BASE ABANDONED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18663, 20 March 1924, Page 7

BASE ABANDONED.

SINGAPORE DECISION. DEBATE JN HOUSE CRITICS AND SUPPORTERS. GOVERNMENT UNMOVED. VIEWS OF THE DOMINIONS. NEW ZEALAND'S OFFER. By Telegraph— Association Copyright (Received 10.15 p.m.) A, and N.Z.Renter. LONDON. Mar. 16. In the House of Commons, Mr. C. Q. Amnion, Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, announced that the Government had abandoned the Singapore base jcheme. Introducing the Navy Estimates, Mr. Ammon emphasised that their reduction by £2,200,000 testified to Britain's observance of the Washington agreement and her desire to reduce armaments. The personnel. was to be increased' by 1000 only. . Fourteen hundred men would be recruited to man the two new battleships and other ships now being constructed, instead of 3200 normally re- ' quired. The remainder would be obtained from other ships. The progress of the battleships Nelson and Rodney had been seriously affected by the boiler makers' lock-out last year, and it. was very doubtful whether the time lost could be regained. It was anticipated that three of the new light cruisers would be completed in the next financial year, and the fourth by July, 1925. Arrangements had been made to maintain an adequate oil reserve for the needs of the fleet. " More Light Cruisers Essential. Cruisers available for the protection of trade were below requirements. The construction of five new cruisers could no longer be delayed in view of the large numbers of light cruisers which in the next, few years would reach an age at which they would no longer be efficient. Out of the 48 light cruisers c r the British Empire. 10 would be over the efficient age this year. Practically all the remainder were built during war-time for the North Sea, and 18 of them were unsuitable to operate on long ocean trade routes. By the time the proposed five cruisers were completed, 11 out of 16 now - commissioned would have been scrapped or placed on the reserve. The Government had closely and earnestly considered the question of the Singapore ba§e project-, as it involved questions of much wider implication than naval strategy. After fully considering all relevant facts and consulting . the Dominions, the Government had decided not to proceed with the scheme. This' announcement was received with Labour cheers arid - Opposition cries of "Shame." To the latter Mr. Ammon retorted: "I have given up attempting to please everyone. The Liberals find fault with 'the Government's decision relating to the laying down of five new cruisers, and the i Conservatives •• are disposed .to criticism of the Singapore decision." Proceeding, Mr. Amnion said that the Government had attempted to steer a course which would result in maintaining proper -efficiency in the Navy as a. first line-of defence, and at the same time to give .in earnest *of its intention to . give the' world a lead regarding the reduction of armaments. The Government would do, no thing to occasion provocation to any foreign Power. Mr". L. •C. M. Amery, who was First Lord of the Admiralty in Mr. Baldwin's Cabinet, said that when the Conservatives were again returned to power they would not.' hesitate an instant in resuming the Singapore base scheme. Base no Menace ta Japan. .In pointing out that the Naval Estimates were much ■ below. what he would have proposed, Mr. Amery emphasised the, tremendous reduction in. Britain's : naval power since pre-war days. At present, he said, British capital §hips amounted to 22, and would shortly be reduced to 20, ' compared with, 62 in 1913,and cruisers numbered 48, compared with 115. The present personnel of the Navy was 100,000, compared with 150,000 -in 1913. , ' ;v; y ' The major matters affecting the security of Britain and thp Empire; continued Mr. Amery, were the cruiser position and the regrettable and wholly unexplained decision regarding the Singapore base. : The latter, was entirely inconsistent with the Government's general ' naval policy. The Singapore base • would no more be a menace to Japan than the Plymouth base was a 'menace to the United States. They ' talked of. the danger of wounding the susceptibilities of a foreign Power, but was not the real danger that of mortally wounding the susceptibilities of their fellow-citizens in the Dominions? Mr. G. Lambert, Liberal member for Devon, supported absolutely the Government's Singapore policy. To build" two battleship docks at Singapore would be one of . the costliest follies ever proposed in the House of Commons. There was a limit to what the British taxpayer could stand

The Prime Minister, Mr. Ramsay MacDonald,. repudiated the suggestion that the Government's action was in an way putting off co-operation with the Dominions or making it impossible to carry on co-operation in different circumstances and perhaps on different plans. He stated incidentally that the Singapore scheme would in ,no way violate the Washington agreement if Britain were driven to create a new fleet in the Pacific, but after • careful consideration the Government had decided that the scheme would detrimentally affect its foreign policy which aimed at 'the creation of international confidence to facilitate a comprehensive agreement on the limitation of armaments. Hew Zealand Representations.

The Government would publish ft document, setting out its naval vws. The Dominions' views would also be fully published when their consent to the course had been received. The Australian representations, he said, urged that the abandonment of the Singapore base would jeopardise the policy of conciliation, because a reduction 'in the mobility of the fleet would reduce the Empire's 1 influence in the Council of Nations. , Australia cordially sympathised with the Government's international policy and decided to advance toward reduction of armaments, but.it considered that the action of His Majesty's Government would jeopardise instead of assisting that policy. The Singapore scheme was for defensive, not offensive purposes. New Zealand represented that the Empire's interests in the Pacific would be endangered if capital ships were unable to operate there, and that the time had rot. arrived to rely wholly upon the influence of the League of Nations for £ peace. - ,

General Smuts described the Imperial Government's policy as a bold move toward enduring peace and he wholeheartedly agreed with it. General Smuts felt that. the great cause ■of peace anal conciliation would be seriously undermined by the construction of the base.

Mr. Mac Donald said he could not accept the Australian suggestion that it would be better to continue extending Singapore for the purpose of scrapping it later, if an international, agreement were reached,, than to hold it up now in the hop© that this would help toward an agreement. From tho viewpoint of bargaining, he believed that Britain would be in a stronger position by holding up the base now, but the Government would let the world know that Britain would extend Singapore if driven to that course. So far as moral sincerity was concerned, tho latter policy would be ten million times stronger than the former. Therefore he thought tho Australian Prime Minister's observations were unsound.

Mr. Mac Donald concluded with an announcement that Australia had expressed, her willingness to contribute a substantial sum toward the development of the base and New Zealand had already offered a first contribution of £100,000. The debate concluded after Mr. Baldwin had stated that Conservatives reserved the right to speak fully and demand a decision of the House on the report stage. Mr. Hugh Deely (Liberal) thereupon moved that there was no necessity to construct five cruisers. This motion was defeated by 304 votes to 114 votes and the House adjourned.

THE JX>BDS DISAGREE. MAJORITY FAVOUR BASE. ■ SAFETY OF DOMINIONS. (Received 10.35 p.m.) ; A. and N.Z.-Reuter. LONDON. Max. 18. Tho House of Lords carried by 56 votes to 19 a motion proposed by tho Marquis Cprzon, declaring that . the House regretted the Government's action in abandoning the 'Singapore scheme, believing that the development of the naval base at Singapore as approved by the Imperial Conference was urgently required for the protection of commerce, the security of the Dominions and the future maintenance of peace. Lord Chelmsford, First Lord of the Admiralty, summarised the replies of the Dominions.

Canada and India, he said, preferred not j to advise the Imperial Government. Australia, New Zealand and Newfoundland i urged construction. General Smuts, Prime Minister of South Africa, approved the policy of the Imperial Government as being conducive to peace. The Marquis Curzon said he was glad Lord Chelmsford had discarded the argument that the decision of the late Government to proceed with the Singapore base could be regarded as a breach of faith owing to the Washington agreement. To say the base would be a menace to Japan was an argument which could' only be used with great caution, or they might b« told they could not have a fleet in the Channel because it would be tantamount to shaking a fist in the. face of France, or one in the Atlantic, because the United States would riot like it. " I wonder what will happen," said Lord Curzon. " if China breaks into chaos and confusion. May it not become vital then for the British Fleet to have the means of effecting repairs at Singapore? j When this matter " was discussed at the Imperial Conference, it was- borne strongly to my mind that the Dominions believed profoundly that they were unsafe." Viscount Grey said that this was not a question of letting the navy down, but a question of giving contracts which committed Britain irrevocably to giving the navy a range of potentiality it had not had befor,e. If there were not another powerful fleet in the Pacific, this expenditure would not be advocated.

Lord Haldane said that no doubt a naval base at Singapore would add considerably to the strength of the navy, but it would be a gesture to the world indicating that Britain was vastly extending her armaments and making a weapon which might be used for aggressionThere was reason to believe the Dominions shared the views of the Government in regard to foreign policy.

The Morning Post characterises the Singapore base decision as " shameful and ,as being equivalent to a repudiation of Britain's obligations and responsibilities in the Pacific. Moreover, the journal says, the abandonment of the base is a deliberate breach of agreement with the Governments of the Dominions. AUSTRALIA PERTURBED. DISCUSSION BY CABINET. IfEW DEFENCE POLICY. Australian and , 2T».Z«. Cable Association. (Reed. 11.39 p.m.) MELBOURNE. Mar. 19 The federal Cabinet at a meeting this afternoon discussed: the situation arising out of the Imperial Government's abandonment of the Singapore scheme. ' Mr. E. K. Uowden, Minister for Defence, in an interview, said he hoped it would not mean permanent scrapping of the scheme. Hie Cabinet was awaiting further information on' the matter. From Australia's point of view it was absolutely essential that there should be somo naval base in the Pacific.. It would be impossible for the Grand Fleet to operate in war-time with no -base nearer than Malta.

Nationalist members expressed disappointment with the British Government's decision. In some quarters it was declared that it would seal the doom of the Labour Government as it was contrary to popular British opinion. Labour members took the contrary view. The opinion is expressed in political circles that the Federal Cabinet must now consider what action Australia must take for her own defence. MR. MASSEY'S REGRET. "GREAT DISAPPOINTMENT," [BY TELEGEAI'H.PBKS3 ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON. Wednesday. The Prime Minister has made the following statement in connection with tbe announcement of the abandonment of the Singapore naval base scheme :— regret exceedingly that the British Government, has seen fit to drop the proposals with regard to fortifying Singapore. It will be a great disappointment to all British citizens in the Pacific, particularly because we know perfectly well that a fleet of battleships ,or battle-cruisers cannot operate successfully unless it has a satisfactory base. I am optimistic enough to believe that this matter will be taken up later on, and perhaps in the not far distant future, by a Government which will succeed the one now in charge of the Treasury benches. In the meantime there is nothing to do but to possess ourselves in patience and be ready to urge the resumption of operations as soon as a proper opportunity offers."