OUR NAVAL DEFENCE.

Evening Star, Issue 14997, 3 October 1912, Page 8

OUR NAVAL DEFENCE.

SECTIONAL NAVIES CRITICISED. "A ROTTEN INVESTMENT." PER CAPITA "CONTRIBUTION ADVOCATED. [Feoji Och Paiuiamkntaiu- Reporter.] WELLINGTON, October 3. Some interesting opinions were expressed in the House yesterday afternoon on the question of Naval Defence. The discussion arose from a query by the Hon. Mr Ngala to the Prime- Minister on the subject of Naval Defence in the Pacific. Mr Massey replied that, the Government of New Zealand are at present in communication with the Imperial Government in the subject of Naval D.-fenee on the Pacific, and the policy of the Government with regard to the subject will be announced in due course. " I think the time is ripe for New Zealand to make some definite statement regarding its policy in naval affairs," remarked Mr Ngata, in commenting on the Prime Minifter's reply, which, he said, was evue'ive. He hoped the Government would not go btuk from the traditional policy of New Zealand by making a contribution to the Imperial Navy. He would be sorry to see the Government enter into the construction of a few torpedo boats and second class cruisers for the sake of trying to prepare for a Japanese invasion. Such a. policy he regarded as a. poor one, and such an investment would be a rotten investment. Australia, he pointed out, was at the prce-cnt time committed to an expenditure of about three-quarters of a million for maintaining what ''. —a squadron not nearly as powerful as was the squadron it had a few years ago. '• I hold," he said, " we should keep our sea power in the cheapest- market for sea power in the world—that is, in Great Britain. The money would be invested in strengthening the British Fleet, and left in the hands of people whose busine.-s has beon for generations past to decide what shall be the strategy for the Empire ais a whole in regard to naval defence." BURDENSOME AND INEFFECTIVE. Sir Joseph Ward contended that no country had attempted anything like a comprehensive system of naval defence with a population of less than 15 or 20 millions. To expect a sectional navy to bo of any practical use to the Empire was unreasonable, and he hoped the Dominion would not begin to tinker with anything in the shape of a tinpot loyal navy. If a test of strength ever took place in the Pacific, it would be with some great country of a naval power equal, or nearly equal, to that cf Great Britain. " Just fancy the defence of the Pacific relying upon an Australian and New Zealand squadron!" remarked the right hon. gentleman, who proceeded to say that a great number of the best minds connected "with the British Navy were strongly opposed to the sectional system of navies which had recently grown up. He contended that with a population of only five millions the Australian Navy would become an enormous burden as time went on. Personally, he believed in a per capita contribution from Canada, Australia. New Zealand, and the other parts of the Empire for the purposes of building ships, providing docks, and helping to maintain the great British Navy. Our land defences, important as thev might be. were a mere bagatelle compared with our 6ea defence, and anyone of common sense knew what chance New Zealand would have of maintaining the British Fla? if the British Navy went down anywhere round the English coast. Just as we had one Empire we should have one great navy, controlled by the best and most experienced intellects entitled to know. Mr Malcolm contended that New Zealand should have representation on the Council of Defence. Undivided control there must be, but as subscribers of a considerable amount we were entitled to knowjust exactly what the position was. At prescmt not a member of the House knew what the n-ecefsitics of the case were, and they were yet asked to pass large sums of money—a positively senseless position, he argued.