Manawatu Evening Standard. THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 1927. BRITISH TRADE IN 1926.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVII, Issue 93, 17 March 1927, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 1927. BRITISH TRADE IN 1926.

Accorjdixg to the British Board of Trade Journal for-January 13th the imports into Great Britain and Northern Ireland during 1926 exceeded the exports by £590,971,000, the stated values being imports £1,242,864, OOu, against £1,320,715,000 in 1925, and exports £651,893,000 as compared with £773,381,000 the previous year. The re-exports amounted to £125,566,000 and thus reduced the trade balance against the country to £465,405,000. For the falling off in the exports to the extent of £121,488,000, the coal stoppage was, of course, responsible. Speaking of that stoppage the Journal stated: “The excess of imports over exports of merchandise, bullion and specie was greater than the similar excess in 1925 by £93,526,000. Practically all of this increase accrued during the seven months directly affected by the coal stoppage. Exports of British coal were less in 1926 than in 1925 by 30,221,000 tons, and we imported and retained 20,019,000 tons. We lost an export of 2,005,000 tons of •coke and briquettes and shipped 8,848,000 tons less coal as foreign bunkers. Compared with 1925 our imports increased by £45,508,000, and our exports of British and imported coal, coke and briquettes decreased by £33,763,000.” From these figures alone it would appear that the coal stoppage involved a direct loss to Great Britain and Northern Ireland of at least one hundred millions sterling, apart from the loss in wages, manufacturing profits and internal trade. The heavy iron and steel trades in particular suffered severely by the coal stoppage, and machinery exports also fell off because so little could be done in the way of manufacture. Up to the time of the general strike the profits of British trade in general had, according to Sir Josiah Stamp, been showing a steady upward trend from the collapse of 1920-21, and, during the following four years, the gains had equalled in magnitude the losses then incurred. In spite of the appearance of great shortage in certain directions, the real national income and , production was, in 1925-26, probably equal to pre-war times, though it was not equal on the per capita basis. The number of the occupied population was as great as then, the unemployed total actually representing an unabsorbed increase. But the distribution of work and reward had substantially altered and certain sections of workers had gained at the expense of other sections, and at the expense of the savers of past capital, small and large. That

represented tlie state of affairs at the time of the general strike, the losses in connection with which and the coal stoppage could not be determined with anything like accuracy. Sir Josiah Stamp, however, is of the opinion. .that the actual loss of wealth is represented more in the disappearance of the increase that would have materialised in 1926 than in a decline in 1926 below previous years. If that view is correct it would seem that the Mother Country is likely to have a good recovery from the setbacks of last year providing that the disastrous strikes and work stoppages can be avoided during the current year. How serious those stoppages were may be gauged from the fact that the official returns disclose that the approximate number of workpeople thrown idle by the general strike, the coal stoppage and all other disputes last year was 2,748,000 and that the aggregate number of working days lost by such occurrences was 163,000,000.

THE EFFECT ON TRADE

The number of trade disputes causing stoppages of work and reported to the British Labour Department in 1926 was, according to the Ministry of Labour Gazette for January, 313. About 2,721,000 workers were directly involved in these disputes; the number indirectly involved (that is those thrown out of work at the establishments where the disputes occurred, though not themselves to the disputes) was about 9000. In addition, about 18,000 work-people were involved in 26 disputes which began in 1925 and continued into 1926. The total number of workpeople involved in all disputes in progress was thus about 2,748,000. Tlie actual wages lost by these work-people (the aggregate number of working days lost being stated at 163,000,000) would approximate close upon £80,000,000 sterling, possibly more. The loss in purchasing power of the British people would be even greater than is represented by these figures, the cost of living rising as ‘high as 79 per cent, over the pre-war figures as a direct result of the strikes, the price of fuel and light rising to 150 per cent, above the 1914 level. The effect upon trade was naturally very perceptible. The prolonged coal stoppage, beginning on the Ist of May and not actually terminating until November, has resulted in the closing of many pits that were being worked at a loss, many thousands of miners being thus left unprovided with work. The number of unemployed persons on the registers of the employment exchanges in Great Britain on January 10th of this j r ear was 1,432,000 — 63,839 less than a week earlier but 210,597 more than a year earlier. These were insured workers who were entitled to receive unemployment sustenance. One of the most serious effects of the industrial troubles of last years is seen in the decline in shipbuilding. According to Lloyd’s Register Annual Summary for 1926 the total tonnage launched throughout the world last year was 1,674,977 tons. The shipping launched in Great Britain and Ireland was 639,568 tons, which is less by 445,065 tons than the previous year. Abroad the decline only amounted to 73,362 tons. The production of Great Britain and Northern Ireland represented 38.2 per cent, of the total output of the world, whereas for 1925 the corresponding proportion was 49.5 per cent. There is, as we have said, every prospect of a good recovery of British trade this year, but that recovery of course depends upon how far the workers recognise that it is upon their industry and application to work that Great Britain can regain her lost trade. Her American and Continental competitors are proving formidable rivals in markets which, in pre-war days, were largely hers, or in which she held at least the greatest share of the trade. None of her rivals stand on the order of their coming or going. Their work-people in most cases work longer hours and receive (except in the case of the United States) smaller pay than the British worker and British trade is consequently handicapped to that extent. We in New Zealand are directly interested in the prosperity of the British people; for they are our best and most reliably customers. We can therefore only hope that 1927 may prove a year of great industrial development in the. Mother Country with a big revival in British trade. That is as essential to our ■prosperity as it is to that of Great Britain.