MISTRUST IN EUROPE

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20737, 22 February 1939, Page 7

MISTRUST IN EUROPE

HOPES FOR CESSATION MR CHAMBERLAIN SPEAKS FOLLY OF SITUATION (Official Wireless) (Rocoived Feb. 22, 12.30 p.m.) RUGBY, Feb. 21 The suggestion that the vast competitive rearmament confronting the nations of the world was perhaps the result of misunderstanding and an appeal to the Opposition to do nothing to increase such misunderstanding by captious criticism or suspicion wore two important points In the speech with which the Prime Minister, Mr Neville Chamberlain, opened the second day’s debate In the House of Commons on defence. British armaments were for defence and defence only. Mr Chamberlain declared, and if it were true that others

had no more intention of aggression than Britain had then the conclusion to which they must all come was that the various nations were piling up these ruinous armaments under a misunderstanding. “I am very much inclined to believe that there is a great deal of truth in that,” he said, and cited the wellknown passage from Lord Grey on the way in which mutual fear begeLs mistrust and evil imaginings. General Agreement Needed Mr Chamberlain concluded his speech with the words: “While I cannot consent that we should relax our armaments in any degree until we can do so by general agreement with others who will do the same, I do say that 1 feel it is our duly and the duty of this Government in particular to watch for every opportunity that may come to try and persuade other governments of the folly of the course we are all pursuing and put an end to a situation which, if it is persisted in, must bring bankruptcy to every country in Europe.” BRITAIN’S PROGRAMME EXPENDITURE ENDORSED NO HEAVY TAXATION INCREASE (United Press Assn.—Elec. Tel. Copyright) (Received Feb. 22. 12.30 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 21 The newspapers express satisfaction with tiie statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir John Simon, that the £580,000,000 required for defence this year he made the assumption that £230,000,000 would he available out of revenue, leaving £350,000,000 to he met out of loan account. This has been generally interpreted as an indication that no heavy increase in taxation is to be expected in the coming Budget. The Daily Telegraph says: “The Government is not committing the country to a course of intlation or allowing expenditure to get out of hand. Borrowing may properly be said to be inllationary when I lie Government is compelled to resort to it in order to cover ordinary expenses of administration but tlie expenduture now being incurred is extraordinary to tlie extent that it exceeds the future maintenance cost of our increased defensive system and there is no question that when the live-year programme of intensive rearmament is over we shall be able to meet this higher maintenance charge out of revenue.” Saturation Point in Taxation Earlier the Premier hacl drawn the serious attention ol''the House to the financial consequences of progressive rearmament. He referred to the suggestion in yesterday’s debate that Sir John Simon might have still further to increase the borrowing powers for defence and .diserved that the suggestion might possibly prove right. In addition I" the cost of creating mighty armament. they would in future have to provide for greatlyaugmented annual maintenance. Mr Chamberlain, while md venturtion whether the annual cost of maintenance of these increased armaments together with interest and sinking fund for defence loans might not liecome more in the future than it would be possible to extract from taxpayers out of current rexenue. Questions of a Conference Thai was a serious prospect to which no one < u!d look ’\\ rd with a light hear* .•ml in ii:> view it reinforced the :'.<<•! tna! it wmild incriminal to allow tin* arms situation developing without making some dc-

j j termincd ofTort to put an end to it. i As to the suggestion of calling a * conference on the limitation or reduction of armaments the difficulties were for the present too great, i “If I could believe such a confer- ! ence would produce effective results j at this moment I would not hesitate to call it but a conference which j failed would be worse than no conferi cnee at all and I feel before it is ! possible to anticipate success from such a conference we must be sure that those who come to it would come with goodwill and with determination to produce the desired results,” said Mr Chamberlain. “ I do not feel we have this confidence established yet to make that conference a practical' proposition at this p.oment.” Goodwill at Munich To Mr J. Maxton (Independent Labour—Bridgeton) who intervened to ask Mr Chamberlain if the spirit of goodwill which he considered necessarv for the success of the conference had been present when he went to Berchtesgaden, Godesburg and Munich—peace efforts of the Premier's for supporting which Mr Maxton incurred the criticism of his Independent Labour Party colleagues—Mr Chamberlain replied: “I think those who went to the conference at Munich went there with the intention of making that conference a success and if I could think that a conference for disarmament would come to the same satisfactory conclusion now I should be the first to advocate it but we ha to be a little advanced in confidence before the time for such a conference has arrived.” This brought the Premier to his appeal for less suspicion at Home regarding foreign countries, amid Ministerial cheers he continued. “ Perhaps it would not be a bad thing if we ourselves were to show a little more confidence and not allow ourselves to believe every tale that comes to us about the aggressive Intentions of others.” Appeal to Opposition Mr Chamberlain added that he was making an appeal to the House as a whole. He was not making accusations against the Opposition which he had never thought wanted war. In the passages devoted to the progress of rearmament Mr Chamberlain said the long effort of preparation and organisation was now at last beginning to bear visible fruit. In the last few months the output of weapons, equipment and munitions of all kind had shown a marked increase. Civil defence, which had been behind, would catch up before long under Sir John Anderson. The Premier also paid a high tribute to Lord Chatfleld, Minister for Co-ordination of Defence, observing that everyone would feel an added sense of security in the knowledge that a man with his particular gifts was installed in the very heart of the national defence system. Labour’s Attitude to League Mr Chamberlain went on to inform ihe House that the Chancellor of the | Duchy of Lancaster, Mr \Y. S. Morri- | son, was now chairman of the principal supply officers' committee and he interpolated the claim that events had now shown the superiority of this system over the proposed Ministry of Supply. In another part of his speech Mr Chamberlain souight to infer from I Opposition speeches that the Labour | Party had abandoned the doctrines of I collective security and suggested they j had come to realise the futility in the j present circumstances of an appeal to tlie League of Nations. I Tiie League had failed, he argued, i because it had been tried to impose I upon it a task completely beyond its j powers and he further declared his ; opinion that Ihe only chance the i League had of becoming an effective factor in tin 1 preservation of peace | i was when it had abandoned the idea j I that p'‘ace omM be imposed by force, j Speaking of the character of the de- j 1 \ bate. Mr Chamberlain indicated that ; ' j he saw signs of tiie House being in • i j better heart. There was absent from ' yesterday's proceedings those syrnp--1 toms of anxiety which he noticed in i the earlier defence debates. PROFITEERING IN ARMS i I i i ‘f.ntted Press Assn.—E 'or Tel. CoDvrlsrfit) LONDON. Feb. 21 i In the defence debate in the House , j if C minions the Financial Secretary to trie Treasury, Captain Kuan Wallace,

said the Government was constantly watching the question of profiteering, which at present was under special review. “You cannot, in present circumstances, keep machines idle while you argue about prices,” lie added. Careful inquiries gave no ground for believing that excessive or unreasonable profits were being made. At this stage the debate waii adjourned.