UNITY OF CONTROL

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 31 July 1928, Page 5

UNITY OF CONTROL

EMPIRE COMMUNICATIONS PRINCIPLE OF MERGER. BRITISH PRESS'DISCUSSION. (British Official Wireless.) HUG BY, July 29. The report of the Imperial wireless and cable conference now awaits discussion by the Empire Governments before effect can be given to its recommendations. Meamvnile it is being examined closely pin the Press. The sweeping nature of the recommendations is recognised on all hands, and “The Times’ ’ says that from the economic and political viewpoints they are of the most far-reaching importance.

“Economically they inaugurate a new era in the history of Empire communication, which is itself an achievement of the highest order,” says “The Times'.” “Politically their unanimous character is a remarkable monument of Imperial co-operation. These far-sight-ed recommendations provide beyond a doubt the right solution to what but a short time ago seemed an insoluble problem. A.ny less bold and comprehensive scheme would have been doomed to failure from the outset.

“The solution proposed is built up on two fundamental principles—unity of control and private enterprise—neither of which could be neglected without certainty of failure. By combining the whole system of Empire communications in one vast amalgamation it has rendered passible the advantages and economics of the modern larger scale enterprise, scientific co-ordination, elimination of wasteful competition, and all the opportunities for economy which these alone can bring.” Tire “Daily Telegraph” congratulates the conference on the proposals, which constitute a revolutionary re-organisa-tion of all the telegraphic services linking the Empire together. It says that the arguments in favour of these sweeping changes are irresistible, except on the ground, which it describes as a puiely doctrinaire point of view, that national ownership is a thing sacred in itself, to which all other considerations must give way. Among the Liberal and Labour newspapers some exception is taken to the report on these grounds, and it i« clear that the opposition in Parliament will concentrate primarily on the State ownership issue when the .report is debated in the House of Commons next week.

The “Daily Herald” protest..-? vigorously agai nst the abandonment of-the principle of public ownership, and the “Manchester Guardian” questions the wisdom of the British and Dominion Governments .selling their cable and w irt* 1-ess services! to privut-e combine. The “Guardian' ’ demands careful consideration of whether adequate safeguards are .provided in the report to ensure against .subordination of public interests to profit making in the prop&sed new combine. , ’ The Liberal journal, the “Daily Chronicle,” on the other hand, reminds advocates of State ownership _ that many States are involved in this reorganisation. “Can it. be thought that a./S tate enterprise run jointly by such a multiplicity of States would be a hopeful way of dealing with a business propose tion, if, us is not fclic ciisc, were all keen on such an experiment. the “Chronicle” asks. “Nobody who does not make it a dogma to insist on* State ownership in all conditions could finch 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, but these points are covered explicitly and adequately in the report.”