SUBSIDISED SHIPPING

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21731, 21 February 1934, Page 13

SUBSIDISED SHIPPING

Sir, —If British shipping is to he subsidised those subsidies must be sufficient to enable it to compete on fairly even terms against foreign subsidised shipping. Half measures would only prolong the life of the patient, not cure him. While Japan, Erance, Germany, Italy and the United States subsidise their shipping, the great bulk of the shipping trade of these nations is between their national port and a foreign port, whereas British shipping is engaged as a world-carrier carrying 40 per cent of the world trade, and almost 50 per cent being engaged outside Empire trade. To meet this foreign subsidised competition it would be necessary to subsidise against all subsidising nations, not one alone. The Americans maintain that they are not subsidising their shipping, but merely giving some measure of support to offset the higher cost of construction and operation under the American flag. Ex-President Hoover a year ago estimated that £20,000.000 gold was being spent by the United States Government per annum on the United States mercantile marine; £7.500,000 in mail contracts. 1 have already mentioned the amount of subsidies and bounties given by France, Germany and Italy to their shipping. One can therefore get some idea of the enormous amount necessary each year to counter subsidise British shipping, with no certainty that the foreign Governments would not go one better. Outside of subsidies construction loans would be necessary to compete against foreign ships constructed out of Government loans. The construction loan of £3,000,000 recently promised to the Cunard-White Star merger by the Government in Great Britain, with a promise of a further £5,000.000 to come, gives one an idea what this means. The great percentage of British shipping claims the United Kingdom as its home port and the cost of subsidies and construction loans would therefore, I presume, fall upon the taxpayer in Great Britain, and I imagine he is looking for tax relief, not further tax burdens. Excess tonnage accounts for tramp freights being 20 per cent below pre-war, while costs are roughly 60 per cent above pre-war, also for 30 per cent of American shipping, 29 per cent of French shipping, etc., being out of employment. ".LH." still suggests a competition in subsidies. The winner of such a contest would be the longest purse, and there is no doubt who has that. "We must scrap obsolete ships and meet competition with modern vessels." Might 1 ask where the money to construct these ships is to come from? There remains a Government construction loan. Does "J.H." advocate that, besides meeting subsidy with subsidy, increase with increase? .1 still maintain that counter-subsidies are not in themselves a remedy for the protection of our shipping. Something else is needed, such as freight and passengers between British ports be reserved to British ships, Imperial preference only given when Empire goods are carried in British ships, differential port dues on subsidised foreign ships, and when all other means fail the subsidy weapon. D. D. Black.