COST OF DEFENCE PROGRAMME

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20671, 9 March 1937, Page 7

COST OF DEFENCE PROGRAMME

OUTLINED BY BRITISH MINISTER SUBSTANTIAL CHARGES ON REVENUE Brltlsb Official Wireless (Received March 8, 5.5 p.m.) RUGBY, March 6. The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr Neville Chamberlain), speaking of the cost of the defence programme at Edinburgh, said: “I am forced to the conclusion that in the circumstances in which we find ourselves we must press forward our re-equipment with all the energies of which we are capable, but J cannot dismiss the hope that we and the nations of Europe will presently find some less suicidal way of ending our fears and suspicions of one another before we are all ruined by our own efforts to defend ourselves.” The “Morning Post” recalls that in 1913, another year of intensive rearmament, the country spent £49,000,000 on the Navy and £23,000,000 on the Army, no separate provision being made for the Air Arm. In 1937 the Air Force alone is to cost nearly £10,000,000 more than the whole expenditure on defence in 1913, while the total bill is practically four times as great. Increased Costs Part of the difference is due to the higher price levels and higher rates of pay, but the bulk is due to the greatly enhanced complication of the whole apparatus of defence. It is now possible to forecast fairly closely, from the civil, defence and other estimates already published, the total expenditure for which the Chancellor will have to budget. The civil estimates at £408,053,605, are up by £28,751,132 compared with last year. The defence estimates total £277,685,000, but only £197.685,000 is to come from revenue, which is an increase of £9,815,000 on last year’s total. With the requirements of the revenue departments, the total for the coming year reaches £619,635,205, or £38,974,432 more than the year now expiring, but the apparent Increase is somewhat misleading owing to the coming into operation of the provision of the last Finance Act by which revenue and expenditure of the former Road Fund are taken into the ordinary accounts. Twenty Millions More When allowance is made for this change, the increase is reduced to thu neighbourhood of £16,500,000. Financial writers in the newspapers take the view that the Chancellor will not have to ask the taxpayer for more than an addational £20,00,000, leaving £80„000,000 for defence not charged to revenue to be defrayed under the procedure of the Defence Loans Bill, out of the realised surplus and borrowed money. The opinion is generally expressed that despite Mr Chamberlain’s warning at Edinburgh that taxpayers have not reached the end of their sacrifices, he will be able to secure additional revenue without any severe increase in taxation.