The Daily News. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1921. NEW NAVAL ERA.

Taranaki Daily News, 7 February 1921, Page 4

The Daily News. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1921. NEW NAVAL ERA.

The momentous decision arrived at by the Council of Imperial Defence in connection with Britain’s naval policy marks the advent of a new era, should that decision be acted upon. The British Government has been awaiting the result of the investigations made by the Committee of Imperial Defence before deciding upon its progi’amine of naval construction, so that the decision against the continuation of big-ship policy, on the ground that it involves the country (and the Empire) in naval expenditure which is so crushing that it will make the effort to reduce the war debt impossible, is bound to produce a deep impression on the whole of the Empire. A calm and impartial review of the problems of armaments and disarmament cannot fail to show that the time has arrived when a policy of drastic curtailment of naval expenditure by Britain is not only expedient but justifiable, particularly as the other great naval Powers—America and Japan—appear to be desirous of a “naval holiday.” The safeguards imposed on Germany’s naval operations are amply sufficient to prevent any anxiety as to danger in that quarter, while the League of Nations may reasonably be trusted to become a reliable factor in checking any tendency to naval rivalry. From an Imperial point of view, even supposing America and Japan elect to embark on the foolish policy of unlimited naval outlay, the one will offset the other, while under no circumstances is there the remotest possibility of Britain and America being at war, and it is extremely probable that Japan will also continue to remain on terms of friendship, her interests being in the direction of peaceful expansion rather than in costly and unprofitable warlike operations. When speaking recently at Hitchin (England), Lord Robert Cecil pertinently demonstrated that as the next big battleship would cost nine millions sterling, and Britain’s contribution to the League of Nations was costing only fifty thousand a year, the saving over the elimination of one battleship would be ten times the contribution to the League. Moreover, it is not only th ? actual saving of the cost of battleships, but the enormous expense of the docks, aircraft, cruisers, and destroyers necessary to protect big vessels. There is force in the contention, voiced by Senator Millen, that it “ would be a sorry commentary on the heroic efforts of the nations which fought in the war, if we emerged from the. horrors of a prolonged struggle only to again, shackle ourselves to ike

intolerable burden.of huge and costly armaments.” That there must be an efficient naval force under Britain’s control goes without saying, but that naval experts will be able to supply such a force without spending several millions in the construction of a “capital” ship may be taken from granted. With Germany out of business as a naval Power, the question of naval policy has become completely changed. What is needed among the present Naval Powers is a policy very much akin to that advocated by the representative of Canada (Mr. Doherty) to the League of Nations in relation to Empire unity—“a basis of agreement, and not a basis of control.” Is such a basis possible? Unquestionably. That it is desirable is indisputable. “A naval holiday,” said Senator Millen, “or a diminution of armaments is an eminently desirable thing. Continued high expenditure on a new race for naval supremacy would be deplorable, not only because of the crushing financial burden, but also because it would breed distrust and irritation.” If there existed the slightest risk resulting from the adoption of a serious- reduction in naval expenditure then the British Government might well hestitate to take that risk, but there should be no insuperable difficulty in coming to an agreement with America and Japan that would eliminate all risk. So urgently is money needed for reducing the eolorsal war debts, rehabilitating finances, and relieving the present heavy pressure on the taxpayers, that exceptional action is imperative, and it would seem the eud in view can be obtained by statesmanship, courage and confidence. It is the efficiency and sufficiency of the mercantile fleet that is really of paramount importance at the present time, and that fleet can be made of the greatest service as an auxiliary to the Navy if required. The more this question of naval expenditure is scrutinised the clearer becomes the conclusion that a determined effort should be made to carry out the policy recommended by the Committee of Imperial De■fence, and that no time should be lost in putting that policy into practice.