NATIONAL DEFENCE

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1001, 18 June 1930, Page 9

NATIONAL DEFENCE

COMPULSORY SYSTEM SUPPORTED MINISTER APPROACHED Frees Association WELLINGTON, Monday. i large deimf.at.ion representing the \ Rational Defence League waited upon the Prime Minister, tho Hon. G. W. Forties, and the Minister of Defence, the Hon. J. G. Cobbe, today to urge that the compulsory system of military training in New Zealand should | be retained, and that there should be no reduction in the land defence vote j this year. Major-General Sir Andrew H. Itus- j sell, president ot the National Defence ; League, introduced a deputation. He I said that they realised it was necessary to make the closest scrutiny jot' j the finances, but they felt that defence j was a form of insurance that was i needed, perhaps more than any other. I Danger unfortunately lay in the back- > ■•round and it was therefore not apparent. It had been rumoured that there were to be severe cuts, and that the compulsory defence system was | to be abolished. They believed tho defence system had been cut down to j the furthest possible extent to which : it was safe to go. Speaking as cne j with a very wide experience ot the j defence system, both volunteer and j compulsory, he would say that the ! volunteer system would never give i them w hat they wanted —adequate ] defence. It was at best camouflage, and would fall to pieces under the stress of war. Preparation in national defence was just as necessary as it was in business. Major-General Russell’s arguments were supported by Lieutenant-Colonel Avery, Dr. Bowerbank, Mrs. Chattield and Mr. W. Perry. In his reply, the Prime Minister said one could not help but tie impressed by the representative character of the deputation and by the arguments that it had advanced. There could be no question of the sincerity o p the speakers. One speaker had stated that the expenditure on other departments should be adjusted so that it would cot be necessary to touch the Defence Department, and he only wished it was such a simple matter as the speakers apparently thought it to be. (Laughter.) The fact oi the matter was that every department thought if a single pound were taken off its expenditure, ir. would react to the detriment of the, country. There could be no doubt that at the present time there was a demand right through the country for a reduction in the public expenditure. “We have to recognise,” said Mr. Forbes, “that wo have been going along for some years now on a fairly prosperous level, and now that we are faced with the necessity of suiting ourselves to a reduced income we are fiuding it a painful process. There is no doubt that there must be a considerable reduction in expenditure. In regard to the land defence vote, we will have to see if we are getting value for money we are expending.” Mr. Forbes said that at. present they were carrying on a territorial system in the face of some opposition. He did not know how many thousands of prosecutions had been made for offences under the Act. The Minister of Defence said there were S6O last year,”

Mr. Forbes said that men put into camp against their will were not likely to make very good soldiers during war. They had been told time and time again that raw material was better to work on than material which came from the territorial forces. Ha had heard that stated very often, and the arguments which had been advanced by Major-General Russell and Mr. Perry that morning had not been heard very much during the war period. Since the introduction of the military training system in New Zealand there had been a considerable alteration in connection with the science of warfare, said the Prime Minister. Aviation was a branch of defence that was being developed very considerably in other countries, and it was a question whether New Zealand should not endeavour to keep pace with those developments instead of spending money on land defence. The Prime Minister stated that it was not the intention of the Government to scrap the whole of the defence system. What the Government intended to do was to make a close study ot the whole position—in other words to overhaul the system in an endeavour to improve it, so that they would get value for the money they expended.

Mr. Forbes said he was not one of those who believed the days of war were over. They had not yet reached that stage when they could say, "Ail is peace.” He believed, however, that they were making a certain amount of Progress toward that happy goal, although he agreed they could not afford completely to abandon defensive measures. In considering the whole question, Cabinet would keep before it the representations which had been made by the deputation. NO NEED FOR ARMIES f AN AMERICAN VIEWPOINT Special to THE SUN WELLINGTON. Today. . A new angle on the dispute concernJn s the revision of the defence system tho country is taken by Mr. T. Kurt, American member of the League of international Freedom, who is visiting New Zealand. Mr. Kurt points out that in common the Mother Country and other British Dominions, New Zealand has signed tho Paris Pact, better known as the Kellogg J*act, and bound herself ,0 renounce Avar as an instrument of Policy. The present opposition to the induction of New Zealand’s forces can only one of two things—either tliat those members of the community not approve tho Government’s decision to sign the pact, or that they nave no faith in tho goodwill of the >ther signatory nations, one of which ** Japan. New Zealand having renfJUnced war, says Mr. Kurt, has no for armies, especially when the Rr nallness of her armaments is considered.