EMPIRE WIRELESS

Greymouth Evening Star, 1 October 1928, Page 9

EMPIRE WIRELESS

NEW PROPOSAL’S CRITICS.

There will be some conflict of opinion as to the wisdom of still keeping the cable and beam services in private hands —although there is a restricted State control —but as the report is signed by Sir John Gilmour (Chairman) and Mr A. M. Samuel (representing the British Government), Sir Campbell Stuart (Canada), Mr Clive L. Baillieu (Australia), Sir James Parr (New Zealand), Mr S. Y. Eales (South Africa), Mr R. Jc Gremins (Irish Free State), Sir Atu] Chatterjee (India), and Brigadier-General Sir Samuel Wilson (Colonies and Protectorates), 'this representative body’s wishes are bound to carry weight (says “Public Opinion”). It is probably because so many different countries are involved that control by our Government was difficult to arrange. The report emphasises the point that die system of communications forms “possibly the link on which, more than any other, the several parts of the Empire depend for mutual intercourse and mutual understanding. Our recommendations will, we believe, establish this service on a firm foundation, lead to its development, and provide for its administration in a manner well calculated to bring to the communities which it is its function to serve all the benefits which naturally flow from a rapid, cheap and efficient system of communications.”

The formation of a merger company

is recommended to acquire, as. from April 1, 1928, the Ordinary Shares of tho Eastern, Eastern Extension and Western Telegraph Companies, and tho, Ordinary and Preference Shares and Debentures (if any) of the Mar-

coni Wireless Telegraph Co, A Communications Co., with a capital of £30,000,000 is propsed, to acquire the communication assets of cable and Marconi companies and the Government cables, and to lease the Post Office beam stations, “In consideration of the virtual monopoly thus granted it,” states the “Times,” “the communications company is to be submitted to a form of State control suitable to a great public utility corporation. A standard revenue has been fixed equivalent to approximately six per cent, on its initial capital of £30,000,000. Any surplus profit above this figure is to go as to fifty per cent, to the reduction of rates or to such other purpose as the Advisory Committee, which will include representatives of the various Governments concerned, shall approve. The remaining fifty per cent, is to go to the shareholders. . “The Advisory Committee, which is intended to act as trustee for the public, will have absolute powers in regard

to any increase of existing rates and will control the allocation of funds available for rate reduction. The scheme also includes a further safeguard for the public in a provision requiring that the appointment of two directors, on© of whom shall be the Chairman, shall be subject to the approval of the Government. “These far-sighted recommendations provide beyond doubt the right solution to what but a short time ago seemed aii insoluble problem. “fi’he solution proposed in the Re-

port is built up on two fundamental principles—unity of control and private enterprise, neither of which could be neglected without the certainty of failure. By combining the whole system of Empire communications in one vast amalgamation it has rendered possible the advantages and economies of modern large-scale enterprise — scientific co-ordination, the elimination of wasteful competition, and all the opportunities for economy which these alone can bring.

“It has created a body which will be capable, not merely of competing, but of co-operating with the great foreign interests which have been built up on similar lines. In deciding, not perhaps without some searchings of heart, to place the management of this vast organisation in private hands, the Conference has also chosen wisely. The technique of beam wireless is still in its infancy, and the possibilb ties of expansion and improvement are almost limitless. To exploit these to the fullest advantage requires a type of enterprise and initiative which in the nature of things is alien to a Government Department. “The danger of hampering this development by the inevitable limitations of bureaucracy must be held to outweigh any possible advantage to be derived from public ownership. For an undertaking of this nature private management, subject to public control, is the ideal because it is the most practical solution. That is in effect what the scheme provides. Nor is there really any reasonable ground for fearing any abuse of quasi-monopolistic powers. The competition of foreign interests, which is likely to increase rapidly in future, should provide a permanent stimulus to efficiency.

Meanwhile th|e carefully devised safe guards created to defend the public are ample. The Conference may well be congratulated on having found the only sound and businesslike solution to a very difficult and important problem.”

“Advocates of State-ownership should remember,” points out the “Daily' Chronicle,” “that many States are involved. 1 The British General Post Office has no claim to stand for the British Empire. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, have Governments of their own, which would demand their share. “Can it be thought that a State enterprise run jointly by such a multiplicity of States would be a hopeful way of dealing with a business proposition, even if (as is not the case) they were all keen in the experiment? Nobody who does not make it a dogma to insist on State-ownership in all conditions could find the conditions here auspicious.

“So we are brought almost inevitably to the solution of an Imperial public utility company, such as the Conference’s Report suggests. Safeguards are needed to secure the consumer against monopolist exploitation, to promote progress in such channels the Empire Governments may specially desire, and to guarantee them the fullest and safest use of the various systems in time of emergency. “These points the Report covers explicity, and, as we think, adequately. The external telephonic services of Great Britain, it will be observed, are left to the General Post Office, subject to its agreeing to the terms with the Company, for the use of the Company’s plant. Backed as it is by the Dominions, we may assume that in substance the Report will be carried out.” The “Manchester Guardian,” too, is somewhat critical. It does not think that past, experience of Government representatives on companies proves “that it is an adequate safeguard against the subordination of public interest to the profit-making in what purports to be a public utility company. “The Conference, perhaps for this reason, is driven to suggest certain specific safeguards, such as for the

continuance of British ownership, for the examination of accounts, and for the right of control by the Government in time of war. These safeguards cannot coVer all the possible contingencies in which a conflict might arise between the public duties and the private interests of the combine. “But for all such contingencies as are not specified in the deed of contract there will be no guarantee that the public interest shall prevail. The Conference professes to be developing a public utility service, but the arrangement seems to be one which may well result in the subsequent re-pur-chase by the State at great loss of the assets which it is now surrendering.”