NAVAL DEFENCE

Hokitika Guardian, 22 August 1931, Page 3

NAVAL DEFENCE

. Curiosity as to the reason for the increase of £25,001) in the naval defence vote was expressed by Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Iml.. Kgmont) when speaking in the Budget debate earlier in the week. “We have two naval vessels of the New Zealand Division,” said Mr "Wil-

kinson, “but one ship should be sufficient for the requirements of this country. I don’t think they could fight or run. In the event of war they would lie nothing but death-traps for those aboard them. The present vessels are simply police establishments. If the vessels were capable of putting up a fight it would not be so bad. T would like to know bow long wo are bound to employ these two ships.” The Hon. J. G. Cobbe said a great deal of work was involved- in the restoration of the warships -on-the New Zealand Station and this accounted for the extra expense as the member for Egmont would find if lie examined the Estimates. Under modern conditions they were most effective shins for work ■in the southern seas. They were the best type that couklbe employed. One only had to look at a map of the Pacific to ses how necessary they were for patrolling in that area. “The member for Egmont,” said Mr Cobbe, “has said these cruisers cannot fight and they cannot run. They are quite fit to fight and would fight were it necessary, and they.don’t run.” Mr Wilkinson : I said they could not run.