Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, NOV. 21, 1934. A SHIPPING PROBLEM.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 304, 21 November 1934, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, NOV. 21, 1934. A SHIPPING PROBLEM.

The competition of heavily subsidised American vessels in the Pacific, especially between New Zealand and Australia, has engaged the attention of the Governments of both countries. Indicative of the concern felt regarding the menace to British shipping was a deputation from the Sydney Chamber of Commerce that waited upon the Minister for External Affairs (Sir George Pearce) at Canberra the other day. Similar representations have been made in the past in both countries. It has been estimated by Sir Archibald Hurd, the famous authority on shippingtransport, that foreign countries subsidise their shipping to the extent of £30,000,01)0, and were Great Britain to adopt a similar policy the cost to the taxpayer would be no less than £21,000,000 if payments were made on the foreign basis. It is this uneconomic competition that the British mercantile marine has been compelled to meet all over the world, and which has dealt it a very severe blow. It will be recalled that Mr Alexander Shaw, when visiting Wellington last Eebruary, stated that the Union Company, which is allied to the IJ.1 J . and O. Company, of which he is the chairman, desired to improve its services with Australia and New Zealand, and wished to lay down, for that purpose, the finest ship ever built in its history. But what chance was there, he asked, of such a ship being able to meet her expenses in the face of this uneconomic competition? Recently, joint statements were issued on behalf of the Commonwealth and New Zealand Governments on this subject. The view was taken that the existence of adequate and efficient local shipping services between these countries and their improvement in the future would be jeopardised by the continuance of the present conditions, and that the granting of countervailing subsidies at* high cost to the public purse would aggravate the fundamental objections to the present position. British and Australian shipping were encouraged by this statement to believe that joint action was contemplated, and the Union Company announced that tenders would be called in Britain for the construction of a fast steamer to “offer a better and faster service than foreign competitors.” It has been suggested that action should be taken on the lines of the coastal clauses of the Australian Navigation Act, giving British owned vessels certain preferential rights in Dominion waters. The American vessels which run from San Francisco to Sydney by way of Honolulu and Auckland were constructed by means of Government loans authorised by the Merchant Marine Act of 1928, and, in addition to the substantial financial assistance they receive, trade between the United States and Honolulu is reserved to them. Commenting on this latter aspect the Sydney Morning Herald says: “Why should not trade between British, Australian, and New Zealand ports be kept for Australian, British, and New Zealand shipping interests? If there is no reciprocity, retaliation may preserve to Empire companies at least the home trade. . . • When all maritime countries enforce these protective measures they may then be the inor(s willing' "to posal of the British delegates to the World Economic Conference, namely the diminution and ultimate abolition of State assistance to shipbuilding and ship tion on competitive routes. lu

Auckland Harbour Board has presented another side of the question—the gain to New Zealand from the tourists the American liners bring to the Dominion, and also its own financial benefit from harbour fees. But, says the London Times, can any impartial person maintain that British shipping has had a fair deal in this important route? The subject is to be discussed by the Ministers and both Dominions at Canberra. Its importance is manifest.