NAVAL POLICY.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 July 1921, Page 5

NAVAL POLICY.

DEFENCE OF THE EMPIRE. PREMIERS’ DISCUSSION. greater cost involved. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. London, July 20. The discussion on the naval question was continued before the Imperial Conference to-day. The First Lord of the Admiralty and First Sea Lord were present. The position was explained irankly and clearly by the Imperial delegates, showing the relative strength of the British and foreign navies before the war and the present .strength. The lessons of the war were reviewed in conjunction with the experience of centuries. One statement showed that Japan owns eleven ships and America eight, each far more powerful than any British ship in the Pacific. Having disclosed the inmost secrets of the developments and prospects, responsibility was thrown on the conference to decide on a scheme to achieve the best results for the whole Empire. “What are you going to do about it?” was the Admiralty’s way of launching the final debate.

The efforts of the conference were concentrated on devising a scheme for Empire defence acceptable in its general principles to all the delegates, who would take it for submission to their Parliaments for approval and ratification. The scheme will be put before each Dominion Cabinet, showing the total cost of proposed shares allotted by the conference. The Cabinets will present it to their Parliaments, including the British House of Commons, with the unconfidential details, and permit full discussion.

The tone of the proposal was that the additional cost should come out of German reparations, but others pointed out that the Dominions and Britain would pay just the same in the long run.

Mr. Meighen wished to rely on the League of Nations and the Monroe Doctrine, with a navy constituted as at present.

Mr. Hughes pointed out that the Dominions paid nothing towards the navy now. The Monroe Doctrine and the League of Nations did not provide a sufficient guarantee at present, and, if the Dominions sheltered under the navy, they should be prepared to accept a share of the cost.

General Smuts said that the position in his country was most difficult. It was like Canada, which contained a large haven of French.. South Africa was not a homogeneous nation. Mr. Hughes jokingly remarked that someone said Australia was Sinn Fein. He was prepared to swop two Sinn Feiners for one Dutchman. The discussion centred round the Empire, and ‘the Pacific was not specifically dealt with. The position has not been reached when one can say whether the delegates have approved of a scheme which will cost Australia more or less than the Henderson programme. Once the larger plan has been decided on tentatively the Pacific proposals will be dealt with. It must be clearly understood that land defence was not mentioned at all to£ay.