IMPERIAL WIRELESS

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 23 May 1928, Page 7

IMPERIAL WIRELESS

THE PROPOSED MERGER.

LABOUR OPPOSITION. , A MEMBER’S ALLEGATIONS'. UNITED PRESS ASSOCIATION—BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH—COPYRIGHT.) (AUSTRALIAN PRESS ASSOCIATIONUNITED SERVICE.) London, May 21. In the House of Commons, Mr. W. J. Baker, Bristol (Labour) raised a discussion on the Imperial beam service. .He detailed all the history of wireless since 1923 and said that he understood the merger between the Marconi Company and the Eastern Company was a caluclated attempt to force the, hands of the Government. They hoped to take over the Post Office wireless and cable system and control . the independent wireless and cable companies in the Dominions. The fact was that the Marconi Company knew how great were the potential profits of the Government beam service. It was understood that the Post Office service, although in its infancy, was already showing handsome profits. The cable companies were frankly afraid of tire success ol the beam and entered the merger as the only way of escaping from competition.

Mr. Baker objected to Imperial wireless communications being handled by two groups of which lie alleged one had a record of scandalous mismanagement. If it ivas a fact that a decision had been reached in this matter by the Imperial Wireless Conference, then the Government had adopted a course which Avas fatal to national interests and the chief result- of the conference had been to enrich share manipulators.

ATTEMPT T 0; FORCE HANDS OF GOVERNMENT. LONDON, May 21. Mr Baker continued : —“I Ava»t to submit to the House, calmly and quietly, that Marconi, the name of the illustrious inventor, stands definitely for scandal and corruption. It is lamentable that a scientific inx-entor should have his name abused, hut the fact remains that the Goi’ernment difficulties are due almost entirely to the financial operations of Marconi’s in the Dominions. The gravest possible charges are made in regard to Marconi’s operations in the Dominions. Distinguished members of the House of Commons have said things I dare not repeat, unless there is proof and I must leave the matter there. The merger is a definite calculated attempt to force the hands of the Government and the attempt is accompanied by treacherous charges on the part of the companies to pay out to shareholders, cease operations- and let cables go derelict-. They threatened this because, after receiving generous Government assistance, they were unable to compete with the Government beam service. The opposition’s great fear was that tine recommendation had been agreed to by the oonierence and that when the Dominion Governments acquiesced they would have found the bargain concluded.” iMr Baker concluded by asking the Government to say why the Secretary tor Scotland ivas asked to look after the Government’s interests. He Avas c-nspicuous lor geniality and courtesy, but these Avere -not Aveapons to meet an international gang. Sir Ha mar Green wood disagreed with Mr Baker’s' conclusion in favour of State control AA-hinli. in view of lack of capital, made for under dev-elopme-mt. The great experiment of Statp-oAvned cables and the beam sysitem had been excellent, but it- avus time they were transferred to private enterprise-. This was an opportunity to make a. good bargain on a rising market. Mr C. G.- Ammon (Labour) said: —

‘‘There seems to ha- an atmosphere of corruption and wire-pulling about wireless communication arul the -cable companies which is almost without parallel in. the history of commerce.”

Captain lan Eraser (Conservative) said that the merger was the marriage if two titles, one of which, owned the best method of transmitting messages vnd; the Other -of which owned- the best method of collecting and handling. He believed that those in favour of nationalisation of this industry were serving a oa.itioal doctrine rather than the ne ids ■'A the country. Sir John Gilmour. speaking- as chairman of the Cable Conference, detailed the progress of the inquiries., He pointed out that the problem was not easy to unravel. It involved considerable research. They had to: consider the reneccnssipn in Australia and. the other Dominions and colonies. The Government accented no responsibility for the merger, which was subject to a saitis-fa-ctorv arrangement with the Governments of Britain, the Dominions and India. All possible reaction from the merger had -been examined in detail by the conference. S-ir John Gilmour added that Mr Baker had expressed a- fear that the House of Commons had been deprived of the opportunity of considering the ’iiobbm before the merger became a fait accompli. Consultations and com-innnica.-tions were st.il 1 pnoee-ecHng- He could not say when they would ho concluded. When the conference made its recommendations the British and Dominion Governments would decide on action. Before any definite conclusion:-' were taken the matter would be brought before the House of Commons. He hoped this would reassure doubters. The Rt. Hon. Vernon Hartshorn welcomed Sir Jonn Giimour’s announcement and the debate concluded.