T HAT the Cabinet should have deferred its decision regarding both
the expansion of its: armament' programme and -the nature of the new defence organisa-' tion is intelligible, for rarely have this country's disposi-
NEWS OF THE WEEK
THAT the Cabinet should have deferred its decision regarding both the expansion of its: armament' programme and -the nature of the new defence organisa-' tion is intelligible, for rarely have this country's disposi- tions depended on a larger number of tineertain:faetors.: First and foremost the collective security system is still under test. If it proves itself filially in the case of Italy - there will -obviously -he : less need in .the future for any country to depend for its defence exclusively on its own resources. The Naval Conference is still in session, though as a factor in possible naval reductions it may be written off. Everything points to the wisdom of a gradual expansion financed through supplementary estimates rather than a long-term programme paid for by a huge armament loan. Even more important than the volume of our defence forces is their efficiency, and efficiency there can never be without a much closer co-ordination between the three services than exists today. The tide of opinion is running strongly against a single Ministry of Defence, but for the plan, advocated by Sir Frederick Maurice among others in a recent issue of The Spectator, of a defence committee of the Chiefs of Staff of the three services presided over by a civilian Minister, with a secretariat at its disposal, there is very much to be said. -.But the Minister must be a man with the peculiar:.qualities-of a Lord Haldane, and it is by no means obyleils.where they are to be found today.
* * * .*
