The 49th State ? AUSTRALIA’S LEANING TO U.S. DEPRECATED

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28450, 3 December 1957, Page 14

The 49th State ? AUSTRALIA’S LEANING TO U.S. DEPRECATED

[By

HAROLD WINCOTT

in the "Financial Times”)

(Reprinted by Arrangement)

After the recent article in which I had some pretty harsh things to report concerning some of our industrial efforts in Australia, I think I am entitled, with a fine impartiality, to take a crack or two at Australia. Or shall we find in the end that much of the blame lies, once again, on our own doorstep? We shall see.

To be frank, I’ve taken a fair beating recently, mainly, surprisingly enough, in Melbourne which is a quieter, more staid place than Sydney. I’ve sat for hours listening to a torrent of criticism of us and our ways. It’s all done with a “this-is-going-to-hurt-me more-than-it-hurts-you” attitude. It all originates in a very genuine desire to keep the Anglo-Austra-lian partnership as a going concern. Making all due allowances, however, I’ve found it a little difficult at times to sit quietly and listen to suggestions that, for example, Australia would be better off out of the sterling area; that our steel industry is a pretty inefficient set-up; and that what Australia wants is a million and a half migrants from the West Coast of the United States. And. I hasten to point out. .I’ve been moving among the elite of Australian industry. (You get a rather different picture in banking and financial circles.) “The American Age”

Behind it all lies the impact of the United States on Australia. It is, of course, a very considerable impact. But do Australians altogether appreciate that this is not a peculiarly Australian manifestation? This is the American Age everywhere in the free world —even the countries behind the Iron Curtain are not altogether immune—’ust as 50 years ago it was the British Age everywhere, and just as 50 years hence it may well be the Russian Age over most of the world. The influence of America through films, television, the theatre, retail trade, and industrial techniques is at least as strong at home as it is here. The supermarket and self-service store are probably better established in Britain than in Australia. I’ve seen fewer kids in jeans here than I do at home. The Australians regard their car industry as dominated by the Americans. But ours is as much if not more under American control. I am commissioned—l give you one guess by whom—to beg, borrow, or steal as I come home across America a gramophone record by a character with the unlikely name of Ned Leadbelly. who plays an eight-stringed guitar. I have yet to meet an Australian who has heard of Mr Leadbelly—but then perhaps I’ve been moving among the wrong generation. Done by Mirrors? This is an inevitable trend, which we can accept philosophically and gratefully and with as little chauvinism as we can muster. Accepting its existence in Australia, may I suggest with great humility and a full awareness of our shortcomings at home that Australia has got things a little out of perspective? I’ve been met here bv reporters who —almost; I’m indulging in a little journalistic licence myself—have asked me brightly: “And will Britain start investing in Australia now?” “In 1955-56.” says an official Australian Government publication. “the United States supplied almost 30 per cent, of total overseas investment in Australia of 238 m dollars.” God bless my soul, do the Australians think the rest was done by mirrors? Over the post-war period as a whole, says another official announcement. the United Kingdom has supplied 65 per cent, of all overseas investment here. You’d never think so, to hear some Australians talk. Are the Australians really to blame? Or have we been too modest. done a poor job in public relations here? Do the Australians really think 65 per cent, is a bad percentage for a nation with a population one-third the size of that of the country which has now reached “almost 30 per cent.”? Do the Australians appreciate what, in contrast to the United States, we have had to do at home over the last 12 years in making good the ravages of war on our housing, transport and industry? Do they realise the extent of the claims on our resources in this period represented by the wartime debts we incurred? Australia is looking to our atomic energy industry to power her new projects far from civilisation. Do people here appreciate the immensity of the defence and tax burden we have been carrying at home as a result of which these nuclear power stations will be possible? Does my friend who thinks there may be a case for Australia to leave the sterling area realise that over-all, since 194849, Australia has had a total deficit on her current trading account of £725m? If British industry is as effete as some Australians seem to think, how do they explain the fact that we now export more to the United States—the toughest market in the world—than we do to Australia? Of course, we ought to—and could—so expand our production and total exports that we could do better here. Of course, we have had too many trade deficits in the post-war years. But our present effort in America is not without benefit to the sterling area in general and Australia in particular. British Modesty Here’s another point. I sense that United Kingdom companies are a bit shy about beating the , drum in Australia. In company with knowledgeable sophisticated

Australians I have passed factories here erected by United Kingdom parent concerns, and remarked: "That’s a fine business.” only to be greeted by a blank stare which told me eloquently enough that my companion had no idea that it was a United Kingdom concern. I get the impression, speaking to Englishmen running businesses out here, that it’s as well to keep dark the fact that control lies at home. The Americans, bless them, have no such inhibitions. They arrive with a flourish of trumpets and never stop beating the drum. They have scored a relatively small number of big and spectacular successes—financed. incidentally, largely by Australian borrowings with the equity zealously retained for America —which are constantly in the news, whereas our effort is more diffuse and less publicised. We. moreover, are much bigger in the financial, banking and insurance fields than the Americans are. Is the contribution from these sources less worthwhile from Australia’s point of view?

Imperishable Roots Please don’t misunderstand me on any of this. I’m not criticising either the Australians or the Americans. I think, as I’ve said previously in these articles, that Australia needs America, just as we do, to make the tremendous contribution to industrial progress which we know she can make. There is. moreover, such a thing as the dollar gap. the continuance of which could force world trade to an uncomfortable low level. One of the most sensible ways of getting rid of this gap is by a higher level of American investment overseas. And. on an entirely different plane, need we really be so horrified if Australia does eventually emerge as an amalgam of Australian, United Kingdom and United States forces? Is our fundamental influence here so weak that we must fear that it will evaporate? I judge not. There are roots here, far down out of sight in the Australian soil, that will prove imperishable but which can draw new strength from across the Pacific. (The children of the New Australians, I have no doubt, let off their crackers in commemoration of one Guido Fawkes with all the relish of Old Australians and our own children). All I am saying is that I would like to see our efforts better understood, better publicised than quite obviously they are at present. Oh, by the way, I see the “Wall Street Journal” is sending a chap out here on a six-week tour to write about Australian economic and financial conditions. Ah, well, better late than never!