HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Hokitika Guardian, 31 July 1925, Page 1

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

NAVAL ESTIMATES.

.DISCUSSED IN COMMONS. [Australia A X.Z. Cable Association.] LONDON, .Tidy 20. The House of Commons is discussing the Naval Estimates. Mr .J. C. Davidson stated that the battleship "Nelson’' will l;c completed by the end of this year. The battleship "Rodney “ "ill he finished in April of next year, and two cruisers liy May 27th next. Three more cruisers probably would he completed by November 27th next and a number of new minelayers and destroyers by June “(it!'.. The complete cost of these new .-Jlips would he forty-three million sterling, Mr Ramsay MacDonald moved the reduction of the naval vote, lie denounced this expenditure, declaring that there was no possibility of any development in the political situation during iho next decade which would make war necessary or inevitable. Nobody would say that America or Japan were p.i-.iblo enemies; and, so far as France "as euneoniod. the problem was primarily an aerial one. There should lie im new building at present hv miv Governmeni actively engaged in promoting disarmament eonlorouMr Lloyd George said that Hiere was no menace in F.urope iustilyiiig this programme. He asked "'lndlier there was any menace to i’.ritisli trade routes iii l la* Pacific justifying such a burden, lb* asked could the Government conceive ally peril in the Pacific during I lie next decade wherein the United Stales would not. he far more involved than Britain, and on the same side.

Mr Churchill declared that the Admiralty had made the most extreme efforts to reduce the charge on the exchequer. The building as finally proposed by the Admiialiv. and as accepted by the Government. wasno more than any reasonable man would consider necessary lor sober and

solid defence of Britain's permanent naval position. Tin* only menace was that the fleet was wearing nut. Mr Chamberlain .innounocd that Mr Baldwin's statement on tin* Naval Programme 'as i•aided on July 23), must he amended, inasiiiueh as the annual construction ut nine destroyers proposed would l.ogm m 1027 not in the L'.'2li-27 loriu. Mr Churchill said that the Admiral! v wen* determined that there should lit* administrative economies. He claimed that the programme only did what was necessary to maintain the British Fleet at a. one-power standard. Mr Phillip Snowden strongly attacked the Admiralty promise to effect considerable reductions. All the talk about replacement had tailed to disguise the fact that (Ids was an increase in the* strength oi the navy. There was an alternative. It was a disarmament < onleroiiro. .Mr Bridgemun (first, Kurd of the Admiralty), replying, said: ’’Our need lor cruisers was far greater than that nf nnv other count rv. because nl our widespread Umpire. The present eniisstrength was lorly-eight. being the lowest since UM!!. The lesson of the Falkland Islands Battle shoved a necessitv for speed and lor strength of cruiser armament. He quoted figures

showing that llrilain would he at a considcra IJe disadva nl aye in H>2!b im compared with the Cnited States. .Japan ami I’’ranee, if they did not lay down these cruisers, lie iosi-ted on the need lor an adequate navy. Hot as a weapon of olfeiiee. hut as a policy •>! insurance. Other countries also would he probably doing the same. Mr I'ridyeiimi! quote'll figures showiny that out of three hundred and twentv-nine warships .if different kinds

laid down hy the live great manlime Powers since Ihe war, Hritain’s share had only hcen eleven, including Iwo Australian cruisers. The question <’f giving employment was not a first coilsideralicni, hut this prop ramme would mean the di-liur-emeiil ol twenty-five millions in wastes alone. The '"'ly wise course for liritaiu. so lotto as oilie*i* i-'HinlricK nrmo«l. wjis to pursue a steady policy of I eplacomoiilas ships heeame ohsolele. and to lie always ready to consider a general proposition lor disarmament, consistent with the security of the Empire. Mr Mac Ilona Ids motion was rejected liv 2b7 to I H>-