MIGRATION POLICY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23005, 7 October 1936, Page 10

MIGRATION POLICY

VIEWS OF EMPIRE CHAMBER RESUMPTION ON LARGE SCALE WORLD ASPECTS OF PROBLEM (Per United Press Association) WELLINGTON, Oct. 6. One of the most important matters discussed by the Congress of the Empire Chambers of Commerce today dealt with a resumption of the policy of migration from Great Britain to the dominions. During the debate Viscount Elibank, who had vacated the chair in favour of Sir Thomas Wilford, contributed a thoughtful address in which he made a plea for a broad view of the problem. The resolution before the conference was a compromise of resolutions which were originally to have been submitted by Britain, Australia and New Zealand. It affirmed the vital importance of early reinforcement of the populations of the overseas dominions by organised and substantial, migration from Great Britain, made recommendations to that end, and recommended that the Governments concerned should cooperate in arranging schemes to ensure that any surplus population leaving Great Britain should settle within the Empire. The resolution was moved by Mr Emlyn-Jones. His speech was vigorous, and was strong in its advocacy of filling up the vacant spaces of the overseas dominions with British people. He said he thought the truth about the dominions' failure to increase population was that there had developed an ill-balanced economy There was far too much concentra--tion on industrial activities and too little on agrarian. There was only one way to increase the wealth of the dominions and the whole world —the application of idle labour to fertile land. By so creating wealth they would be able to absorb the unemployed in their own countries and the Homeland. It was not a problem of over-production, but in reality a crisis of under-consumption and maldistribution of primary products throughout the world. DOMINION VIEWS Mr R. M. Clark (Sydney), seconding the resolution, said he was in hearty agreement with the object in view, though not in agreement with all of Mr Emlyn-Jones's statements. Mr Clark said a migrant from Britain might put someone out of work overseas. What was wanted was migration on a large scale. A large population overseas would enable Britain to carry a much larger population than she did, and large populations abroad and at Home would make Britain invincible. He heartily seconded the resolution. Mr Russell (Brisbane) said they could not accept the view that the dominions should merely be Britain's suppliers of primary products. What they were aiming at in Australia was a balanced economv. Mr Martin (Wellington) admitted that New Zealand's carrying capacity was a population variously estimated at 5,000,000 to 10,000,000. He acknowledged that our own population was not increasing satisfactorily. The birth rate was declining and for the last four years the excess of departures over arrivals was 2813 annually, whereas, prior to the stoppage of migration, we were actually receiving 10,041 more people over departures every year. "The population increase today Was .estimated at 12,000 annually, which would mean only 100,000 more people in 10 years' time. Mr Martin proceeded to stress how the depression had struck New Zealand and went on point out that now that we were coming out of it the subject of migration was becoming a live one again. It was largely a matter of publicity, and that had already commenced. Three books had already been written dated this year. He quoted youth organisations and other means by which migration was actually taking place into New Zealand. Mr Martin declared that there was a shortage of labour in New Zealand, particularly for farms and domestic service. If given time to formulate a comprehensive scheme he thought something could be done. Sir Montague Burton said It was estimated that every person additional to the population gave employment to another person. Mr E Stanley Leatherby (Plymouth) spoke on oehalf of the fishermen of England If the Empire could find room fo some of these magnificent pecole, '. e said, it would render a service that would pay. They were hard up against it, and it would ' daughters opening their arms to the best type of man Britain could send. LORD ELIBANK'!' ADDRESS , Lord Elibank, speaking as a delegate, said he found himself in entire agreement with Mr EmlynJones There was what might be called "land hunger" in the world which was finding expression in different ways In Italy they had gone out and taken what they wanted In Germany every few weeks we heard demands foi the return of colonies and mandated territories, and in both countries they were going on increasing the population by command of dictators and building up huge armies and armaments, as far as one could see, with only one object Was it extraordinary that these people who we.e determine-! to expand and overflow should turn their eyes to the vast unpopulated fertile spaces in the British dominions capable of containing many millions of white inhabitants? We should not only consider migration from the point of view of building up our own Empire and giving an outlet to our own people. Lord Elibank said but we had to consider it from a world point of view. It was essential that migration should be tackled in a bold, comprehensive manner. He agreed sincerely with Mr Clark when he said he did not want single migrants, who only created more unemployment, but migration on a large scale and the continuous settlement of large areas. Lord Elibank said it might well be that they should export more of their capital with their migrants, but he suggested that the dominions should make the way easy by making land available on favourable terms There was no prospect of capital being invested in any dominion in private enterprise unless it received proper consideration when it arrived. If it were taxed out of existence or anything were done to make trade impossible, very little capital would come out from the Old Country.

Lord Elibank added that the blood of Britain was not so unmixed, and he made a point that the dominions might find it in their interest, as America had done, to open their doors to a certain proportion of foreign European blood. RESOLUTION CARRIED Mr Fee (Auckland) expressed the view that there was underlying the debate the idea that New Zealand must be a primary-producing country. He felt that an increase of the population of New Zealand was vitally necessary, if only from the point of view of national security. If New Zealand was to remain a primary-producing country she could not have a large population and must remain a target for an enemy If she was to become a safe country she must do as others had done and increase her population, and to do that she must increase and develop her secondary industries. The reception of any large influx of immigrants must be accompanied bv secondary industry development. Mr G. D. Virtue (Perth) expressed the opinion that, taking the long view, the dominions must open the door to selected migrants from European races. Mr Mansfield (London) said it was no use sending out people unless they were voluntary migrants. There would be no voluntary migrants unless they saw an opportunity abroad. That opportunity must be provided. There were any amount of people with grit who would come out if they saw an opportunity If Britain had not such people, then any resolution was in vain. He condemned the kind of migration that resulted only in weeping and returning to London to parade posters in front of the dominions' houses there. The motion was carried unanimously and by acclamation.