WORLD CONFERENCE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17951, 1 December 1932, Page 9

WORLD CONFERENCE

| REASONS FOR DELAY TACTICS OF FRANCE AND U.S.A. i RETURN TO GOLD STANDARD WANTED ! LONDON, Nov. 21. It is 7io .secret that the British Government is uneasy about the World Economic. Conference, which, unless exceptional steps are taken, cannot begin until April at the earliest. In some quarters it is even said that it will not assemble before midsummer, by which time it might, be too late to be effective. There is a real fear that the goldstandard nations, headed by France and America, are seeking to make Britain’s return to that standard a condition of the conference being called at all. | This demand is being based on the widespread opinion that influential j London bankers are sympathetic to such a policy. The Government, 'however, has definitely refused, through its representatives at the preparatory ■ conference of experts, to consider the j proposal, which, if carried out under present economic conditions, would have a serious reaction on British trade and industry. LESSON OF 102 d Eminent economists point out —and many business men agree with them—that*deterioration of trade, of employment, and of budgets has been more marked during the past year in the gold countries than in Britain and other countries which have suspended that standard, and that the losson of Britain’s return to the standard in 1025 should not be forgotten, since it. originated in the disastrous policy of deflation.

Britain’s refusal to accept what was virtually an ultimatum was the real reason for the unexpected abandonment of the discussions by the preparatory committee appointed laat July by the Lausanne Conference. No one was more disappointed at this turn of events than Mr MacDonald, whose desire it had been to gee the agenda ready in time to complete the first stage of the World Conference before Christinas. Indeed, it is now obvious that when 'he declared the .other day that the conference must meet before Christmas, he was endeavoring to give a calculated jolt to some 'persons unspecified, though he bad lost hope that his wish could be fulfilled.

The cause of the delay was that, perversely or otherwise, the experts misconstrued their terms of reference, and embarked upon a long programme of research, which, it is felt, lay properly within the sphere of the conference itself. They considered themselves to be charged to investigate currency and economic questions, whereas iheir duty was interpreted in London merely to draw up an agenda. They have actually proposed certain remedial measures, and it is not denied that one is the return of non-gold countries to gold as the condition precedent of a .successful conference. Efforts to expedite the meeting before April are being made by the British Government, but the difficulties are great, more particularly as the experts have dispersed, and have no intention of reassembling before January. Whether this dilatoriucss is intentional or not, none can say, but in London at least there is some misgiving on that point. NECESSARY PREPARATION At the same time, considering that the world expects the conference to deal effectively not only with the paralysis that has afflicted the international market, but home markets as well, i.t would seem that more harm than good would be done by meeting lie fore the participating Governments have made up their minds what action is desirable. As the Times points out this morning, “Impatience at this stage can only be baaed- on a false conception of .the difficulties which have to be cleared away before it is possible even to frame an agreed list of agenda. It is hinted that these committees have misread flieir instructions, and that not content with listing the .subjects with which the conference should deal, they have occupied themselves with debating the merits of different suggestions for dealing with them. “But surely it is only by such preliminary discussion that the agenda can be kept free of questions on which it is impossible to hope for any general agreement, and that the conference can lie left free to devote its energies to the consideration of proposals, however few in number they may be, on which there is a real possibility of co-opera-tion. Unless that work is done and done thoroughly beforehand, the. conference. could only degenerate into a series of fruitless debates illustrating once more the wide divergences both of interests and of views which Grave still to be reconciled.’’

Moreover, it has to be remembered that American co-operation is necessary for a successful conference, and that future American policy will not -be defined until March at the earliest, when the new Government assumes responsibility. This important fact alone would seem to justify the delay which has disappointed the Prime Minister so keenly.