DIVIDED OPINIONS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26349, 2 January 1947, Page 5

DIVIDED OPINIONS

RATIFICATION ISSUE BRETTON WOODS AGREEMENT .. e AUSTRALIAN LABOUR CAUCUS (From C. R. Mentiplay, Special Correspondent) (Rec. 8 p.m.) SYDNEY, Dec. 31. Over the holiday period men of all shades of opinion within the Australian Labour Party are studying the intricacies of the Bretton Woods agreement. Suddenly this has reached paramount importance as an issue which is above all others in the turbulent post-war year and has threatened the structure of the party. The Liberal and Country Parties will also be well primed for trouble in 1947, though so far the Opposition has not discussed the agreement officially. The closing caucus conference of the year almost foundered when a recommendation by the Federal Executive that tne agreement should be ratified met the rock of Leftist disapproval. The Federal Executive, which is dominated by the long-sighted moderates, Mr J. B. Chifley, Dr H. V. Evatt, and Mr Ji H. Scullin, chose ratification on the principle that a system based on an agreement between nations, and organised quite openly as a financial counterpart of the United Nations Organisation, was preferable to the existing hidden controls of international finace. In the caucus, Mr E. J. Ward and Mr A. A. Calwell headed the opposition, which contended that the agreement would facilitate the work of the less desirable side of international finance, and that Bretton Woods would mean a return to the gold standard, with a consequent deflation, and that the operation of the International Bank might force an alteration in Australian living standards. Close Voting The decision of the Federal Executive was only seven votes to five m favour of its ratification. Mr Chifley did not make the caucus decision a test of his leadership, but passed the matter out to the Federal conference of the Labour Party, the duty of which would be to define the policy on the Bretton Woods agreement. This conference is no nearer than it was at the end of the. recent parliamentary session. The New South Wales State Executive has decided to abide by the decision of the Federal Executive. West Australia has adjourned its discussion of the problem until the last Monday in January, but informed sources advise that its attitude is similar to that of New South Wales. Tasmanian Labour circles are talking of referring the matter to the State conference, which further postpones the dates of the suggested Federal. conference. Queensland has made no decision, and Victoria and South Australia have not gone beyond approving of the interstate conferences. At the moment the issue seems to be on approval of the Federal Executive’s reommendation on one hand, or the holding of an interstate policy conference on th§ other. There is a strong possibility that if a sufficient number of undecided States join New South Wales in supporting the executive, then the ratification of the Bretton Woods agreement will go through without further ado. So far there has been no positive action to seek retrospective and original membership of the fund and bank if the party finally agrees on its participation. Clash Between Leaders Most interesting is the fact that all this discussion and counter-planning is going on within the Labour Party itself before the eyes of the Opposition. Many regard it as a significant clash between the present parliamentary head of the Labour Party and his logical successor, Mr E. J. Ward. Certainly in this issue Mr Ward has revealed that he can command a following which in the coming months could either take control from Mr Chifley or divide the party into two camps.