Defence at Home The local authorities have apparently surprised the
Home Secretary by their unanimous rejection of the Government's offer to contribute 70 per cent. towards the cost of air defence plans, and the whole elaborate scheme of defence against air attack is held up. The local authorities maintain that this scheme is as much a national concern as any other part of the rearmament programme, and that the cost shOuld be borne by the rn national exchequer. If the Government's sug- gestions were carried out, the cost would fall almost entirely on a few large cities which are already overburdened with rates. It is true that the great industrial areas form the most likely targets in war, and the Government holds that ratepayers in areas especially threatened ought to pay more. But the crux of the matter is that the obligation to take air-raid precautions is not local but national. Several cities which were asked by the Home Office to organise air-raid services claim to have done so on the understanding that the Treasury would bear the cost. Not only air-raid precautions but various other kinds of purely defensive measures such as the improving of transport facilities, and the storage of large food and fuel reserves are in danger of being neglected because attention is being concentrated on offensive weapons ; the debate on Co-ordination of Defence for which the Liberal Parliamentary Party intends to call on its next Supply Day will provide a useful opportunity for drawing public attention to this danger. * * * *
Previous page
