approaches to Australia is pure "defeatism" and is senseless. To use Malayan lessons for urging the strengthening of the air arm is merely an obvious deduction and comes within the scope of constructive criticism. What "should be barred is all controversy that is, not primarily motived by an intelligent desire to wring from failures the secret of success. Singapore should warn and inform us, not dismay or

paralyse us. Looking-forward criticism is in no sense dependent on the backwardlooking criticism that concentrates en unproductive issues of culpability. The present is the child of the past, and the parent of the future; all the responsibilities \of the present are owed to the future. The explanation of 99 per cent, of present failures is to be found in a democratic past.for which every political party and every person in Britain, America, Australia, and New Zealand must share the blame. Mr. Curtin's declaration of total war marks the final break in Australia with the leisurely past,1 and at the same time implies that as the seeds of failure belong to this past period for which all are culpable, mutual recrimination has no purpose in prosecuting our immediate and urgent war effort. And if it is true that the democrats at this end of the world are in no position to accuse one another, being all more or less guilty, it is equally true that they are in no position to accuse democrats iii Britain Who for half a century have carried the lion's share of cost of Empire defence. Any reproaches to distant Britain Come back like a boomerang ?. upon the leisurely people on the spot. We understand Mr. Curtin to mean that Singapore shall hot be used in Australia as a stick to beat Britain with by persons who are "defeatist" in intention and who wish to weaken the Empire. At the same time Mr. Curtin breaks with the past by declaring total war—which is the least that Australians and New Zealanders can offer to the common war effort, which, from now on, must be based on equal sacrifice. This present age, the child of a Weak past, is charged with the Responsibility of laying the foundations of a strong future. And criticism should be directed to discharging that responsibility in a constructive manner. Would any constructive purpose be served by dismissing Churchill, who has inherited a past the evils of which he strenuously fought—in fact, he battled almost alone for years against the Very sins which today are still tying his hands? Clearly, Churchill is the man least of all responsible for that indefensible past. But would any constructive purpose be served by an intelligent and expert inquiry into recent defeats with a view to discovering their lessons? The answer here is supplied by the Churchill Government's action in setting up an inquiry, under a Judge of Mr. Justice BucknilPs calibre, to find out why there was delay in discovering that the German ships had left Brest, and whether there was sufficient liaison between the Navy and the Air Force. These are pertinent, forward-looking issues. Their purpose is to give practical effect to the old principle that experience teaches. In the House of Commons debate Earl Winterton is reported to have expressed the viewpoint of general constructive critics. "I do.not," he said, "accept the line that all that has happened is inevitable, and that if we question its inevitability we are showing panic." His speech is interpreted as meaning .that "a deep inquiry into causes," without "niggling criticism," will produce improvements. Improvements are more important than dismissals, but if improvements require dismissals, "disciplinary action,", Mr. Churchill states, "will follow."