PROPOSED NAVAL BASE.

Hokitika Guardian, 9 May 1923, Page 3

PROPOSED NAVAL BASE.

AUSTRALIAN' AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. LONDON, May 0. The “Weekly Despatch” canvassed the views of prominent naval men regarding the proposed base at Singapore. . ( Admiral Guy Gaunt declared that either wo were going to keep control of our eastern possessions and stand by our companions in time of need or we were going to shut ourselves up in England, and leave the rest to chance and the good nature of possible enemies. Singapore, lie said, is an ideal strategic centre. "War would eventually take place in tho air, hut nienii,while the Empire must he defended at sea Australia must he protected, and a. ha so is essential for that purpose. Edmund Slade said that the advent of new naval Powers in the East renders it imperative that we have a strong force in the East. A base at Hongkong was not enough. Singapore was an ideal dominative point. Cufchbert Hunter said:—‘Me must remember Australia was underpopulated. Japan would ho a menace in later years, and we might want Singapore badly ns a base one day. It should be n baso for big ships as well ns for flotilla aircraft. . ... Sir Percy Scott declared that tilt country could not afford the money, „ IU I described as nonsense Mr Amery s statement that expenditure was necessary for the defence of Australia m case of Japan not remaining at pence with us. Ho considered that by us in„ a means of defence consisting of nerovliines. submarines, mines and destroyS?,s Australia Would be thoroughly to protect herself. He asserted that she did not want the trouble ot taking care of some of our useless Kerr advocated the establishment of a flotilla and air rise ■unoii" the islands. He said a capital base would be mere waste ol money Cecil Lambert said there was no justification for a ha.se for capital ships, for which there was no cash, and m view of their vulnerability to submaiiiios which the Admiralty had pioccd.