STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER THE RT. HON.
SIR ROBKRT MENZIiS
The Prime Minister* Sir Robert Menzies, said
today that his Goverment regarded the defence issue as one
of the most important in the current election campaign.
The Government's defence planning based on the
advice of the senior officers of the three defence services,
envisaged the highest possible degree of mobility for the
forces. With this in view the Royal Australian Air Force
was now equipped with the Aercules, the finest transport
aircraft in service anywhere in the world, which was capable
of shifting well-equipped army units to any threatened area
within a few hours.
Mobility of forces, the Prime Minister said,
answered Australia's special problems of area and distance far
better than the sort of static defene, with small units
scattered all over the continent, which was the essence of
Mr. CalwllIs thinking.
The government was also providing the RAF with the
Mirage fighter and the TFX bomber each the best of its kind
in the world and each eapable of reaching any part of Australia
in a few hours. Guided missile destroyers which would come into
service before very long and a submarine force would help to
make the Royal Australian Navy the most modern and effective
for its size in the world.
Sir Robert Menzies said that in an attempt to
" buy" votes in the New South Wales electorate of Cowper, which
Labour unexpectedly won in 1961, Mr. Calwell had last week
promised to station a battle aroup in the town of Grafton.
Perhaps it was the same battle group he had already promised
to Western Australia. In any case, It was the sort of
irresponsible promise which carried to its logical conclusion,
would result in the ineffectual dispersal of our forces all
around Australia, particularly in doubtful electorates and
an inability to concentrate our strength where it might be
most needed. The splitting of our forces into small widely
separated groups destroyed completely the concept of concentrated
training and quick movement on which the whole of the planning
of our military experts depended.
Mobility, on the other hand, would allow us to
bring to bear In the minimum of time considerable concentrated
power at a point of attack. It also would allow us to move
our forces to points outside Australia. It seemed to be the
labour Party's view that any war should preferably be fought
on Australian soil. This was not the present Government's idea.
The Labour Party's amxlety for power had led it
into making many promises which in defence matters especially,
ran counter to oxpert advice, It was strange, for example,
to read Mr. Calwell's proposal to build a naval base in
Western Australia in the same speech in which he declared his
intention to " re-negotiate" the agreement with the United States
for a naval communications station at North West Cape. / 2
2.
Re-negotiation on Mr. Calvell's terms could
well lead to United States withdrawal from the area just
as Dr. Evatt's " r-negotiation" over Manus Island after the
last war had led to United States abandonment of plans to
establish a base there which could have made a tremendous
difference to Australia's security. Withdrawal of the United
States fro the North. West Cawp could administer to Australian
defence plans an irreparable setback.
The present Government's friendly co-operation
with our United States ally in the North West Cape agreement
was the best assurunce of the defence of the western and
north-western areas of Australia. The Government would stand
firm on its agreement beoause it meant so much to our future
security. PERTH, 17th November, 1963.