AUSTRALIA’S SAFETY

Grey River Argus, 17 June 1943, Page 5

AUSTRALIA’S SAFETY

Curtin’s Estimate CHALLENGED BY BILLY HUGHES

SYDNEY, June 16. , The Prime Minister, Mr Curtin’s recent statement that Australia Jias passed the danger of being invaded by the Japanese was described by Kt. Hon W. M. Hughes (leader of the Federal House of the United Australia Party) as being a “hollow sham and a “mere political stunt.” “As a member of the Advisory War Council I am supposed to be kept fully informed, but I know ot no change in the military situation in the South-west Pacific that warrants Mr Curtin’s statement,” Mr Hughes said. “If it is true that Australia is safe from invasion, then the country’s manpower position should be reviewed immediately.” He said that Australia h.ad been geared for total war. Australia had an army of 800,000. More than half the land forces were not available for offensive operations outside the restricted area prescribed in the Militia Act. To build this great army, the primary anjdustr’fes had been seriously handicapped. Thousands of women were sent to work in factories. Married women were taken from their home duties, and children were left without pipper care. But if the danger of invasion has passed as claimed by Mr Curtin, then at least one hundred thousand of the military forces could be released to industry and of course, further callups would no longer be necessary.” In a bitter attack, Mr Hughes said that Mr Curtin was narrow and parochial, that he had been against compulsory military training, and had done nothing to aid voluntary recruiting, and that for 25 years ana more, he had been a bitter anticonscriptionist, and that in this war he was isolated. ON SAFE SIDE CURTIN’S OPTIMISM. (Rec. 10.10.) SYDNEY, June 16. A Boston “Christian Science Monitor” war correspondent. Mr. W. E. 'Lucas explaining the improvement "an Allied fortunes in the South West Pacific theatre, says: “The Japanese have allowed the initiative to drop from their grasp in the South-west Pacific.” ... Mr. Lucas discusses Mr. -Curtins recent utterance that the enemy cannot now invade Australia. He says: “On the face of things, it might appear that we have witnessed a remarkable exhibition of sleight of hand In point of fact, these are formidable Japanese forces, which, according to some observers never appeared more than defensive, and which have proved to be that veiy thing. Thus Mr. Curtin’s present optimism .might possibly be regarded as a delayed realisation of the position actually existing several months are- too other aspects of the South-west Pacific giving cause for what migh,t be called ‘negative optimism.’ The enemy has done little to prevent our side from improving its defensive as well as -its offensive power around New Guinea, and North Australia. Thus, with a general increase of pressure against Japan the position in this area must automatically take on a rosier colouring.” ENGLISH PRESS VIEW. CURTIN’S OPINION ACCEPTED. LONDON, J'une 15. When Mr Curtin affirms, and then reaffirms the belief that the Japanese can now no longer invade -Australia, we may be pretty certain; that Australia is safe, states the “Manchester Guardian,” in a leading article, and adds: A good J many people have thought the same: thing for some time, but they lived u long way farther from the Japanese than the Australians, and the views'i, about the imminence of danger tehd to vary with distance.' We assume, as Mr Curtin’s opinion' is so

happily definite, that the recent Washington conference was satisfactory to him in the prospects it held out. Also that the Allied strength in and around Australia has been substantially increasing. A great invasion expedition would now run the risk of becoming a great disaster. General MacArthur recently reported constant growing reinforcements of enemy strength in the island perimeter. It now appears in Mr Curtin’s view that the Japanese intention is defensive.