THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1909. BRITISH NAVAL POLICY.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 3113, 11 February 1909, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1909. BRITISH NAVAL POLICY.

The difference of opinion on naval policy that is reported to be dividing the British Government touches a question which has long been a vexed one, and ranks among the most vital to the Empire. In proposing increases of the vote by £2,500,000 now, and by £5,000,00 and £6,000,000 in the succeeding years

the Lords of the Admiralty declare in favour of the view that the British construction programme is not bold enough; and the Ministers who oppose that addition represent the argument, which h as been inferentiput forward by the Prime Minister, that every possible contingency being provided against by the pre- . servation of the two-Power standard. Thp question that suggests itself to the onlooker is that of what basis the Admiralty is working on. It represents the expert advisory brains of the Government, and if in its opinion more expenditure is necessary to keep up the two-Power standard, to withstand it would need some hardihood. It, however, it is going on the assumption that the twoPower standard is not sufficient, it is dealing with a question of policy whicn properly falls exclusively within the sphere of the Government. Naval experts presumably know best what needs to be done to cope with a given liability, but just the same authority must be allowed to the Government in deciding what that liability is. Generally it has been agreed that the combined strength of the two next strongest Powers was all that need be insured against, but recently the idea has been mooted that the safety mark ought to be superiority to any possible hostile combination. Which of those gauges shall be adopted is for the Government to decide, and after that it is for the Admiralty to see that it is observed. It is intelligible that the prudent Ministers should hesitate to commit the nation further, seeing that it is already involved in an estimated naval expenditure of over £32,000,000 for this year, or double what is proposed by Germany, the next highest spending Power, though there is little difference between the amounts voted by the two countries for new construction and armaments. If that [ is sufficient and is being effectively allocated, there would not seem to be any reason for increasing it. But if the naval experts say that the maintenance of the two-Power standard • requires more money it will not be easy to effectively appose that opinion.