FOOD ORGANISATION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26229, 13 August 1946, Page 4

FOOD ORGANISATION

The record of international co-opera-tion to meet the challenge of the world food shortage is not a proud one. Too often political considerations have outweighed the needs of starving people, the various boards which have been set up have overlapped in their functions, and the aid given—though it has averted the worst disaster —has amounted to less than was promised. Mr Hoover has calculated that 20 to 30 millions of Europe’s children are physically sub-normal —hardly a good foundation for the future envisaged by the United Nations Charter. And this estimate takes no account of the situation in Asia. Almost a year ago U.N.R.R.A. was pointing out the prospects of a food crisis, but it was Tate in December . before it was generally recognised that famine already overshadowed many countries. Even then it was two or three months before much had been done. Since then the task has been approached through spasmodic crusades which have been concerned with immediate needs, although the fact is that even after the 1947 harvest the world food shortages are likely to be acute for three or four years. It was very recently that a Chinese spokesman gave the appalling estimate that 30 millions of his countrymen were facing starvation. Yet, in these circumstances, Mr La Guardia has announced that U.N.R.R.A. “ has received notice that our labours are ended ” —not because the work is completed, but because “ not one of the main contributing nations had made provision for 1947.” Of the main food organisations, the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation is primarily concerned with long-term problems such as “ the wedding of agriculture and nutrition.” Details of its suggested programme were contained in a cabled message published in our news columns recently. U N.R.R.A. is a distributing agency. The Combined Food Board, is the only one which deals with the obtaining and allocation of food supplies, but its scope is limited in that, in the words of the Economist, “ it is no more than a device for registering agreements among sovereign governments, whom it has no power to direct.” It, too, is | likely to cease its functions at the I end of the present year. It is cer- | tain that some sort of international j organisation on a broader basis must j carry on the work, but even with a j re-formed food board of twenty | members, such as has been proposed,

the limitation of authority would still militate against the success of its operations. It is doubtful if any such body could have over-riding executive powers at the present time, so that the real issue remains the attitude and effective policies of the individual countries. Canada, Australia, and the Argentine have in the past reached their production targets, but the United States has in almost every case fallen short of its commitments. Controls have now been established which should be most helpful in the future, but they would have been more effective if they had been imposed six months earlier. Even with adequate national planning and co-ordination on the international level, the problems of transport from the farm to the port and from the port overseas cannot be allowed to hamper the effort as they have done "in the past.