REACTION TO SPEECH

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21184, 3 November 1938, Page 7

REACTION TO SPEECH

PRAISED BY GERMAN SPOKESMAN Purpose of British Rearming Defended by Prime Minister , Adverse Criticism in France United Press Association—By Slartno Telegraph—Copy right (Received November 2, 6.30 pm.) BERLIN, November 1. Mr Chamberlain's speech caused the greatest satisfaction In political circles. One commentator welcomed the speech, especially the confidence expressed In Herr Hitler’s good faith and the acknowledgement of Germany’s position in Central Europe. It is stressed that Germany does not wish to hinder the trade of other nations In these markets, but has always been opposed to England's political loans. It is explained, with regard to rearmament, that Germany’s Interest lay In who should direct a powerfully rearmed nation—a Chamberlain or a Churchill. NEW CHAPTER OPEN GERMAN PRESS VIEWS United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received November 3, 12.30 a.m.) BERLIN, November 2. General satisfaction is expressed by the newspapers with Mr Chamberlain’s speech. "The Voelylsgher Boebachter" says: Mt Chamberlain closed Versailles epoch from English history, and opened a new chapter. The real importance from the speech is not the justification for the policy wn’-h led to the signing of the Munich agreement, but the attempt to create an hypothesis for a new European cooperation based on Munich. ADVERSELY CRITICISED IN FRANCE “INTIMIDATED BY FORCE” United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received November 3, 1.40 p.m.) PARIS, November 2 The French newspapers generally adversely criticise Mr Chamberlain's speech in the House of Commons. It is suggested ithat the British Prime Minister has been intimidated by Germany’s strength. BRITAIN’S DEFENCE PLANS OUTLINE OF GOVERNMENT'S ACTIVITIES PROMISES OF SPEEDING UP British Official Wireless (Received November 2, 6.30 p.m.) RUGBY, November 1. The second half of Mr Chamberlain’s speech in the House of Commons was devoted to questions arising from the review which the Government had made of civil and military defences to see what arrears or deficiencies had been revealed in the recent emergency. The civil side review was complete, and while it naturally showed that preparations were far from comprehensive or perfect, nevertheless Mr Chamberlain was of the opinion that they had been put to the test they would have worked a great deal better than many supposed. The Government, however, had come to the conclusion that the whole subject of air raid precautions had assumed gigantic proportions and complexities that a separate Minister was required to give his whole attention to It. Sir John Anderson as Lord Privy Seal would, in fact, be Minister of Civil Defence, having direct charge of air raid precautions. Sir John Anderson would also be responsible, In consultation with the other departments concerned, for the arrangements for national voluntary service. In connection with air raid precautions. Sir John Anderson would preside over the Co-ordination Committee of Ministers of the various departments affected, and he would, of course, be a member of the Committee for Imperial Defence. As to national service, the Government was satisfied that it was desirable and practicable to meet the need of civil defence by voluntary action, suitably organised. Defence Gape to be Remedied The review of the military, naval, and air defences was not finished, but in the meantime, Mr Chamberlain reiterated the unwillingness of the Government to accept a proposal for a Ministry of Supply, which, he argued, would cause dislocation of the existing arrangements without guaranteeing any improvement, and would involve the use of compulsion, which employers and workers would not normally accept in peace time. He made the point that Britain was then only in the third year of her rearmament programme, which was undertaken and organised as a five-year programme. To argue that, because everything was not completed In three years, the programme had broken down, was therefore foolish. He doubted If it would have been possible to squeeze the five-year programme int three years, but he admitted that the review had shown special urgency of certain parts of the programme for which certain practical reinforcements were necessary if they were not to Jeopardise the whole schemes. The Government would therefore direct Itself to those parts. He reminded the House that there undoubtedly would be an addition to the total cost of the programme. Finally, Mr Chamberlala turned to some criticism which had been heard

abroad on British rearmament, and he asked why a different standard was being applied to Britain in this matter. However, he added the repetition, which he clearly thought should have been unnecessary, of assurances of Britain's peaceful intent. No Aggressive Intention “I would repeat here, categorically, that we have no aggressive intention against Germany or any other country,” Mr chamberlain said. “Our sole concern is to see the country and her Imperial communications safe, and that we shall not be so weak relatively to other countries. Our diplomacy cannot enter upon discussions upon an equal basis. There is nothing further from our minds than to enter upon a new armaments race.” ARE SOCIAL SERVICES IMPERILLED? MINISTERIAL DENIAL IN BRITAIN United Press Association— By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received November 2, 6.30 p.m.) LONDON, November 2. In the course of the debate in the House of Commons, Mr Attlee referred to the report that instructions had been sent by the Treasury to all departments dealing with social services, to cut expenditure. Mr Chamberlain immediately gave a categorical denial to this report. A statement correcting the misunderstanding in regard to a recent speech by himself, which suggested that cuts in the social services were intended, was issued last night by Mr Walter Elliot (Minister of Health). He said his argument was that inroads upon the social services would injure the very things the Government was fighting to preserve, and it was to prevent the possibility of such Inroads, that he urged support of the policy of appeasement. At question time in the House of Commons to-day, Mr Elliot denied that the Government was contemplating cuts in the social services, and added that so far from thinking of cutting social services the Government intended to maintain, and if possible expand them. FULL STATEMENT PROMISED BRITISH DEFENCE SCHEME British Official Wireless (Received November 2, 6.30 pan.) RUGBY, November 1. The Prime Minister (Mr Neville Chamberlain) announced in the House of Commons that early in the next session a full and comprehensive statement would be made on the steps which the Government had taken and was taking to leal with defence matters. He agreed to consider the issue of a White Paper in advance of the debate. The Secretary of State for War (Mr L. Hore Belisha) said that the production of Bren guns wa- proceeding at the maximum rate in Britain. If some facts could be revealed there would be less cause for disturbance in the public mind. The Under-Secretary of State for Air (Mr Geoffrey Lloyd) said that the air raid precautions personnel enrolled now totalled over 1,600,000. In the House of Lords, the Marquis of Zetland (speaking for the Government) gave the following defence details: Anti-aircraft guns are being delivered three times as fast as they were six months ago; searchlights at four times the rate. More than twice as many mountings for 3.7 and larger anti-aircraft guns had been turned out in the four weeks succeeding September 26, as in the preceding four weeks. The air defence personnel on October 1 was 2027 officers and 43,223 other ranks, compared with 683 and 8798 two years ago. A million feet of trenches had been dug and thirty million gas masks distributed during tho crisis.