Evening Post. THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 1944. DIPLOMATIC POSTS

Evening Post, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 82, 6 April 1944, Page 4

Evening Post. THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 1944. DIPLOMATIC POSTS

Changes in diplomatic posts announced yesterday involve the return to New Zealand of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Nash), his replacement in Washington by Mr. Berendsen, ] New Zealand's representative at Canberra, and the appointment of Mr. J. G. Barclay, formerly Minister of Marketing, to succeed Mr. Berendsen. Mr. Nash has established the New Zealand Legation in Washington on a sound basis and has made a valuable contribution to the establishment of an understanding between this country and the United States. There are good reasons, however, why he should not continue to have one foot in the United States and one in New Zealand and endeavour to carry out two important functions. The portfolio of Finance cannot be administered satisfactorily on a part-time basis. Moreover, even those most friendly to Labour must admit the need for strengthening the personnel of the Cabinet. Mr. Berendsen has had an excellent record at Canberra and will take to Washington extensive knowledge and experience of the • questions with which he will have to deal. His appointment will place the representation at Washington on a somewhat different basis. Instead of reporting straight to the Government, Mr. Berendsen, as a non-political representative, will report through his Ministerial head. This may necessitate sending a Minister of the Crown to Washington when there are major issues to be discussed. Although Mr. Nash's work has laid the foundations for an understanding between the two countries, there are still some important matters to be decided. One outstanding matter is the placing of lend-lease and reverse lend-lease transactions on a more realistic basis. The confirmation of Mr. Barclay's appointment to Canberra will come as a distinct surprise to the public in view of his own reported statement a few days ago that he;had no knowledge of any such move. When commenting on the report that such an appointment was contemplated, we referred to the undesirability of appointing to important posts men who had been recently rejected by the electors. This objection still stands. It is true that a man who does not'possess qualifications that appeal to an electorate. may possess special qualifications which suit him for appointment to a diplomatic post. Mr. Barclay's record as a Minister of the Crown, however, does not suggest that this is so in his case. Rather to the contrary. If the former Minister of Marketing and Agriculture is to prove a success in his new post, and is to effectively present New Zealand's point of'view in Australia, he will need to revise the attitude, he adopted in New Zealand in regard to publicity. Unless he does, much of the value of having a High Commissioner in Australia will be lost. So far there has been no confirmation of the further report that Mr. Boswell, formerly Labour member for the Bay of Islands, is being considered for appointment as Minister to Moscow. Important questions will be asked by the public bearing on this suggestion. One is: Can such an appointment be justified? Are there particular interests as between ourselves and Russia, or are there likely to be interests in the future that make it necessary that we should have representation separate and distinct from that which we have, as part of the Empire, through Britain? A point that will appeal to the public is that the Moscow appointment is apparently being considered before consideration has been given to similar appointments to South Africa and India, two countries with which we have close ties, ties which are likely to become even closer in the future. The second question is: If we wish to inaugurate and develop a special relationship, is a rejected candidate the best man to 'undertake this delicate and important mission?