AMERICAN LOAN

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24750, 15 December 1945, Page 7

AMERICAN LOAN

Acceptance Of Terms CONSERVATIVE ATTITUDE • (N.Z Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 7 pin.) LONDON, Dec.^3. The Government mhtioh for the acceptance of the United States loan and conditions was carried in the House of Commons by. 345 rates to 98. The Leadfer of the Opposition (Mr Churchill], said that the Conservative Pafiy as a body Would abstain from voting oil the motion. However, 7S Conservatives disregarded his appeal add Voted.

Mr Churchill added that ,he could not understand why the Opposition should, be expected to come forward to welcome a proposal which filled every part of, the House with grave anxiety and which was offered against the fear of an even, darker alternative. It was for the Government with its, big majority to bear the burden. The House later approved . the second reading of the bill making Britaih a foundation member of the Bretton Wbods scheme fay 314 votes to 50. Sixty-eight Conservatives, 20 Labour members, and 10 Liberals and Independents Voted against acceptance of the loan. Seven Conservatives voted with, the Government. “The most astonishing feature bf the loan debate was that 100 members came out into the open and opposed the loan,” says the Press,. Association’s political correspondent. iu They,lncluded Mr Robert Bdbthby and SqUadrbn Leader Christbplief Hollis, who Opposed it in debate. It was the triore surprising because about 70 Conservatives disregarded Mr, Churchill's appeal to abstain from vfatmg. A ‘ hurfibef Of Conservatives .With falnblis names marched in unfamiliar company into the Govitriffient lobby. About 90 Conservatives Ostentatiously refrained frbiti voting, remaining In their seats during the division.

Years of Austerity ; Mr Oliver Stanley, resuming the debate, said that an alternative to the loan would mean years of. austerity far greater than any. yet experienced. The standard,of life, food,'ahd necessi-' ties would hardly be sufficient. to maintain physical health, social discipline, and industrial efficiency. , Mr Stanley said he doubted whether tberb would be sUfflCiefat reserves to ptovidfe capital, equipment, and raw materials for the effective recovery of the export trade. Several members had suggested that if Britain wete to refuse the agreement the Americans, before long. Would return with something much more favourable * “I feel that the present alternative cf, rejection, followed by a better offer, iS a mirage,” he said “Rdjectioh of the loan Wfltlld lead tb a catastrophe from Which thgfe Wcrtild be no. recovery.** ■ Turnihg to the Bretton Woods agreement, Mr Stanley said h§ approached it With profduhd diS^Uibt, “I thiflk Bfettbfi Woods woUld Havte beeh an admirable agreement Befbfe 1914, and a satisfactory agreement before 1939. bht what We ate doing now may bd building a tank tb fight tb . last war,’* he contihUed. “There is tidt sufficient accommodation • under the agreement to ■ suit the disequilibrium of the present day. When W§ Went Off the gold standard in 1931 and allowed stefllhg tb find its oWh level it fell sbmeWhere hear 22 percent. The l 5 per cent variation permitted under Bretton Woods would be dUite ihstifl 1 cietat tb iftebt the remedy then required.*’

Imperial Preferences Mr, Stanley said he found, the commercial agreement most difficult, to understand. Potentially the ■ most dangerous fundamental point was how far was the Government committed by the agreement? He hoped the Government had not classified Imperial preferences as discriminatory; practices according to article seven r Of thd agreement, He warned .that whatever Imperial preferences'-might rnban to Britain and the Dominions, they were a matter of life and death to the colonies. Mr Stanley said there WCfe he ddUbt that Britain would.be .able to. produce £30,000,000 wOrtH of fektfa goods to discharge her annual obligation under the loan agreement. However, it was very doubtful Whether : thfe United States would be willing to receive those goods. ‘‘There is nothing in this loan Which gives us any reason to suppose that an administration which Can offer a niggardly, barbaric and antediluvian settlement sUch as this can solve the unemployment problems of its own country, much less: help the world,” said Miss Jennie Lee (Labour). She added that the loan would mean roughly £lO a head for the. people of Britain, She was not clear how much it would cost in the long -run for £lO worth of tobacco and films.

Sir Thomas Moore. (Conservative) pointed out that the Government had said there.Was no alternative to: acceptance of the loan, but what if Con* gress refused to ratify the proposals? “I will give an alternative,” added Sir Thomas Moore. “I say drop this stupid nationalisation, free export trade from its fetters and rally, the sterling area friends to our side. Our goodwill is enormous." i Mr E. F. M. Durbin (Labour) Claimed the agreement was a simple proposal to establish an organisation for bringing about an all-round reduc* tion in the trade barriers. "We argued before the war that we should gain much and lose nothing from ah allround freeing of international trade channels;" he added. “We said then that the United States attitude made, tariff reduction impossible, but now the United States has changed its philosophy and made a concession. Then there arose a series Of complaints and criticisms from us.”

Group Captain the Hon. Max Aitken (Conservative) suggested that trouble was coming if' Britain defaulted on the loan as many eminent economists had expressed the opinion that she Would. The Americans would say “Twice in 20 years. Never again.’* They would retire into their shell of isolationism. Group Captain Aitken said that during the war he had fought along* side the Dominions airmen. They were not fighting for Canada. Australia, and New Zealand, But for the Empire. He believed that* if the Empire was asked to rally round Britain-she Would be able to tide over the desperate period and not have to take this disastrous loan.

Mr Churchill’s Criticism “1 resent the indecent haste with which this most serious and complex matter has been thrust before us to be settled,” said Mr Churchill, He complained that the Government had allowed , itself to be browbeaten in the matter of the time, for the ratification of the Bretton Woods agreement had no sanctity. The whole matter should have been disclosed, to both the British and American people. They should have been given two months to allow public opinion on both sides of the Atlantic to form itself.

Mr Churchill said he was astonished that the United States should think it worthwhile to exact the equivalent of 1.62 per cent, in interest from a debtor in Britain’s special circumstances. The interest charge could play a very small part in United States economy and must be a deterrent to United State® exporting power. Mr Churchill added that some speakers had described the loan terms as harsh. These considerations applied to other creditors besides the United States. Britain owed £1,200,000,000 to India, and £400,000.000 to Egypt. Neither Country had made proposals Similar to lend-lease. Everything - had been charged against Britain without the slightest recognition of the common cause. The Italian and German armies would have pillaged and ravished Egypt had Britain not defended her by her life blood and strong right arm. Was not Britain entitled to say, “Here is our counter-charge for defending you from the Axis Powers.*’ The same argument applied to India. Mr Churchill said be sympathised

PEARL HARBOUR INQUIRY

FURTHER EVIDENCE BY MARSHALL

WARNING TO HAWAII before Attack

(Rec. 7 p.rh.) WASHINGTON, Dec. 13. “Major-General W. C. Short Was given a definite alert order before the Japanese attack, and I feel that when you give a command to a high officer you expect if to be carried out,” said General G. C. Marshall, the United States Chief of Staff, at the Pearl Harbour inquiry. “It was my own responsibility to the Secretary of War. I was responsible for the actions of the General Staff. I was responsible for this. A very tragic thing occurred. I am not attempting to evade that at all. 1 ’ , - General Marshall added that he had no knowledge of any information before December 7 definitely pointing to attacks bn Pearl Harbour.

When General Marshall had finished his evidence, the chairman (Senator A. W. Barkley) said that the committee wished General Marshall, on his . new mission- .the same high sticcess he had achieved in Other fields. Major-General Sherman Miles, former Chief of Military intelligence. Said that it was hours after the attack before they could ascertain what had happened at Hawaii. Partly because Of this, ho additional alerts were sent to General MacAfthur in the Philippines. Major-General Miles accepted full responsibility for hot delivering to General Marshall on the night bf December Japanese diplbmatic message* which wound up next morning with a fourteenth part that spelt war. The first 13 parts had not indicated Japanese intentions* and he did not consider it necessary to arouse General Marshall that night. , Representative Gearheart (a member of the inquiry Committee) said he had been informed by someone who went through the attack, that Hickham field. pn- HaWaii Was on full air alert from December 1 to December 6, but Without an explanation, the alert was called off the day before the attack. He asked the committee to secure the relevant documents.

A directive introduced in evidence at the inquiry revealed that Admiral ftafk ordered Unite of the United tat§s Fleet tb hiove towards the Paflatna Canal ih June, 1940, to test Jhe activities of Japanese sabdtelir§.' The vessels left Pearl Harbour about June 24, after the Navy had deliberately let the news of the move and the destination leak out,- The units, sailed for two days in the direction of the canal, returning secretly to Hawaii.. Admiral Stark ordered the feint because . intelligence reports indicated that extensive Sabotage . Would' bfe attempted at the ’ canal if the' UhiteS State's tried to move major, fleet units from the Pacific tb the Atlantic. ,A correspondent of the New York “Herald-Tribune” says: ‘The directive did not reveal Whether the feiht resulted ih the apprehension of any saboteurs, but portlbh Of the fleet was safely shifted to the AtlahtiC later in 1940,’.’- \

very toUfch With the "United States argufiieht ih cbnnCxioh With thb loan. - MT Chhrchill Said he considetM. it a great pity that a, Commerciai traha-' :r action should be hhxed up With : n6n« ’ ‘ commercial trarisaCtiohfe, afe With the Srettbh Woods agreement. Hd haa said recently that tfid : gdhdtal elgettoh' v ? results Would prove a disaster fot 'thd country, The hard teffes fob thd Ibbn v were undoubtedly one, ihStalindfit of , that disaster, united States public opinion Was affected' by the thought • : . that thfe United States Wfis the faSt refuge' of free enterprise' While the fdSt of the world was Sihking into Socialism . or Worse.

Mt. Churchill added, that- the : Opposition rdfiisd'd to abcept reSpofiSibillW fbr, thd transactions. It Whs for thd'Government with its great majority to bear thd-bUrdCn;. V

“Wd haVd called for general abstention from Voting On the part ;o£ the ' . Conservatives,” he concluded. : . '■ Uproar in House ; ' . A great roar, of laughter greeted Mr . BeVin’s opening sally when he followed Mr ChurcmU to wffid UP. tnS- .'. debate for.the Government.. "1 pieve'r,. thought I . should ■ ever meet. ;Mr ■ ” ChUrchill ih .the capacity of an abstainer,” he said. “I have never heard. . a tnore pleading . speech -for . every drunkard to be sober than his to-.. night." . : v.. , ; i' ~ Mr Bevin said the task of facing the : > loan' discomforted many people, blit he did not know of anyonewho came away from a mon6ylenc|er’s office and calculated the repayments who felt • comfortable. “This discomfort increases ? ■ when a catastrophe falls on you after you have beeh a money lehdef yourself for so long," he added. ' Mr Bevin thumped his- dispatch box, ■ as, referring to .Mr Lyttelton’s; ipeeCH, ; :., he demanded': “Is that a claim that" they would have gbt better terms?” There was an Uproar • When Mr Churchill repliep: *T am certainly of the opinion we could have got-, better , terms.” : ■ ■■ • ; ’

Mr Bevin: Thbt m a libel oh the Administration of the United States. We have hot beeh dealing With New York bankers, but the elected representatives Of America. ' . Suggesting. it was only fair’to \ry t&tli atgufed that Americans would Say that total lease-lend to Britain amounted to 20 billion dollars. Return lease-lend from Britain to the United States equalled about five billion dollars. The united states representatives claimed this left a balance of 15 billion dollars or about thrice the amount .bonftwed frotn the United States during tile 1914r 18 War.

Mr BOvin continued that the present agreement viewed froth the American angle constituted a cancellation of a substantial part of the 15 billion dollars balance. HO asked his predecessor, Mr Eden, "Was it not a great gain internationally to clear up the great debt of lease-lend for 650,000,000 dollars?" Mr Bevin argued that if Britain could have cleared up her great debt after the 1914-18 war for the same cost, the effect' of the clearance oh subsequent foreign policy would have made a tremendous difference. "If economic war is added to the troubles arising from the world war I dread the consequences,” said Mr Bevin. “I, In the end, with my CON leagues accepted the agreement because I believed we were doing the right thing for the world, faking all the factors into account.”

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Dr. Hugh Dalton), moving the second reading of the Bretton Woods agreement, said it was a machinery measure giving effect to the decision already reached by an emphatic Vote. The House, after the Speaker had refused a request- by Mr Boothby for mors time to discuss the agreement, divided and the second reading was carried.-

REDUCING TRADE BARRIERS

UNITED STATES PLANS CONFERENCE

(Hec. 7 p.m. 7 WASHINGTON, Dec. 13. “The United States has invited 14 nations to a round table discussion designed tp cut down tariff barriers and promote world trade," says the Associated Press. . “It is planned that the conversations should precede the full dress United Nations trade and employment conference in 1946. “No date or venue has been fixed and the conference might be held in Europe in spite of the United States being the inviting nation. The countries reported to have been inviird are Britain. Russia. Chin?. Fran e, Canada New Zealand, Austral a. South ACricCuba, India, Belgium, Holland, Czechs Slovakia, and Brazil.