THE H.B. TRIBUNE SATURDAY, JULY 30, 1932 GREAT BRITAIN’S CASE.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 193, 30 July 1932, Page 6

THE H.B. TRIBUNE S ATURDAY, JULY 30, 1932 GREAT BRITAIN’S CASE.

The frankness with which the delegates of the dominions laid their case before the Ottawa Conference has now been met with an equally frank statement by Mr. Baldwin of the views held by the British delegation from the standpoint of the necessary maintenance and expansion of the overseas trade of the Old Country. A glance at the figures which yesterday’s cable message showed him as submitting discloses very clearly how lop-sided the exchange of exports has hitherto been as between Great Britain and the self-governing dominions. In every cases, excepting only the Irish Free State and Rhodesia—with whom the favourable margin is very small—the balance of trade is shown to dip deeply against the Motherland. Taking statistics for the year 1930, it is shown that in the aggregate Great Britain accepted from the dominions cited some £316 million’s worth of their exports, while the aggregate of their imports from her amounted to only some £220 million.

Here it may at once be said that the seletcion of figures for the one year only is rather unfortunate, having regard to the need for a clear understanding. It would certainly have been very much better had Mr. Baldwin adduced the average over a series of, say, four or five years. More especially is this the case when wo come to consider that even in 1930 the general slump in international trade had already begun to have its effect upon the dominions’ imports, in Australia in

particular and in this country to a very appreciable degree. Another aspect of the figures given that somewhat clouds the real issues is the inclusion of bullion and coin, which can scarcely be sqjd to be subjects of trade in the ordinary sense and which must unduly swell South African and Australian figures and, to some extent, those for New Zealand also. Much better would it have been to confine the citation of statistics to marketable commodities and raw material. However, even had these been taken there can be no doubt but that the balance would have still weighed heavily against the United Kingdom. Thus Mr. Baldwin’s contentions would still stand, and we have now to hear what the dominions have to say in reply. The difficulties that will probably have to be considered with respect to the foodstuffs that constitute the staple exports of both Australia and New Zealand have already been discussed here, and there would seem to be quite a good prospect that a satisfactory scheme of adjustment will be devised. There may, however, be some greater trouble in finding a basis of agreement with regard to the products of the secondary industries that constitute practically the whole of Great Britain’s exports. Here the conflict of interests will arise more especially with Canada and Australia, where manufacturing industries that compete with those of the Old Country have become well established under fairly high protective tariffs. It is pointed out that in the result, despite the tariff preferences that have been extended by the various dominions to the products of the Empire, the general effect has been to afford British manufacturers no chance of fair competition with local producers. The suggestion is that unless this policy is relaxed Great Britain will necessarily be compelled to give even greater regard than otherwise would be the case to the preservation and promotion of her trade with foreign countries. This would naturally involve still greater caution in dealing with preferences to the dominions that might prejudice that trade.

In any event, the cards would now seem to be all on the table, and it remains to be seen whetner the “genius for compromise,” of which we hear so much as characteristic of the British race, will work towards satisfactory conclusions. Incidentally it may be said that Mr. Baldwin did well to remind the oversea delegates of the many advantages the dominions enjoy as the result of their close relationship with the Motherland. Not the least of these has been free access to her money market on terms much more favourable than could possibly have been got elsewhere. Nor is it ever to be forgotten that it is upon the British taxpayer that falls almost the whole cost of maintaining the navy that is virtually our sole defence against possible aggression. Having enjoyed them so long, we are altogether too much given to taking the many privileges and benefits thus conferred upon us as matters of course.