“AN ABSTAINER”

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26027, 15 December 1945, Page 7

“AN ABSTAINER”

TILT AT MR CHURCHILL REPLY TO THE DEBATE (Rec. 7 p.m.) LONDON, Dec. 14. A great roar of laughter greeted Mr Bevin’s opening sally when he followed Mr Churcnil! to wind up the debate for the Government. " 1 nevei thought I should ever meet Mr Churchill in the capacity of an abstainer. I never heard a more pleading speech for every drunkard to be sooer than his to-night.” The task of facing the loan discomfited many people, but, Mr Bevin declared, he “ did not know anyone who came away from a moneylender’s office and calculated the repayments who felt comfortable. This discomfort increases when the catastrophe falls on you after you nave been a moneylender yourself for so long.” Mr Bevin thumped his despatch box as, referring to Mr Oliver Lyttelton’s speech, he demanded: “Is that a claim that they would have, got better terms? ” There was an uproar when Mr Churchill replied - “ I am certainly of the opinion we could have got better terms.” Mr Bevin retorted: “That is a libel on the administration of the United States/ We have not been dealing with New York bankers but the elected representatives of the American people.” Suggesting that is was only fair to try to look at the matter from the point of view of the United States, Mr Bevin argued that the Americans would say that total lend-lease to the United Kingdom amounted to 20,000, 000,000 dollars. Return lend-lease from the United Kingdom to the -United States equalled about 5,000,000,000 dollars. United States representatives claimed this left a balance of 15,000,000, 000 dollars, or about three times the amount borrowed from the United States during the 1914-18 war. Mr Eevin continued that the present agreement, viewed from the American angle, constituted the cancellation of a substantial part of the 15,000.000,000 dollars balance. He asked his predecessor, Mr Anthony Eden: “ Was it not a great gain internationally to clear up the great debt of lend-lease for 650.000,000 dollars? ” Mr Bevin argued that if they could have cleared up the great debt after the 1914-18 war for the same cost the effect of the clearance on subsequent foreign policy would have made a tremendous difference.