NOTES OF THE DAY

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 68, 14 December 1931, Page 10

NOTES OF THE DAY

Great Britain will Require “a genuine quid pro quo” before admitting the Dominions to the advantages of the wheat quota system proposed for the British market, according to the Secretary for the Dominions. There can be little doubt as to Mr. J. H. Thomas’s .meaning. Some of the Dominions are already granting Britain what they may call a substantial preference in their markets but although the preference duty is lower than the general tariff it is sometimes too high to permit of effective British competition with local production. Canadian duties on New Zealand butter offer a ready example of this sort of eye-wash. The duty on foreign butter is 14 cents and the preferential rate for New Zealand is 8 cents but the latter duty is just as prohibitive as the fqrmer and the preference quite valueless. Mr. Thomas apparently does not intend to be humbugged in this way at the forthcoming Imperial Economic Conference. In exchange for real advantages he does not intend to accept paper privileges, a friendly hint to the Doriiinions in advance to be’ ready with substantial proposals if they wish to gain a preferred position ip the British market.

In seeking to reduce expenditure on secondary education, the Minister might well consider the suggestions made by the headmaster of Wellington College. Most people should agree with Mr. .Armour’s first proposition “that the State, as in America, while providing free education, may reasonably look to parents to provide, something toward school maintenance.” Quite a considerable sum to set off against the cost of schools could be obtained if such a fee were charged and it is possible that the mere fact of having to pay it would cause parents to take a closer interest in their children’s progress and see that they were getting value for money. It is unlikely that under such a contributory system many promising pupils would be denied their chance and provision might be made to meet such rare cases. Mr. Armour’s second proposal “that every free-place holder should pass through a rather exacting probationary period before the final bestowal of a free place” also recommends itself, It should do away with the waste caused by many children attempting to pursue a course for which they are not fitted, resulting in loss to the State and to themselves. The Government might well make another stipulation by obtaining an undertaking from parents that once a free place has been accepted the pupil will be kept at school for long enough to enable him or her to obtain real benefit.

Once again reduction of armaments in Europe has been stated in the United States as a condition that should be attached to any War debt concessions. There can be no doubt that American public opinion is soldidly behind such a stipulation and there can also be no doubt that, in private finance at any rate, the creditor can reasonably require conditions from debtors in return for relief, although it may be another matter to impose them openly on independent nations which prize their sovereignty- Such a course would undoubtedly raise a bitter outcry against the dictatorship of the dollar, demonstrating that open diplomacy may not always be diplomatic. Moreover, secure in her isolation and self-sufficiency, America does not comprehend the psychology of fear that is the basis of Europe’s retention of armaments. How can a nation whose distant shores are practically invulnerable be expected to' understand Europe’s emphasis on security? The saying that “self-preservation is the first law of human life” does not convey much to those whose lives- have never been seriously threatened. Incidentally, if the United States presses her point about a general reduction of armaments, she canno* complain if Europe respectfully draws attention to the flhct that, despite her favourable geographical position and smaller need of navies and armies, the American expenditure under this head is higher than that of any other nation.