Nelson Evening Mail MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1930 EMPIRE FREE TRADE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 3 February 1930, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1930 EMPIRE FREE TRADE

LORD BEAVERBROOK'S plan for making the Empire an independent and self-dependent economic unit is not receiving from the leading politicians of Great Britain the serious attention which it deserves. When the subject was brought up in the House of Commons last week by private members, the Conservative leader, Mr Stanley Baldwin, had left the House (purposely, no doubt, to avoid being drawn into the discussion); Mr Snowden, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, made it quite clear that no support could be expected from the British Labour Government; and Mr Lloyd George, the leader of the Liberal Parly, heaped scorn on the proposal. The arguments brought forward against Lord Beaverbrook's bold and comprehensive plan were comparatively small

and insignificant. In so many words, Lhoso arguments may bo summarised as the objection that Empire free trade would increase the cost of food and raw materials lo the producer in Great Bri. tain; though no attention was given to the Empire's ability to produce all the food and raw materials which It needs, and more. No attempt whatever was made to controvert Lord Boaverbrook's contention, set out clearly in one of the numerous pamphlets which he has issued, that In the aggregate less than 10 per cent, of the land of the British Empire is under cultivation, whereas less than 50 per cent, of the land of the United Stales is now being farmed. In Australia only one acre in every hundred is cultivated ; in Canada the similar figure is 2£ acres, and in New Zealand and South Africa 3 acjes. Throughout the Empire there are millions of acres of land now lying idle which could and should be used for the production of food. . . . Our supply of food, therefore, will not shrink and its price will not rise—(because there would be ample competition between the food-producing countries of the Empire 'to keep down prices)—Only its source will be changed and we shall buy what we need from our own people instead of from foreigners who give us no compensation in return. Neither Mr Lloyd George nor Mr Snowden seems to have dealt with these very fundamental aspects of the problem, since the "Dominions are Great Britain's best customers, and the more food and raw materials she buys from them the more manufactured goods they can buy from her. Messrs Snowden and Lloyd George merely put forward the old and out-of-date arguments of the shell-back Cobdenite free-trader, whose false principles, though sound enough a century ago, are to-day ruining British .industry, and reducing Britain to a secondrate manufacturing country. But the crassest ignorance of Lord Beaverbrook's beneficent ideal was exhibited in Australia by Mr Scullin, the head of the new Labour Government there. AsKed if he was in sympathy with Lord Beaverbrook's plan for free trade within the Empire, ho said "Not on your life! My Government is pledged to build up secondary industries in the Commonwealth." Mr Scullin quite ignored the fact that Lord Beaverbrook has said, First and foremost it must be laid down that it is not and never can be a part of the policy of the Empire Crusaders to destroy any industry that now exists in any part of the Empire. So far from tending to eliminate or handicap the infant industries of the Dominions, Empire Free Trade is designed to strengthen them and give them fresh opportunities for expansion and development. If that means anything, it means that the secondary industries of the Commonwealth would remain under protection, and would continue to grow while the Commonwealth would enjoy exceptional privileges for the sale of its foodstuffs and raw materials in Great Britain.

As we have said, the new policy for making the Empire an independent and self-dependent economic unit has not been treated as it deserves by the leaders referred to. They have merely carped at" this wide and comprehensive plan for welding the countries of the British Empire into an economic whole, to their immeasurable advantage. We do not think that .the Empire Crusaders' case was very ably set forth in the Commons, on the occasion referred to. , But the debate had the result of revealing the stock arguments of its opponents, arguments which can easily be proved to be futile, though it must be acknowledged that the prejudices behind those fallacious arguments will be difficult to overcome. If the ideal of free trade within the Empire is to be reached, the antiquated ideal of the Cobdenite free trader will first have to be exploded. That is clear enough from the recent debate in the Commons. It is not enough to enunciate the high ideal of Empire free trade. It is first necessary to destroy the fallacy which leaves British manufactures unprotected. All that is required at present is the existing free importation of food and raw materials into Great Britain. By and by, when it can be shown that the Empire can supply these latter, the next and final step to achieving the economic unity of the Empire can be safely taken.