ONE ECONOMIC UNIT

Greymouth Evening Star, 1 August 1946, Page 7

ONE ECONOMIC UNIT

I BRITISH-AMERICAN FUSION ! IN GERMANY RUSSIAN POLICY NOT CLEAR [N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent.] LONDON, July 30. Great importance is attached to the British and American decision fo merge their zones in Germany into one economic unit. “The announcement,” says The Times, “may become a decisive turning point in British policy in Europe.” Whether Russia and France will accept the offer to negotiate on similar lines is not yet clear. It is reported that' there is, at the moment, little sign that they will. Although Russia’s policy indicates she has no wish to renounce her say in western Germany or to see Germany in effect divided, the Manchester Guardian says evidence is accumulating that her reaction, initially at least, will be to misrepresent the fusion with the object of denigrating its authors.

The British Government is reported to believe that France will be inclined to postpone her decision until she sees what success Britain and America achieve. Five-Hour Debate Prominence is given by all the British national newspapers to the five-hour debate on Germany in the House of Commons and the statement by the Minister of State (Mr P. J. Noel-Baker). In it he said that the British administration must aim at bringing the German people as quickly as possible to the point of which they could govern themselves by democratic methods without becoming a menace to the rest of the world. He revealed that the number of Germans still held in detention camps in the British zone was 40,000. They were members of the S.S. Gestapo, and other Nazi organisations which would be brought to trial when the Nuremberg trials finished. Referring to the repatriation of prisoners of war, Mr Noel-Baker said that Britain was not acting out of accord with the spirit of the Geneva Convention, and before large-scale repatriation started it was essential to do what could be done to sort out the prisoners into anti-Nazis, Nazis and non-politicals. There was no question of keeping the prisoners as slaves with an indefinite future. It was hoped to recontinue returning 2000 a month after September.

Mr Noel-Baker said that food in the British zone must be increased, and it was hoped that this year’s crop would produce 100,000 tons more grain than last year, and next year there would be . a bigger acreage under cultivation than in 1938. After his statement on the fusion of the British and American zones, Mr Noel-Baker said it was not intended I hat this special form of cooperation should in any way detract from co-operation with the Allies on the Control Commission. On the contrary Britain would seek by all means to promote four-party cooperation “in all matters concerning the control of our administration in Germany.” Expenditure Defended The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr J. B. Hynd) defended the British expenditure of £60,000,000 in Germany. He said it was not a grant but consisted for the greater part of exports which the Govern- 1 ment hoped and intended would be repaid in due course. The disarmament of Germany would take another 18 months to complete.

Commenting on the result of the fusion The Times says that no measures of economic co-operation between the British and American zones are likely to wipe out the financial burden which the occupation of Germany now places on Britain and America, but a start must be made in lightening the burden. The Manchester Guardian remarks that to unite the zones industrially, commercially, and financially will by no means create an ideal economic unit, but it will create one for which at least life will be possible.