BRITISH TRADE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIX, Issue 18, 17 December 1938, Page 9

BRITISH TRADE

EXPORT GUARANTEES.

AID FOR FIRMS

GOVERNMENT MOVE. (United Press Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) (British. Official Wireless.) RUGBY, Dec. 15. Mr R. S. Hudson (Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade), moving the second reading in the House of Commons today of the Government’s Bill to extend considerably the export guarantees system and to assist British trade with other countries, said that there had been considerable pessimism expressed about the state of Britain’s export trade.

“Many people,” Mr Hudson said, “would have us believe that the foundations of our trade are being cut away.” He thought, however, that figures just published, which showed that for three months in succession there had been an increase in trade, were an intimation that British exporters were effectively pursuing their trade.

“Trade made to-day,” said Air Hudson, “is affected by financial prestige, and in a world of Power politics our trade to quite a large extent depends upon whether the world believes that we are in earnest about our rearmament plans.” The operations ot the export and credit department had now become an integral part of Britain’s export machinery, and the present Bill was designed to extend that service, Mr Hudson added. A number of cases had arisen in which members of the advisory council felt that, if they carried out their duties strictly and judged each particular case purely on commercial grounds, they were bound to recommend that particular transactions should be turned down. “Some of those transactions,” Mr Hudson went on, “appeared to be transactions which, though we fully agreed with the committee that they could not be accepted on strictly commercial grounds, were nevertheless transactions which we thought, taking the long view, were in the national interest. “For example, a particular proposal came along for which credit was required by a firm or country extending over four years,” Mr Hudson said. RISK WORTH TAKING.

“On a strictly commercial basis, one year was about the limit for which one could prudently give credit, but taking the long view, it would appear to the Government that, at the end of four years, that firm or country was likely to be more prosperous and have recovered in one way or another so that, not only would it be able to liquidate that particular contract, but the mere fact that we had been willing to give credit over a longer period and to trust it would ensue to our advantage by gaining its goodwill. From a national viewpoint, therefore, the risk was worth taking,” proceeded Mr Hudson. “I suggested that the method employed in the Bill is only one of many methods which will have to be adopted by Britain to meet the existing situation. New difficulties and new problems are continually cropping up. Our competitors are continually extending and developing their methods, and it seems to me that we shall have, as occasion arises, to adopt new devices to meet these difficulties.

“These may well he devices or methods which we should not take in ordinary circumstances. They may be novel and will certainly be without precedent in our history, but in so far as British exporters require them for their protection and for developing the trade which is vital to the existence of Britain, I am perfectly* certain that not merely the Government but the House will not hesitate to give them any powers they require,” Mr Hudson went on.

DOMINION SUGGESTIONS. During the debate following Mr Hudson’s speech, Mr Ellis Smith (Lab.—Stoke) said “Some of us during the Coronation celebrations met representatives of the Dominions and colonies. I understand that the finance -L.iinister of New Zealand specially submitted a number of constructive trade suggestions, and I believe a reply has not yet been given. We are not playing the game in not taking more notice of suggestions from New Zealand, Australia and other Dominions and colonies.” Mr Oliver Stanley (President of the Board of Trade), replying to the debate, said that Germany had as much right to trade as Britain, but when her methods of competition became unfair, Britain believed it better to make an amicable agreement to share the market. Mr Stanley said ho hoped that it would be possible to reach an agreement enabling both to carry on fair trade at fair prices, instead of with the ruinous price-cutting prevailing to-day. It would be necessary, if that failed, to operate the measures provided in the Bill. , , ... The second reading was carried without a division.