ECONOMIES IN DEFENCE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 29 March 1930, Page 7

ECONOMIES IN DEFENCE

PRESS COMMENT^ The proposal to effect defence economies is meeting with approval in the metropolitan. Press. The Auckland "Star" says: "The fact is that the present land defence policy, now nearly twenty years old, is ready for overhaul., Between 1927 and 1929 the-expenditure in this branch 6f defence was reduced by £30,000, but this year's estimate was nearly equal to the figure.;pf 1527; Sir Joseph Ward sau. in his Budget last year that war had not yet been completely ruled out, and there must be some preparation, for defence. This' is' quite' true, but it does not necessarily mean that we need spend a million a year on defence or that the best, value is being obtained for the money." £IOO,OOO SAVING "No one outside the circle ofbraided militarism and jingoistic patriotism will' cavil at the Government's policy," says the Auckland "Sun." State economy in somo direction has become essential, and in the face of existing circumstances, national and international (unless the idealism of peace be nothing more than pious hypocrisy), the proposals of the Ward Administration represent economy in the right place at the right time. . . It is to be hoped that the Government's proposals for a revision of the present svstem of Territorial defence will take the definite form of more extensive retrenchment. And many citizens, probably the majority of citizens to-day, would not now protest against the abolition of compulsory military 'training. . . . If the Government's decision to cancel military camps for the remainder of this autumn should be extended into a permanent, policy, the State would bo saved an expenditure of not less than. £IOO,OOO a year, which would help to pay the interest on money borrowed annually for reproductive public works. In the event of Parliament agreeing to the elimination of camp training this year, upxt year, and perhaps for ever (a vain hope!) consideration wil have to be given to tho delicate question of retrenchment among the highest-paid officers. Withou* Territorial training in ca'mps there should be no valid reason for spending about £40,000 a year on maintaining the New Zealand Staff Corps, which comprises seven-ty-five officers and three cadets. And so with all the other subdivisions of the permanent forces of the Defence Department, Altogether .they cost the country about £210,000 a year. In that expenditure also there appears to be J some scope for the practice of essential economy." "FLAGRANT WASTE" "The Christehurch Star" states that if the decision of the Government to hold no more Territorial camps pending the meeting of Parliament is the prelude to the abolition of tho system of compulsory military training, it is in every way to be commended. "There is lio more flagrant waste of public money in New Zealand," says the "Star," "than the expenditure on the present Territorial defence system. Compulsory military training of young men on the present methods is out of harjinony with the present-day peace movement, but this is not its' chief defect. It is virtually valueless as a defence factor. It costs an inordinate amount of money in proportion to its real value. As a preparation for actual warfare it is almost a joke. It involves a great' deal of loss of time industrially, and it vexes a large section, of tho public. Hie money spent on it could much more profitably bo devoted to the organisation of an efficient air force. All this, however, can he said without condemning the idea ut local units fur military training. .\ sicleton organisation must be maintained, but the actual training of young men could be better conducted on the voluntary system, because that system at least secures keenness and enthusiasm on the part of the trainee."