PROTESTS VOICED

Southland Times, Issue 21716, 31 May 1932, Page 6

PROTESTS VOICED

OTTAWA DELEGATION MR COATES’S POSITION DEFENCE OF HIS INCLUSION ' < . • (Special to the Times.) Auckland, May 30. Criticism of the personnel of the New Zealand delegation to the Imperial Economic Conference at Ottawa has drawn a vigorous comment from Mi W. Goodfellow who will represent the dairy industry at the conference. “I regret that there have been strong protests against the inclusion of the Rlffht Hon J. G. Coates in the delegation” said Mr Goodfellow this evening. "Most of the statements made in that connection are contrary to fact and are very unfair. It has; been stated that Mr Coates has pushed himself in for personal reasons. Thisi is absolutely unfounded, the producers of the Dominion had the greatest difficulty in persuading Mr Coates that it was his duty to go to Ottawa. He refused at first, but subsequently agreed to reconsider the matter. About six weeks ago the most representative denotation possible of all primary producers waited on the Cabinet Ottawa Committee and urged that both Mr Forbes and Mr Coates should go and that on account of his special qualifications Sir James Parr should be included. That deputation represented the Dairy Board, the Meat Board, all the dairying associations through New Zealand, the Farmers’ Union, the Woolgrowers Association ,the Fruit Board and the pig industry. The producers want Mr Coates to go and apparently the secondary industry interests want Mr Stewart” said Mr Goodfellow. “Mr Stewart may suit the manufacturers and the banks, but he will not suit the farmers, and the suggestion made in some quarters that he should be the sole representative of this Dominion at Ottawa is preposterous. One might ask why Sir James Parr, the best qualified man in the Dominion for a job of this sort has been omitted, added Mr Goodfellow. “He at least is both able and willing to go and would get something done.”

CANADIAN CABINET PREPARATIONS FOR CONFERENCE NO PREMATURE DISCUSSIONS (United Press Assr..— Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 9.15 p.m.) Ottawa, May 29. Meetings of the Dominion Cabinet will be devoted to a considerable extent to preparations for the Imperial Conference. It is doubtful, however, whether much information of an official nature regarding the preparations will be made public. It is suggested by those in close touch with the Ministry that the Government is anxious to avoid premature discussions on subjects which will come tip at the conference. It is felt that a long range discussion over the cable now might militate against the success of the conference when the delegates talk things .over face to face, for example, the attitude of the Canadian Government in connection with the dispute between the British Government and Mr De Valera over the oath of allegiance. No word has come from the Canadian Government one way or the other. “The Constitution of the Irish Free State is modelled after the Canadian Constitution, and Canada has lived much longer under it than has the Irish Free State,” declared one Government official. “It does seem reasonable that Canada might be very helpful in smoothing out the situation, and that is why, unlike some other Dominions, Canada has taken no part in the controversy. She wants to be free to help if she can without prejudice to her usefulness by a premature expression of opinion.” The United Farmers of Alberta will set forth objections to the wheat quota at the Imperial Economic Conference on the ground that Canada has a large exportable surplus which is not purchaseable by countries within the Empire. The loss of foreign markets through any British quota is foreseen. The abandonment of the gold standard by the British Empire is suggested in a brief statement issued by the United Farmers of Alberta for submission to the conference. The memorandum declared: “In general the gold standard should be abandoned as a basis for commerce within the British Empire, or in the alternative parity between the Canadian dollar and the British pound should be established.” EDITORIAL VIEWS THE OTTAWA DELEGATION. SOME CRITICAL OPINIONS. Editorial comment from metropolitan centres on the Ottawa delegation mainly emphasizes the strength of the representation. The following give brief extracts of the principal editorials:— “The personnel of the New Zealand delegation to the Imperial Economic Conference is a striking indication of the importance which the Government and the people of New Zealand attach to the occasion,” says the Christchurch Press. “It is doubtful if New Zealand has ever been represented abroad by a delegation better qualified to speak for her, and it would certainly have been difficult to find a better one at the present time. . . It is necessary to face the fact, however, that the strength of the delegation, which includes the three leading figures in the Government, implies a serious weakening of the Government during the period of their absence. Cabinet cannot have considered the appointment of the delegates without at the same time considering the situation of the country and its need for strong and wise and prompt direction in its present difficulties, especially those of finance and unemployment, and its decision cannot have been lightly taken. It could not have been taken at all without first a strong sense of the importance of Ottawa, and second a degree of confidence in the remaining members of Cabinet and in the country itself, which every effort will have to be made to sustain and justify.” Keeping the Balance. The New Zealand Herald says: “Three members of Cabinet, Mr Forbes, Mr Coates, and Mr Downie Stewart, will represent New Zealand. For the role they are to play the trio can he accepted without cavil. The only question is why three when Australia, as the nearest example, will be satisfied with two? The answer is easily found. It is one of the consequences of the Coalition—an effort to keep the balance between the parties, both at Ottawa and at home. The outlook may be perfectly satisfactory for Ottawa, but there remains the problem of public business to be done in the absence of the delegates and of allotting the portfolios they will relinguish. Temporarily choosing those who will shoulder it is scarcely less delicate than selecting the delegates for overseas. The sending of three increases the difficulties, which are bound up with the difficulties of the times.” "So far as the personnel of the delegation is concerned the decision of Cabinet that both the Prime Minister and Mr Coates should be absent from

the Dominion at one time is not, in our opinion, a wise one,” says the Christchurch Times. “It is particularly open to criticism at this time when the unemployment problem is acute. The Dominion could surely have been adequately represented without taking the leading three members of Cabinet away at so difficult a time.” Disapproval Expressed. “The country will be astonished and even shocked that three Ministers are to go to Ottawa,” says the Auckland Star. “Even in a time of rampant prosperity and economic calm the size of this Ministerial delegation would be extravagant. To-day is is indefensible. Moreover, the political representation is confined to the Government ranks. It would be a graceful and profitable act to invite a member of the Labour Party to accompany what is a national delegation going on a national and Imperial mission. All over the country there will be sharply expressed disapproval of the Ministerial party (which will leave a dangerously weakened Ministry behind to govern the country), and if Mr Coates is wise he will at once withdraw.” Dunedin Critical. Commenting on the inclusion of the Minister of Public Works, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, in the personnel of the Ottawa delegation, the Otago Daily Times says:— “It is announced that the Government will be represented at the Ottawa Conference by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Public Works. It was obvious that Mr Forbes and Mr Downie Stewart should, if available, be members of the delegation, and most people would probably have been satisfied if the representation of the Government had been confined to them. It might have been supposed that the demands made on Mr Coates’s time in his capacity as Minister of Employment would have prevented him from absenting himself from the Dominion during the winter months, and we are not at all sure that he is acting wisely in allowing himself to be included in the delegation.” The Evening Star comments briefly and pointedly. “As to the Ministers,” it says, “the inclusion of Mr Coates with Mr Forbes and Mr Stewart will be a surprise only to those who are unfamiliar with the extent of his ambitions.”