PREMIERS’ CONFERENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 June 1921, Page 8

PREMIERS’ CONFERENCE.

STRONG foreign policy. NEED OF POWERFUL NAV-Ya PROTECTING THE PACIFIC. By Telecraph .-—Press Assn.—Copyright. London, June 16. •Monday’s sitting of the Conference is likely to pass without important results. So many details require examination that marked progress is not likely to be apparent for a day or two. The naval defence of the Empire is to be debated early in the Conference. The representatives o£ Britain have said quite plainly that she cannot, unaided, bear any longer the enormous expense of maintaining a navy sufficiently strong to guarantee the safety of every part of the Empire. Britain herself has been the first to recognise that the Dominions should have a voice in framing foreign policy, but a strong foreign policy would be no good without a powerful navy to back it up. It will be left for the Conference to decide what shall be done.

It is considered likely that Lord Jellicoe’s recommendation that. Britain should pay three-quarters of the annual cost and the Dominions one-quarter. This will be the basis of the discussions. The protection of the Pacific will, of course, largely focus the Australian viewpoint. Mr. Hughes says Australia is ready to shoulder her part of the burden. Other delegates are not so outspoken. THE PACIFIC PROBLEM. Although M. Meighen has stated that Canada’s financial position prohibits her embarking on any substantial naval programme at present, it will be pointed out to the Conference that, whereas Canada, South Africa and India are within comparatively easy steaming distance of the most powerful naval force drawn from the centre of Britain’s might, help could not come to Australia or New Zealand in an emergency in-less than a month. If these outposts of the Empire are not to be instantly crippled on the unexpected outbreak of some war before relief arrives, it will be necessary to maintain in the Pacific a • sufficiently strong holding force to keep off the enemy fbr at least four weeks. This would necessitate the provision in the Pacific of bases, docks, victualling and coal stations at convenient points, not only to maintain the holding force, but also to provide the neetls of the smashing force on its arrival, because its first requirements would most certainly be coal and refitting. This defence by sea must be adequate to meet all possibilities. The Commonwealjth cannot provide this from her own resource any more than Britain can provide for the defence of the whole Empire. There can be no argument about that phase, the only for discussion being on the allocation of cost. No official statement is available yet, and Messrs. Hughes and Massey both refuse to discuss the matter, but it is quite certain they will put forward their views on the Pacific problem very strongly and frankly at the proper time. AUSTRALIA TO BE READY. It may be taken for granted that the Henderson scheme will be abandoned, but such parts of it as have been developed will be maintained, thus Australia will be kept constantly ready to fight, and the smaller ships, carrying nucleus crews, will be kept in a state of efficiency. The Adelaide will be completed as soon as funds are available. As a matter of fact, naval men with whom her future was discussed deplored even the suggestion that she should be allowed to rust at anchor in Sydney harbor. They regard the Adelaide as likely to be the most effective unit of the fleet and one of the most up-to-date warships of the King. Meanwhile a controversy is raging as to the choice of names for the conference. General Smuts started it by saying: “We must find a name for future meetings.” “Imperial Conference,” and “Imperial Cabinet,” it .is contended, do not adequately describe the assembly, but it has been suggested that “Congress” would. The Times’ correspondent prefers “Britannic” to either “Empire” or “Imperial,” and his view is meeting with some support. —Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.