BRITAIN'S SACRIFICE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17067, 27 September 1929, Page 10

BRITAIN'S SACRIFICE

NAVAL DISARMAMENT A NATIONAL LOSS BROKEN CONTRACTS. LONDON, August 1Fvom comments in the foreign press, and particularly in certain American papers (states the Daily Telegraph), it is clear that the full meaning of the British Government’s latest disarmament gesture has not been appreciated by all observers abroad. U. js freely stated, for example, that in suspending Die- cruisers Surrey and Northumberland and cancelling two submarines and the big submarine depot Medway, we have scrapped ships that exist only on paper, and that, consequently, no real sacrifice of naval Length has been made. Actually, all tho slops the construction of which has been stopped belonged to the 1928 programme—a programme whioh had been approved by Parliament uni for which large sums l)ad been voted long before the latest developments m the direction of naval disarmament had been foreshadowed, and, incidentally, nine months before the passage of the United States 15-cruiser programme, by Congress. The ships affected constituted the cn* tiro cruiser programme for 1928 and more than half of the entire naval building scheme for that year. Hus scheme was estimated to cost about 811,000,000, but the action now taken hv the Government has reduced tins sum to £5,000,000. COMPENSATION QUESTION.

Nor is it true to say that the vessels in question were merely contemplated. All were ordered some months ago, work in connection with the ships and rlveir equipment was actively in hand, and heavy financial liabilities had been incurred. The value of the orders for material which had been placed amounts to £1,750,000, and authority had been given to expend an additional £1,400,000 on the ships during the current year, ft- is certain that the Government, in suspending or cancelling so much new construction, did so with full knowledge of the dislocation of work that would be suffered by the shipbuilding and imminent industries concerned. Claims for compensation in respect ot broken contracts will undoubtedly ho forthcoming. Apart from the blow to private industry, the Royal Dockyards will also suffer severely as a result of the Government’s decision. It will be seen, therefore, that Great Britain, in holding np such a- substantial part of her naval building programme, lias made a very real and vital sacrifice in the interests of international disarmament and goodwill. The fact that the effects of this renunciation will bo felt by wide sections of the community, employers and wage-earners alike, givw it a distinctly national character and thus enhances its significance.