NAVAL DEFENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 August 1922, Page 9

NAVAL DEFENCE.

COST .TO NEW ZEALAND. LARGER CONTRIBUTION PROPOSED. «‘IF OUR FINANCES PERMIT.” Wellington, August 15. The cost to New Zealand of naval defence was detailed to the House to-night by the Prime Minister in the course of his Budget Statement. Mr. Massey also outlined purposes to make a bigger .contribution towards next year if financial conditions permit. The Premier said: The expenditure on naval defence for the financial year amounted to £418,6*65, under the following headings:—Permanent charges on account H.M.S. New Zealand, £115.148; annual appropriation for naval defence £303,517: a total of £418.665. The capital sum owing on account of H.M.S. • New Zealand is £1.795.166, against which accrued sinking funds amounting to £931,429 are held by the Trustee, to whom 4 per cent, per annum on the capital sum is jiaid for this purpose. An item of £1,500 has been placed on the estimates for the building of a shed on the property of the Auckland Harbour Board at Calliope Dock for the housing of naval ordnance and other stores. With this exception .no new item appears on the current estimates, which have been drawn up with a view to providing for the maintenance - and upkeep of Chatham and Philomel, for the payment, victualling. &c., of the personnel, and for administrative charges on an economical basis. Certain items show an unavoidable increase, due, as regards pay, etc., of personnel, to the ' fact that a larger number of men will 'be borne throughout the current financial year than were borne throughout last year, and to the increase in rates of pay on advancement, &c., particularly of new-entry recuits.

The time has arrived the contributions of the Dominions, whatever form they may take, should be placed on a more satisfactory and businesslike basis. If it was certain that contributions would be forthcoming from Germany on account of the enormous expenditure incurred by British countries during the war, I would suggest that the cost of new warships should be a first charge on such payments; but, in any cast, the Dominions cannot allow such a large proportion of the total cost of the naval defence of the Empire to be carried by the taxpayers of the United Kingdom: to do so would be grossly unfair and unpatriotic. The countries of the Empire should contribute to the defence of the Empire, naval defence particularly, in proportion to their financial ability.

The cost of the Chatham, with the training-ship, will be approximately £300,000 per annum. This sum counts as a contribution. The payments we are now making on account of H.M.S. New Zealand amount to about 100,000 per annum, and if our finances will permit in the next financial year, we should make our contribution for naval defence, including the items I have mentioned, up to £500,000 per annum. This may seem small, but it will, if agreed to, be a move in the right direction and an improvement on the present position, and it can be improved upon as time goes on and as our financial conditions permit. For the present financial .year maintenance charges are estimated at £256,656 against an expenditure last year of £303,517. A reduction amounting to £46,561 has therefore been effected.