NO GLOBAL CONTROL

Grey River Argus, 10 November 1944, Page 4

NO GLOBAL CONTROL

POST-WAR AIRWAYS

N.Z.-Australian Proposal

DELEGATES UNABLE TO AGREE,

(Rec. 11.20). NEW YORK, Nov. 9. The ' Chicago Aviation Conference dropped the New Zealand and Australian proposal for a global air corporation from further consideration, upon a Brazilian motion that there was- a lack of unanimity; necessary io achieve such a goal. The New York Times Chicago correspondent says: The New Zealand and Australian proposal was eloquently proposed and just as eloquently buried. Only New Zealand and AuS' tralia voted against the Brazilian motion to drop the proposal. Toe French delegate, M. Max Hymans, proposed that the matter be further studied by the interim permanent organisation. This proposal was ruled out of order by;, the chairman of the South African delegation, Mr Jonn Martin, who presided over the Conference. M. Hymans reserved ; ne right to raise the matter later. The New Zealand and Australian proposal was presented by Hon. D. G. Sullivan, whose eloquence and sincerity impressed the Conference. His presentation brought him rounds or undiplomatically hearty applause. “We are familiar with ruthlessness in the struggle in domestic commerce,” saic. Mr ‘ Sullivan. “Indeed, those who have to do with war-time supply are too well aware that even the need, for national unity in war-time does not assuage this acquisitive passion. I say solemnly that we here now should free international air commerce from that kind of passionate struggle. I say with deep personal conviction and representing the judgment of my Government that competition between private and national interest in the field of aviation will yet be the cause of another war.’ Mr Drakeford, Australia', seconding the proposal, said that Australia advocated it, first, because an organisation with such powers and authority could be more effectively integrated with any world security council; and, secondly, because sanctions and supervision could more readily be applied if all nations participated in the ownership and control of aviation instrumentality. The proposal might not be considered the best way, and might even by; some be considered to be the worst way. to deal with the problem, but if no attempt at all were made to deal with it, it would deeply disappoint the hearts and minds of millions of people throughout the world, who were desperately seeking the development of a means' whereby a world holocaust might be prevented. The chief United States delegate, Mr. Berle supporting the Brazilian motion complimented New Zealand and Australia on the wisdom ano propriety of bringing the proposal before the conference. He said: “Hoping for the ideal as we. do, but recognising' th e real as we must, we know that the instrument is still not fashioned to which we could commit so much of the fate of all nations.” The New York “Times” points out that the great respect with which the Anzac proposal was turned down reflects the possibility that the British Labour Party shares New Zealand and Australian views and might, if returned to power bring them up again with tne Empire’s force behind them. Hencg it is considered possible that the French proposal for the study and a trial of the New Zealand and Australian plan might, be adopted, if only in a regional sense. The results of the Presidential election have strengthened the hand or the American delegation. The American people have clearly given the American delegation a popular mandate to stand by its programme favouring an international air body limited to consultative and technical functions. However, this does not preclude the possibility of the usual give and take of an international conference with the British and Canadians, who, in different degrees, favour an international air authority with broad powers. The rejection or the New Zealand and Australian proposal has ended any possibility of extreme internationalism at this time. What remains is to work out art agreement on a middle course, determining the account of regulation and competition.