NAVAL DEFENCE.

Southland Times, Issue 17607, 23 March 1914, Page 4

NAVAL DEFENCE.

If we may judge from Mr Churchill s statement in the House of Commons New Zealand is not likely to have any warships of any value on her coasts except she provides them herself. As was explained last session the Government, while entering il:q an agreement with the Admiralty for the use of H.M.S. Philomel as a local training ship, continued to exert pressure upon the Imperial authorities with a view to having two cruisers of the Bristol type sent out to New Zealand. Mr Churchill has made it quite clear that no Bristols can bo spared so far from the central point of danger, and unless New Zealand does something herself she will have to be content with the Psyche and the Pyramus. A change in European conditions has made it Impossible for the British Government to carry out the highly advantageous agreement which Sir Joseph Ward procured in 1908. Under that agreement Britain was to maintain a unit consisting of two Bristol cruisers, three destroyers and two submarines in New Zealand waters, and the gift Dreadnought, as part of the China squadron, was to show her flag regularly on the coasts of the dominion. New Zealand was really to have a local defence force of quite considerable strength at tho cost of an annual subsidy of £IOO,OOO and the interest on the price of the Dreadnought. Through no fault of New Zealand, however, this agreement has fallen through, and, the Australian navy having been established, the Home Government has withdrawn all ships for which any real fighting power can be claimed from the southern Pacific. In meeting her own problem Australia has made a problem for New Zealand, and it is now for New Zealand to say whether she is content to rest entirely under the protection provided by the British taxpayer at the rate of 19s 11 %d in. every 20s of cost, or whether she will discharge her duty in carrying a full proportionate share of tho cost of Imperial defence, in other words is Now Zealand to have no naval defence force at all, or is she to provide her own force, as Australia has done and as Canada will inevitably do? The naval question is likely to create keen discussion next session.