FORMIDABLE TASK

Evening Star, Issue 22576, 18 February 1937, Page 11

FORMIDABLE TASK

BRITAIN'S DEFENCE PROGRAMME INDISPENSABLE TO PEACE (British Official Wireless.) Press Association —By Telegraph—Copyright RUGBY, February 16. Britain’s White Paper on defence, after emphasising the wide range of the programme, proceeds: “ The formidable nature of the task confronting the British Government is apparent. Since it was first embarked upon, the conditions which governed the extent and pace cannot bo said to have become more favourable, and at present, at any rate, there would be no justification for any reduction or slowing down of the programme. “ His Majesty’s Government firmly believes that in the form it is presented the programme is a contribution indispensable to peace and one which it is a duty to the British people to make. The desire is to deal with all problems by elastic means susceptible of adaption in the light of changes in world conditions and of the new need arising from the intensive application of scientific research and invention. Recent years have witnessed an immense elaboration of the mechanical equipment of the fighting services. Moreover, the forces, once equipped, must be assured of swift and steady replacement in war. “ While these necessities are common to many nations, the wide dis-. persal of British territories and the dependence of the Home Country on supplies overseas lay a special responsibility on the British forces and above all on the British Navy to preserve freedom of communications. Modernisation of the defences of the strategic points in various parts of the Empire is in itself a' formidable item in the cost of the defence programme.” NAVAL EXPANSION THREE NEW CAPITAL SHIPS, LONDON, February 17. The actual expansion of the British Navy under the new proposals will be three capital ships in addition to the two land down last year, seven cruisers in addition to the seven being laid down in the current year, and two aircraft carriers in addition to two in the current year. Full expansion of the Fleet air arm to 450 machines will be held up till the carriers have been completed. "A CONVINCING CASE" ‘THE TIMES’ APPROVES. LONDON, February 16. Declaring that a convincing case had been made out for the financial and economic principles of . the Government’s defence proposals, ‘ The Times,’ in a leader, says: “ It remains for the House of Commons to see that value is obtained for this vast expenditure and no opportunity is lost of securing such relaxation of international tension as will make the programme and its cost elastic in the right direction.” GERMANY STARTLED ; TAIN’S RIGHT TO ARM. BERLIN, February 17. The British defence expenditure, startled Germany. “It is colossal,’ ’ said the Government spokesman. ■“ Nevertheless, we do not deny Britain’s right to arm to the extent she deems necessary, and we claim the same right.” Other German commentators question Britain’s need to arm so extensively, saying that Britain’s position is far less exposed than Germany’s. It is suggested that even air attack would be less dangerous to Britain than to •Germany because enemy aeroplanes .will always take some time- to reach the British coast, thus enabling more efficient defence measures to be taken. ITALIANS IMPRESSED RESPONSE EXPECTED ON MARCH 1. ROME, February 17. * The Italians are impressed at Britain’s determination to repair her armament deficiencies and amazed at the vast expenditure involved. Some critics declare that Britain and France are now leading the armaments race to heights which poorer countries will be unaMe to follow without intolerably burdening the citizens. Italy’s response is expected on March 1, when the Fascist Grand Council will meet to examine the entire miitary situation in “ relation to its requirements.” HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE OPENED BY MR CHAMBERLAIN (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, February 17. (Received February 18, at. noon.) The two days’, House of Commons defence debate was opened by Mr Neville Chamberlain, who recalled that when he announced last week the Government’s intention to take power to raise by loan or from the Budget surpluses £400,000,000 during the next five years for the purpose of expenditure on the defence programme, Mr Atllco had described the proposal as unprecedented in times of peace. The real justification of the proposal lay in the unprecedented conditions at the present time. The Chancellor of the Exchequer then referred to the vast increase in the cost of armaments since the close

of the Great War. Every country, he said, had been making every effort to increase its own striking power by the invention and development of new weapons, new means of transport, and new equipment. Every new means of offence called for some corresponding development in defence, and he hardly knew which was the more expensive of the two; but Britain, with its vast responsibilities and its multitudinous vulnerable points, could not neglect equipment either for defence or offence. It must equip itself at home and along all its lines of communication with the newest methods of repelling attack, and it must provide itself with forces capable of being despatched wherever they were wanted.

The White Paper showed where and how the cost of the defence programme would be incurred, and details of the cost would be found in the Estimates for the three services. If the circumstances changed so as to permit, a reduction of the programme the Government would be thankful enough to reduce it, but, just as conditions had changed to the disadvantage of Britain since the inception of rearmament, so they might change again, and they might find £1,500,000,000 was insufficient.

Defending the loan proposal, Mr Chamberlain pointed out that, on the assumptions of the White Paper, £32,000,000 extra annually would have to come out of revenue, even if the loan powers were fully used. But if the loan proposal were abandoned £112.000,000 extra would have to be found each year out of taxes. In his opinion such an additional tax burden would cripple their resources and throw back the whole course of recovery already bo marked.

The amount of borrowing proposed, he claimed, was not excessive, in view of the fact that the taxpayer would still be bearing three-quarters of the total expenditure on defence. Reviewing the details of the financial resolution before the House of Commons, the Chancellor said the Treasury was authorised to raise money in any manner suited to N the requirements at a particular time, and which, seemed most economical, and he emphasised that 8 per cent, would be charged to the defence votes and provisions made for repayment within 30 years. But the defence votes were bookkeeping transactions, which had no necessary relation to the terms or conditions on which the Treasury would borrow. This Mr Chamberlain declared vigorously, amid Ministerial cheers, was a measure for the preservation of peace. Everybody knew the British Empire stood for peace. It would never use its forces for aggressive purposes.. It would always exert its influence to preserve, peace, not only for itself, but for all others as well. The Government knew from its own experience that British influence waxed and waned with British strength. The strength of Britain was rapidly gaining from day to day and from week to week, and was in itself a steadying factor in international affairs, and was the greatest bulwark for peace in the world to-day. Convinced as the Government was that the great programme was essential for the safety of Britain and a major factor in the safety of other nations, it was impossible for it to shrink from meeting it. No one, least of all a Chancellor of the Exchequer, could see the growing accumulation of burdens which arma-; ments imposed without a feeling of disgust and shame that civilisation was preferring to break its own back instead of trying to settle its differences by give and take and turning its energies to pursuits which might bring prosperity and contentment to it. But for the time being at least they could only set their teeth and go forward with essential measures. Peace, political appeasement, and disarmament were not obtainable by any one Power alone, hut wherever and whenever the British could find others who shared their views they would rejoice in their company to seek a more fruitful, saner, and worthier solution. LABOUR OPPOSITION (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, February 17. (Received February 18, at 1 p.m.) Mr Pethick-Lawrence (Lab.) criticised the White Paper and the Chancellor’s statement on the ground that they revealed neither a considered connection between the Government’s defence programme and its international policy, particularly in relation to the theory of collective security, nor was there any sign of real co-ordination of defence or firm conception of essential strategic consideration such as would ensure efficiency in planning the defence of the country. The Labour Party, be said, would oppose the resolution because it proposed, instead of placing tho burden on the broadest backs, by appropriation, to impose, by the inflationary influence of further Government borrowing on prices, a disguised tax which would fall on those least able to bear it. For the Liberals Sir Archibald Sinclair declared that while scrutinising the Estimates carefully, they would vote for whatever armaments were necessary for the defence of the country and peace. The rearming of certain Powers in Europe, though he thought the moral responsibility for it might well be found by history to belong to the post-war policy of the victors in the Great War, left no alternative but to raise British defences to the necessary level. He, too, criticised the loan proposals as economically unwise in the present phase of ’business recovery, and expressed doubt as to the effectiveness of the measures being taken io prevent profiteering. The debate continues. REACTION ON STOCK EXCHANGE LONDON, February 17. (Received February IS, at 1 p.m.) Gilt-edged securities fell further ot» the White Paper. Industrial companies are heavy sellers in order j» increase their cash holdings.