THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1936. GREAT BRITAIN’S DEFENCES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22822, 5 March 1936, Page 8

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1936. GREAT BRITAIN’S DEFENCES

The recent debate in the House of Commons with reference to Rearadmiral Sir Murray Sueter’s proposals for the creation of a Defence Ministry served to concentrate attention on a weakness in Great Britain's defence system which the Government is now proceeding to repair. It was apparent that members of all parties recognised the force of the representations made with regard to the co-ordination of the defence services. Mr Baldwin conceded that the increasing demands upon his time as Prime Minister made it essential that he should have assistance in defence matters. He will retain the chairmanship of the Committee of Imperial Defence and of the Defence Policy and Requirements Committee, but a Minister is to be appointed as deputy chairman of these committees to whom the Prime Minister will delegate certain duties. The resume of these duties suggests that they will provide a whole-time job for the occupant of the new post. He will be empowered to exercise a general day-to-day supervision and control of the Committee of Imperial Defence or any committee dealing with the execution or reconditioning of the plans for defence. New conditions have ai’isen, and the Government’s proposals in this matter, have been accorded general approval throughout the country as being desirable in the interests of efficiency. The White Paper on defence now issued is the most important document bearing on this question presented by the British Government for years, and in its contents is, of course, a strong argument for strengthening the system of defence supervision. If the proposals spell rearmament it is a measure of rearmament that is inevitable fertile regaining of lost ground. As the Government observes, “ it is essential that the relations of our own armed forces to those of other great Powers should be maintained at a figure high enough to enable us to exercise the influence and authority required for the defence of vital British interests and the application of collective

security. . . . Conditions in the international field have deteriorated.

We have really no alternative in the present state of the world but to review our defences and provide the necessary means of both safeguarding ourselves against aggression and playing our part in the enforcement by common action of international obligations.” The details furnished respecting the armaments situation in other countries emphasises the force of the tide of rearmament into which Great Britain has been reluctantly drawn. The programme is generally indicated, while evidently in some respects tentatively, and without any suggestion of the total cost of the proposals, which will cover a considerable period. As was to be expected the particular importance of the navy is to be recognised in the service estimates. Naval replacement is to be begun next year, the Government aims at bringing the number of cruisers up to seventy—an intimation which should be very welcome to the Empire generally—and the personnel of the navy is to be considerably increased within, the present ’year. The strengthening of the air force and the military arras in important respects is also provided for. The magnitude of the undertaking involved in this provision for adequate defence is pointed to in the statement in the White Paper : “We have to carry through in a limited period measures which will make exceptionally heavy demands upon certain branches of industry and certain classes of skilled labour without impeding the course of normal trade. This will require most careful organisation and the willing co-operation both of leaders of industry and of trade unions in order satisfactorily to provide for needs both in peace and Avar.” The expenditure involved means the imposition of a burden on the nation, but one which it must' accept as cheerfully as possible, understanding, as it must, that lacking security it lacks the assurance which counts above all others. As Mr Duff-Cooper, Secretary for War, observed in a recent address to the Westminster Savings. Committee: “The expenditure must be borne philosophically' by wise economists who realise that their highest ideals can be carried out only in a State safely defended against barbarians.” When the defence debate takes place in the House of Commons it may be expected that the Labour Party will be found recognising the clear necessity of a certain measure of rearmament. In the address delivered by him at Birmingham a day or two ago Sir Austen. Chamberlain expressed very forcibly some of the reasons why Great Britain has to examine and take practical steps to meet the implications of portents which, for her own safety, she cannot neglect. The White Paper signifies Great Britain’s intention of putting her defences in order, and in so, far as the world desires peace it must welcome an increase in her strength as a champion of peace and of collective security. _ ■