NEW AID FOR BRITAIN

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 69, Issue 119, 1 March 1949, Page 3

NEW AID FOR BRITAIN

HOFFMAN JUSTIFIES SHARE Mayhew was “Needled Russians” e (N.Z.P. A.—Copyright) (Rec. 10.40) WASHINGTON, Feb. 28. The proposed 940,000,000 dollars in new aid to Britain was a “tight fit” —the absolute minimum needed—Mr Paul Hoffman, head of the Economic Co-opera-tion Administration told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to-day. The committee had called Mr Hoffman and a group of advisors to justify Britain’s share of new aid funds, and to explain the “wide discrepancies” in the estimates of Britain’s recovery progress. ' Mr Hoffman said that any reduction in the allocation to Britain would adversely affect recovery in both the United States and Western Europe.” “Until Britain’s earnings of dollars through exports and services to the United States and other hard currency areas are sufficient to pay for essential imports, she will still need American aid,” he said. “We are convinced that the salvation of Western Europe depends upon a joint economic effort of all participants and can only be achieved by mutual aid and close economic co-operation. Any setback to a country so important as Britain would be bound to have the most serious consequences.” Some Concern Expressed Mr Hoffman expressed concern lest British progress would be reversed, and “a stultifying and generally demoralising Influence on the whole pace and vigour of British recovery be substituted.” He said the question of cutting the British programme by at least 200,000,000 dollars had been explored. In addition to the adverse effect this would have on British economy, it might cut into United States exports of cotton, foods, tobacco and industrial goods. It would mean that Britain would have that much less to spend in the United States, Canada and other markets where goods could be bought only for dollars. Mr Hoffman claimed that Colonel Christopher Mayhew, British Undersecretary for Foreign Affairs, had been “needled by the Russians” into making a statement before the United Nations last week that the United Kingdom had already achieved recovery. He characterised this and a statement by Mr Hector McNeil that Colonel Mayhew had been “telling the truth” as “purely political.” _ Mr Hoffman insisted that “we in the Economic Co-operation Administration are just as anxious as any one else to save every dime of Government funds. At no time have we relied on any British politician for arriving at the figure of what Britain needs.” Absolute Rock Bottom Mr Hoffman, however, declared himself “distressed and embarrassed’’ by the statement of the British officials. “This present situation is a very distressing one for us. ' To put it mildly, these speeches have proved very embarrassing to us. But I can say that if there should be any slowing down ot British recovery, I can think of nothing that would be more disastrous to the whole recovery programme.” ' In spite of his asperity in regard to speeches by British officials, Mr lionman was full of praise for Britain s recovery efforts and self-discipline. Mr Hoffman was followed by Thomas Finletter, chief of the E.O.A. London, who went through a detailed description of Britain s present and prospective balance sheet earnings and export targets. He went even further than Mr Hoffman in describing the 940,000,000 dollars as “an absolute rock bottom figure. He said it was the figure the British Government had recommended, and he personally thought a larger sum would have been needed. Senators ended the meeting .liter about two hours, and the consensus of opinion among observers was that Mi Hoffman and Mr Finletter had convinced the committee of the validity of the amount sought for aid for i>riThe senate debate on the L.R..P. appropriations will begin m the next few weeks.