TOPICS OF THE TIMES

King Country Chronicle, Volume XXVIII, Issue 4606, 6 October 1934, Page 4

TOPICS OF THE TIMES

"An Imperial Muddle." The Morning Post publishes the following editorial article under the title "An Imperial Muddle":—lt is a regrettable fact, which no useful purpose is served in ignori'ng, that the commercial relations of this country with Australia have been steadily deteriorating in recent months. Neither side can be altogether absolved from its share of the responsibility for this development. On our part, we have been pursuing three separate policies without taking adequate steps to ensure their mutual compatibility. The British Government said to Australia: "We will put only such restrictions on the import of your agricultural produce as may be necessary to further the expansion of our own agriculture." To the British farmer they said: "Produce all you can, and we will assure you of a market by limiting imports below a certain quantity without proportionately reducing Empire imports." In the result, which, with more careful calculation, could have been foreseen, they have found that it was impossible to fulfil the second and third promises without violating the first. The first promise, it is true, was subject to a time limit, which, in the case of meat, has already expired, but Australia, not unnaturally, resents the suggestion that future restrictions should be imposed on herself for the benefit of the foreigner. Australia, on her part, has maintained a high tariff (exemplified by the recent increase in the impost on cotton piece goods) designed to protect and sitmulate her secondary industries. But how, if she presents a restricted market for manufactured imports., can she expect an unrestricted market for her agricultural exports? The truth is that both countries are trying to eat their cake and have it. We want to extend our domestic agriculture and keep our foreign markets while simultaneously developing our Empire trade. Australia wants to sell more while buying less. The realistic solution surely is that we must sacrifice some of our foreign markets for the sake of Australian imports, and Australia must sacrifice some of her secondary industries for the sake of British imports. As things are at present both are just drifting into a deadlock, Lancashire talking of a boycott against Australia, Australia talking of new markets. But what is the use of either side complaining of the other when each is following self-contradictory policies? The way out is for the two parties to came together and concert a rational policy in harmony with their common interests as members of the Imperial family.

Empire Trade. In the British Empire the restriction in the volume of agricultural produce that can be accepted by Britain is creating uneasiness, says The Times Trade and Enginering Supplement. In a recent speech Mr. Bruce said that at the end of two years the whole position should be reviewed, and that Britain ought to review it with a very grim determination of her own interests and remembering that she is the only market in the world of real interest to the agricultural countries. He declared that the Dominions will need to have the rule put over them as to what they can give to Britain in return for what she can give, because they are all dependent on a prosperous Britain as a market for the things they want to sell. The ideal policy at this time, in his opinion, is that Britain should be in the centre of a great group' of agricultural countries —Britain giving them the opportunity of selling their products in exchange for the sale of her manufactured products. Mr. Brucc's pronouncement seems in accord with our own frequently expressed belief that the future prosperity of these islands and that of the British Empire as a whole are intricably interdependent.