DEFENCE OF AUSTRALIA

Taranaki Daily News, 2 September 1929, Page 15

DEFENCE OF AUSTRALIA

“ILL-PLANNED REDUCTION”

CONCENTRATION IN CITIES.

COUNTRY KEENNESS KILLED

Sydney, Aug. 15.

The ehangCß that are being made in the defence forces of Australia as part of the economy campaign of the Federal Government are regarded with considerable perturbation by those who are competent to judge—and all of these are not military men, who depend on the maintenance of the forccfi for a livelihood. The changes are bound to result in a serious loss in efficiency in the training of citizen forces, and the view is held that this -will not nearly be compensated for by the caving in money. Many people hold the opinion that Australia cannot afford to lead the way in disarmament, and that while the great Powers are armed Australia must be in a position to meet’ any onslaught on her native soil. The reorganisation is taking the form of the abandonment of military training in certain parts of the country and the concentration of officers and equipment in Sydney.

It is in fact that enthusiasm among the citizen forces is great in the country districts than it is in.the city. The country towns had a personal pride in the force that was centred in their district, and the young men were encouraged to do their part. The training camps were regarded as important events in the life of the district, and there was a rivalry between the towns that was good to see. More than that, these . country forces —mostly Light Horse —had the example of the Light Horse in the Great War always before them, and they lived up to that example. With the batteries transferred to Sydney this local interest at once disappears. In Sydney they will create no interest at all, and they will be manned simply by the drafting of men from the infantry —men who would not be soldiers in any circumstances unless compelled by the law, as they are. Personal enthusiasm seems to wane in military matters as soon as there is any suggestion of compulsion, except in the country towns, where the work is regarded more as pleasure than anything else. The military authorities were proud of the progress they had made in the country towns, and now they see all their good work going to nought, for it is practically certain that before long the batteries will cease to exist as such, and the training of the infantry forces an a half-hearted manner will continue, with unsatisfactory results. It has been shown on various occasions that military training in the big cities is more or less farcical..

It is feared that the officers, finding that there is no enthusiasm among the men who come under their care will put no vigour into their work. The rabble remains a rabble, of little use should their services be called upon in an emergency. Furthermore, there seems to be little serious attempt to enforce the compulsory provisions of the Defence Act in a systematic manner, and there are thousands in consequence who are escaping their obligations. And the department seems to be glad to be relieved of them.

In the country districts there was not the same desire to escape training, and it seems to be a matter for great regret that the defence authorities should have selected the country for the economy move. No doubt they have been guided by the increased cost of training in the country, where there were certain travelling expenses that had to be paid. By reducing the cost of training and maintenance, the reorganisation will effect considerable savings, but the question at once arises: Will it be worth it?