British Delegate’s Speech Raises Questions In U.S.

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 February 1949, Page 6

British Delegate’s Speech Raises Questions In U.S.

WASHINGTON, February 26.

The Secretary of State (Mr Dean Acheson) said today that if Marshall aid to Britain were stopped now it would undo everything that had been done in the Marshall Plan so far and jeopardise the future of Western Europe. He added that he most certainly did not think the recovery of Britain justified the cutting down of aid. Confusion had been caused by a well-intentioned but somewhat overenthusiastic statement (presumably that in -which Britain’s Under-Secre-tarv of State for Foreign Affairs, Mr C. P. Mayhew, told the United Nations Economic and Social Council on Wednesday that Britain was at last within sight of balancing her trade figures). Mr Acheson was commenting on a decision by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to review the proposed recovery grant to Britain of 940,000,000 dollars. The committee summoned Mr Paul Hoffman, the Marshall Plan Administrator, to explain “wide discrepancies” in the estimates of Britain’s recovery. Mr Hoffman will appear before the committee next Monday. “Wide Discrepancies” The move was requested by Senator Arthur Vandenberg, who spoke of “wide-discrepances” between the reports on Britain’s recovery given by Die Economic Co-operation Administration and Mr Mayhew. Senator Tom Connally, chairman of the committee, told reporters that its members were determined to allot foreign aid funds only “when they are needed and direly needed.” Economic Co-operation Administration officials have told Congress that Britain still has a long way to go before she gets back on her feet. They asked the Senate committee to include the 940,000,000 dollars for Britain in the bill extending Marshall aid for another 15 months. Senator Vandenberg said: “Mr Mayhew’s speech has raised a question both in the public and Congresssional mind. It seems highly desirable that there should be no question about the validity of the E.C.A. figures.” The British Ambassador (Sir pliver Franks) said yesterday that Mr Mayhew’s remarks had been misinterpreted. He added that Mr Mayhew meant only that Britain was moving back toward a. balanced foreign trade, not that she had overcome all her post-war economic difficulties. Aid To Britain “Essential” Reuter says that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Stafford Cripps) today repudiated Mr Mayhew’s statement at Lake Success and emphasised that Britain still needed American aid. Sir Stafford Cripps said that Mr Mayhew had “referred to the economic situation in the United Kingdom in terms which suggested that recovery was now complete.” Doubts had been expressed in the United States whether in these circumstances Britain needed aid to the amount of the 940,000,000 dollars proposed. “In fact, recovery in the United Kingdom is not complete,” he added. “Its achievement depends on the continuation of American assistance. There is no doubt that we do need American aid. We can speak of our recovery being completed only in the very limited sense that our production is now back to levels substantially above those before the war. Continuation of American assistance is therefore a vital element in our progress towards full recovery. Moreover, aid to Britain is essential not only to our own recovery but to the recovery of Western Europe.”