A MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22831, 16 March 1936, Page 8

A MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

The addition of a Minister of Defence to the. British Cabinet indicates that the,National Government is paying serious heed to the expressions of concern that have been heard respecting the organisation of the defence services. In recent years Great Britain, partly as an economy measure, but principally in an unselfish and earnest endeavour to sol an example (o the world in disarmament, has permitted the strength of her military resources (o be greatly diminished. Events in Europe and beyond have forced a change of policy, and the Government

has now entered upon a comprehensive programme o£ rearmament with especial attention to the need for increasing the effectiveness of the Navy and the Air Force. But the inauguration of a new order in defence measures lias not entirely allayed apprehension. It is feared among important sections of the British people that there has not been that measure of co-ordination between the fighting forces of the nation as would ensure their being most efficiently employed in the case of emergency. Rear-admiral Sir Murray Sue ter’s proposal, which was debated a month ago in the House of Commons, that the administration pf defence should be unified in a separate Ministry revealed how strongly this view was entertained. The debate disclosed that many Government supporters were seriously dissatisfied with the present system of control of the services. An impressive contribution to the debate on the subject was that of Sir Austen Chamberlain, who criticised in candid but not unfriendly terms the position which the Prime Minister, has been occupying. He expressed strongly the opinion that Mr Baldwin would commit a blunder if he continued to combine the chairmanship of the Committee of Imperial Defence with his multifarious other duties. He suggested that Mr Baldwin had been wrong before in his estimate of defence needs, his admitted failure to realise the full extent of German rearmament being cited, and that he might be wrong' again. The Government did not immediately acquiesce in the view that the establishment of a Defence Ministry was called for, but Mr Baldwin intimated that he would relinquish his chairmanship of the National Defence Committee in favour of a Cabinet member with more time to devote to the duties of the office. Evidently a realisation of the extent of public unrest and quite probably considerable pressure from the Conservative ranks have driven the ment to the acceptance of the principle that a separate Ministry of- Defence should be created. The first duty of this Ministry may be expected to be the co-ordination of the activities of the department controlling the fighting services. An important part of its duties, which are to be undertaken by Sir Thomas Inskip, will doubtless be to assess the strength, efficiency and requirements of Imperial defences and to devise such plans as may be regarded as essential for their improvement. The Government’s concession to the opinion of those who advocated the appointment of a full-time Minister of Defence is both welcome and significant. Great Britain has taken a lead in disarmament, but has met with a discouraging response in other countries. In the unsettled condition of the world a nation fully armed is in a much better position to plead for peace than one which has dangerously reduced its fighting strength. _ Moreover, the fact can no longer be ignored that a disarmed nation is a vulnerable one. As a guardian of her own Empire and as a major guarantor of peace abroad, Great Britain must be effectively armed, and the creation of a Defence Ministry should be reassuring to British people as an evidence that adequate provision for defence and the effective co-ordination of the services will be a matter of the first consideration.