The Dominion. SATURDAY, MAY 6, 1944. THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 187, 6 May 1944, Page 6

The Dominion. SATURDAY, MAY 6, 1944. THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

Broadly speaking there are two fields of discussion to be explored by the Imperial Conference now in session, lhe first, of immediate importance, concerns tlie ways and means, the resources, and contributions to be made, for furthering the Empire’s war effort. The Conference has assembled at what is generally regarded as the most crucial stage of the war, in which, with the impending invasion of Western Europe, a tremendous Allied effort is about to be made to crush the enemy on the Continent. In questions pertinent to this, it must be assumed, therefore, that agreements reached, unlike Conference resolutions adopted in normal peacetime, will have the force of firm decisions. In circumstances so unique and pressing, departure from precedents and established procedure would seem inevitable. The Imperial Conference is an expression of the recognition that co-operation is essential to the strength and security of the British Empire as a whole. Its constitution, as laid down in 1907, comprises the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom as President, the Secretary of State’for the Dominions, the'Prime Ministers of the Dominions, and a representative of India as a full member. Each unit has only one vote in discussions. It is important to note, as asserted categorically by the Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Mackenzie King, in*the Canadian House of Commons in 1937, that the resolutions of the Conference normally Jiave no binding force in the strict sense. Pfofessor Berriedale Keith, in his authoritative work, The D ominous as Soveregn States, defines the Imperial assembly as “a Conference --of Governments responsible to Parliaments,” and he points out that the obligation which agreement to a resolution ordinarily implies is not at such a Conference absolute. “A Dominion Government,” he adds, “must no doubt desire to carry into effect any resolution to which it ■ has agreed, for obviously the value of Conferences becomes minimal if the resolutions are treated lightly. But it must be the judge of the wisdom of submitting to its Parliament any resolution, and of the extent to which it should press the issue if it appears to be unpopular. A local example in illustration of this observation occurs. . When the Statute of Westminster came before the New Zealand Parliament, the Government of the day, correctly sensing the strength of popular sentiment toward the Mother Country, placed the question in a form which excluded this country from the operable clauses of the Statute, until such time as Parliament might decide otherwise. The declared intention of the present Labour Government is to legislate for the final adoption of this Statute. It is well to remember Lord Baldwin’s warning in this connexion: “If we try to define our Constitutions too much we may split our Empire into fragments and it may never- come together again. Politically, if ever a phase were true, it is this, ‘The letter killeth and the spirit giveth life.’ ” This second field of discussion to be covered by the Conference now sitting is concerned with post-war plans and policies. In this connexion the saying that “no man can live for himself alone” applies with even greater forc’e to the several units of the Empire. As Pro/fessor Berriedale Keith remarks, “though autonomy is essential to the Dominions, their attitude to the other parts of the Empire is no less essentially positive;” This, he adds, involves “important cooperation.” Speaking at the conclusion of the 1937 Conference, Mr. Mackenzie King defined the general position in these words: The value of .this, as of other Imperial Conferences (he said) lies mainly in the free exchange of information and opinion; in furnishing the representatives of the several Governments with more adequate knowledge of the problems, the difficulties, the aspirations, the attitudes of other members of the’ British Commonwealth of Nations; and in giving that direct and immediate understanding of the.national and personal factors in the situation which cannot well be obtained by correspondence or indirect communication. With this further knowledge in their possession the representatives of each Government, in consultation with their colleagues and their respective Parliaments, are in the best of positions to formulate policies ,on questions where co-operation is required. This statement, it will be generally agreed, represents the best basis , of reaching working agreements in Imperial relationships, and of promoting the harmony and unity of the Imperial connexion. In the light of it, the Canberra Pact between the Australian and New Zealand Governments in regard to the future of the Pacific, a question involving Imperial co-operation in the widest sense, was clearly hastily conceived and premature, and incompatible with the conception of Imperial relationships so simply and lucidly stated by the Canadian Prime Minister, as quoted above. . ■' What will be clearly needed in the difficult period after the war is an intensification of the spirit of co-operation. Narrow nationalism will be dangerous. It is impossible to predict the duration of the war, .or what the state of the world will be after it. Plans and policies made or propounded today can only, in the nature of things, be of a tentative kind. Ideals, admirable in themselves, may have to yield to compromises through the compelling force of circumstances, either as to the extent or the manner of their implementation, or in period of time as to their total or partial application. In this atmosphere of uncertainty the principle of free and open discussion in a. spirit of Imperial co-operation gathers strength, and encourages prudence and wisdom in action to ensure the safety and security of the Empire as a whole, and of its .individual members.