LEASE-LEND ACT

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 63, Issue 248, 30 July 1943, Page 5

LEASE-LEND ACT

MR NASH SURVEYS OPERATION. DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. (P.A.) WELLINGTON, July 29. A sui’vey of New Zealand’s position under the Lease-Lend Act of the United States was given by the Minister of Finance (the Hon. W. Nash) in the House of Representatives this evening. He traced events leading up to the introduction of the system. When the United States came into the war on December 7, 1941, he said, there was a changed policy, under which mutual aid was to be provided amongst the Allies. Under this agreement there was, in effect, no provision for payment for goods and services provided between Britain and the United States. The fact, that there was no clause providing lor payment was vital, said Mr Nash, who added that after various agreements between the Allies, New Zealand had made an agreement with the United States which linked up With the agreement with the United Kingdom. The Dominion and the United States agreed to supply each other with articles, services, and information usej t'ul for the common war effort. The general effect was that the Avar production and resources of both nations I should be used by each in the way | which would most effectively advance j the common interest, j In the two years since the passing i of the Lease-Lend Act, till April 30, 11943, the value of goods provided by the United States, as measured in New I Zealand currency, amounted to 1 £3,300,000,000, representing 12 per cent of America’s total war production. Speaking of New Zealand’s interest in United States supplies, Mr Nash mentioned that in the last six months aeroplanes valued at £1,500,000 had been paid for by New Zealand. New ! Zealand’s supplies to the United States in two years, as mentioned in the Budget, amounted to £9,547,000 worth of goods. U.S. Exports to N.Z. Up to April 30 this year the United States had exported to Neiv Zealand goods Avorth 96,886,000 dollars, and total goods landed in Ncav Zealand up to June 30 amounted to £ (N.Z.) 32,000,000. The Acting-Leader of the Opposition (Mr W. J. Poison) said it Avas difficult for most people to realise the colossal figures that had been quoted, and understand just what they meant in goods and services. In his opinion, the Minister’s statement relieved anxiety by some people that perhaps one or other of the Allied nations might emerge from the present great struggle with great opportunities and ability to 'take advantage of those opportunities to a greater extent than others. The principles of leaso-lend had resulted in a neAv great relationship betAveen the nations that liad been unheard of hitherto, but it was something that must bind them together in future after the struggle Avas over.

Mr F. W. Doidge (Opposition, Tauranga) said the help Britain was receiving from the tjnited States Avas magnificent, though it Avas no greater than the help Britain Avas giving her Allies without charge. The lavo forms of assistance Avere just about equal. Our hope for the future, he said, Avas in a common understanding betAveen Britain and the United States.- Between them, Ave hoped, they Avould guarantee the peace of the world. Mr F. Langstone (Government, Waimarino) said that lease-1 end Avas certainly the greatest idea that had ever been conceived for the utilisation of the nation’s resources for mutual aid in time of stress.

A revolution was taking place right in front of us, and many people did not recognise it, said Mr Langstone. A new world order had to be faced, and if that wore not recognised the world would stumble .into the greatest trouble it had over laced because of lack of understanding. New Zealand’s Obligations.

Air W. A. Bodkin (Opposition, Central Otago) expressed disappointment that the Alinister of Finance had not dealt in greater detail with New Zealand’s obligations under the agreement. New Zealand’s contribution would no doubt comprise largely primary’ products, and these would be progressively greater each year. It was important to ascertain as clearly as possible what the position was likely to he, because it would affect New Zealand’s economy. There would also be. a moral obligation for New Zealand to make some contribution to the post-war reconstruction.

The Minister of Supply (the Hon. D. G. Sullivan) said no one would place on the Lend-Lease Act, or the Atlantic Charter, a moaning which would result in the destruction of New Zealand’s local industries, though there might have to be some modifications. Dealing with New Zealand’s requirements under lend-lease, and her obligations, he. said the Dominion could not possibly’ meet the needs of her allies in the Pacific and of the United Kingdom. Either Britain would have to agree to a diversion of supplies, or else. New Zealand would not lie able to supply her allies in the, Pacific with all the items they required, although there were some items where there would be enough for both the Pacific and Britain.

Air Nash, in reply’, said there had been a definite statement in the agreement about a reduction of tariffs, but it had referred io a general reduction of tariff’s. It was in the United States that tariff’s would have to he reduced. It did not mean that New Zealand would have to abandon control of imports and exports. These were matters for discussion. The main purpose of lend-lease was to avoid debts after the war. He was satisfied that America would back up the principles of the Atlantic Charter, and lend-lease, no matter what party was in control, and

her goodwill to other nntions would be maintained.