NORTHERN ADVOCATE DAILY FRIDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1934. MUTUAL TRADE AND DEFENCE

Northern Advocate, 28 December 1934, Page 4

NORTHERN ADVOCATE DAILY

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 28, 1934. MUTUAL TRADE AND DEFENCE

Registered for transmission through the post as a Newspaper.

Sagacious consideration of the mutual requirements of New Zealand and Australia in direct trade, co-operation for assurance of markets in Europe, the Far East and elsewhere, and common defence measures, must lead to the conclusion that their association in all these respects ought to he as intimate as between any two countries in the world. It is pertinently pointed out by the Sydney “Morning Herald” that these lands share a geographical isolation from the rest of the white world. Theirs are common problems in every sphere of activity. The democratic progress of their peoples has gone forward hand in hand, as the industrial legislation in each country bears witness. Any appreciation of the naval and military situation in these seas would place their interests as one and indivisible. It is satisfactory that Australian naval and military training colleges arc now again receiving .Now Zealand entrants. The name of Anzac linked them in the war and is their common heritage. Any future Avar must affect them both equally, in the same fashion, and as a common danger; for any enemy capable of attacking either, and using an opportunity to do so, would use any lodgment he could effect on the shores of the one as a base against the other. The Tasman Sea, actually separating them Avould in Avar unite them. The main ocean trade routes hitherAvard run either through Australian ports to Ncav Zealand or through Ncav Zealand ports to Australia. A certain difficulty in combating subsidised foreign merchant shipping is common to both of them, and by admission requires joint counter-action. In recent years the economic depression in the Avorld has brought the two countries to a realisation of the need for closer understanding in dealing Avith problems arising from that cause too. The OttaAva Conference did much to aAvaken us to the merits of co-operation therein; and our long and foolish duel by Avay of locking out certain of each other’s raAv products. It resulted in keeping up local prices for potatoes and sundry fresh fruits

in both' countries, and provided a parallel to high protection of manufactured goods. Moreover, this petty friction has blinded the exporters in both countries to the advantages resulting from regulation of more important exports to oversea markets —regulation which would better accommodate customers and assist to maintain market prices. The conference between high Ministerial representatives of both countries in Canberra gave special attention to this point, and it will be the sincere hope of each that fimvlity of agreement will bo attained when the adjourned deliberations are resumed in New Zealand next March. If the two dominions can agree to regulate supplies of mutton, lamb, and dairy products to- the British market, action should be unnecessary in the United Kingdom to control such imports from that end, the wrong end. That in itself must be an immense incentive to joint .action in these Australasian countries; and when it is added that prices, too, will be better assured, the argument for collaboration must be deemed complete. Co-ordination of ramified departmental action, lately established in New Zealand, is recommended for Australia, too. The leader of the Commonwealth Country party advocated a course much on these lines be fore he joined the Ministry. The further policy now suggested is consultation for harmonising the activities of such authorities in the two countries for their common trading advantage. The importance of consultation has increased with time as well as from altered, circumstances of world markets. Both New Zealand and Australia have developed enormously in skilled production and marketing during the last generation—a development from demand for, quality overseas and also from civilised progress at home. The two countries have never been able to ignore each other. Their people appreciate more clearly now the need to cultivate each other’s interests. The Australian interest 1 ' in a friendly New Zealand market has become exceedingly important as a region for regular export of some manufactured goods. In the language of Parliamentary debates, the “cultivation of Empire markets” is usualty interpreted as meaning the home British market, in which the dominions strenuously compete with each other. For too long have politicians remained blind to the truth that there is a variety of Empire markets, and with that variety a wealth of interests neglected. Ottawa opened attractive new possibilities in that direction. Of such one example is the improved exchange trade between Australia and New Zealand. Hitherto trade negotiations have been inclined to halt before the preliminary difficulty that leading exports from each country are of the same commodities. As soon as the problem was tackled with resolution it was seen that the fa'ct made cooperation the more necessary, in order to secure the best returns from oversea markets in which 'each, had established custom.