The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, The Echo and The Sun SATURDAY, APRIL 8, 1933. SECESSION IN AUSTRALIA.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 83, 8 April 1933, Page 8

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, The Echo and The Sun

SATURDAY, APRIL 8, 1933. SECESSION IN AUSTRALIA.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrong that needs resistance, For the future in the distance, And the good that ve can *v

When States enter into federations, the possibility of divorce is not contemplated.

The irrevocability of the step, indeed, is strongly emphasised by opponents of union. Once federated, always federated, is the assumption. A State partnership is lucky if it can break up without bloodshed, as when Norway left Sweden. A long war may have to be waged to preserve a union, as when Lincoln refused to allow the Southern States to secede. Secession is a very live subject in Australia, and to-day the people of Western Australia take a vote on the question. There is apparently no specific provision for secession in the Federal Constitution, though it seems to be in the power of the Federal Government to present the issue as a referendum to the people in all the States. The Government would not do so, and it is quite certain that if it did, the issue would be defeated. Western Australia is holding a referendum of its own, and quite possibly this will result in a victory for the secessionists, but the question will remain as to how effect is to be given to any such decision. The farmers of South Australia are also talking of seceding from the Commonwealth, but they have given no indication as to how they propose to accomplish their purpose. Nor have any really unanswerable arguments been advanced why either State should secede, the advocates of secession having mainly been inclined to blame federation for economic ills with which it has really little to do.

The Premier of "Western Australia, Sir James Mitchell, based his plea for secession on the two grounds of the high cost of Federal Government, and the disadvantage of the Commonwealth tariff to an undeveloped State like his own. He mentioned that when Federation was first proposed it was stated that it would cost 2/6 per head of population. Last year it had actually cost £11 per head. This he attributed to tfie fact that while at its inception the responsibilities of the Oommonwealth were restricted, duplication had crept in, and the cost had accordingly mounted. The rising cost of Federal government, however, affects all the States, though possibly it presses more heavily on those with smaller populations, such as Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania. The question of tariffs is the more important. The main argument is that the income of Western Australia is dependent entirely on the primary industries. These industries at present are being carried on at a loss, and this loss is stated to be so serious that, if it continues, it • may bring the State to bankruptcy. The high protective policy of Australia is said to be the main cause of the disabilities from which the farmer is suffering. It is contended that the tariff is only of use to manufacturing States, whereas Western Australia as an undeveloped State suffers from the high price for manufactured goods caused by a tariff designed to help the Eastern States. Against the statement that Western Australia is threatened with bankruptcy must be set the fact that, although its primary industries are depressed in common with primary industries in all countries, its goldfields are still prosperous. More gold is being won. Kalgoorlie is one of the most prosperous places in Australia to-day, and there are now 5000 more men employed on the goldfields than was the case three years ago. The prices for primary products have admittedly fallen, but the actual production has increased.

The farmers of Western Australia and South Australia have been told that they would be prosperous if they could withdraw from the Commonwealth. "Secession," says one Western Australian journal, "will bring prosperity to our primary producers; our ports will flourish and our factories will have great opportunities; it will provide work for everybody." The farmers are bidden to cast off their "shackles" and win prosperity. During the last six years the export price of Australian wheat has fallen 50 per cent. The cost of living has not shown a corresponding drop, and farmers are suffering chiefly from low prices for what they have to sell and comparatively high prices for what they have to buy. But that is; not the fault of Federation; it is common the world over. It is what economists call "maladjustment." There is the same maladjustment in the United States and in Britain. The position in Australia is, indeed, better than that of many other countries. Britain and other great exporting countries have not been able to find a market for more than half their old output at any price at all, whereas Australia has been able to find a markefc, for a larger quantity of her chief products than she did even in the years of her greatest prosperity.

Itjis impossible to frame a tariff to suit all interests. The same difficulty has been experienced in Canada, where the agricultural provinces demand lower tariffs on manufactured goods, while the industrial provinces seek greater protection for their secondary industries. There is a strong feeling in Western Australia against the .Federal tariff policy r and a strong secessionist movement; but a declaration by the State in favour of secession can have no legal effect. Western Australia is bound by the Constitution, and the bond could only be severed by a majority vote of the electors of the Commonwealth. Remedies for the depression in the °less populated States will have to be sought in other fields than that of secession. In all federations, especially in hard times, there are restless partners, and Western Australia will have to continue to lie on the bed she chose when she agreed to become a member of the Commonwealth.