INTER-IMPERIAL POLICY

Taranaki Daily News, 12 August 1930, Page 11

INTER-IMPERIAL POLICY

PROBLEMS FOR THE CONFERENCE

NEW ZEALAND PREMIER’S OPINIONS

DEFENCE, TRADE AND DIPLOMACY

By Telegraph—Press Association. - • .<•<■■ ■• Wellington, Last Night. A debate on linperial affairs was initiated in the House of Representatives this afternoon by■ the Prime Minister, Mr. . . Forbes, who said it would be recognised that on certain Questions it would be premature to have public discussion before they had been considered at the Imperial Conference. The defence and foreign policies were conspicuous examples on which considered opini could be given only after the fullest information, confidential and Qtherwise, had been supplied.

lt would be agreed that the'representative of New Zealand must to a considerable extent be allowed a free hand in the discussioni and decision of the various subjects to be dealt with at the conference but Mr. Forbes hoped to indicate m general terms the lines it was intended follow. •'

Mr. Forbes said he wished to make it clear .at the. outset that,., the..present Government shared in no less measure than previous. Governments the traditional attitude of New Zealand towards the United .. Kingdom. . New Zealand valued very highly its continued association with and it was the Dominion’s wisli to maintain that association as closely and as intimately as possible, both politically and economically. • . • Referring to inter-imperial relations, Mr. Forbes said the individual membership of the Dominions in the League of Nations and their constantly-growing participation in international affairs inevitably focussed attention upon the theory of Dominion status, and- at the Imperial'Conference in 1926 a committee headed by the late Lord Balfour produced a momentous report which was acepted by the plenary conference. The report was based on the dictum that the British Dominions, were “autonomous communities within the British Empire, ’equal in status and in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs though united by common allegiance to the Crown and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations.” Mr. Forbes thought New Zealand would have been content to have left things as- they had been. New Zealand had not in any way been embarrassed by the' terms of association with the British Government, nor had the Dominion been restricted in the control of its own affairs, but it was. impossible to ignore the fact that a position entirely acceptable to New Zealand had not been acceptable to' other members of the British Commonwealth and in a political organisation whose most marked characteristic was its dependence entirely upon the goodwill of its component parts it was obvious that its continuance in the future must depend upon a basis acceptable to all. There could be no question that the report of the committee of experts of 1929 carried to a logical conclusion the necessarily vague decisions ac to Dominion status of the Imperial Conference of 1926. - EXPERTS’ RECOMMENDATIONS.

The Government did not feel it could effectively oppose acceptance of these feebirimend’ations. If at "the forthcoming conference it should appear—and Mr. Forbes had little doubt it would apjicar—that' the recommendations of the repdirt met with the common acceptance of 'other Governments, then New Zealand would not dissent.

“These teebrnmendatiops,” Mr. Forbes cbntin'ueil) “are permissive only, and not obligatory ilpon any member of the British Commonwealth even when the immediate steps proposed by the report to facilitate complete autonomy of the Dominions have been taken either. in the form of United Kingdom legislation or otherwise. It' will still remain for the New Zealand Government and for the New Zealand Parliament to decide how far these recommendations should be adopted, if at all in respect of New Zealand.

“Indeed, in one respect the New Zealand Government is definitely averse to carrying into fleet the full implications of the report —we do not wish to make any alteration in the.present powers in regard to New Zealand legislation that would adversely affect the' very high standing of New Zealand credit on the London market, and whatever happens, we shall carefully safeguard the position in this- respect. “It will be noted,” the Prime Minister stated, “that experts recommend for the consideration of the Imperial Conference the' establishment of a tribunal for the determination of any dispute that may arise between members of the British Commonwealth in international delations. Disputes on matters of right in which we are concerned will now be settled by-reference to the Permanent Court of International Justice at The Hague, but in the acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of this court a special reservation was made of interImperial disputes, and it is for the consideration of such disputes that this tribunal is now proposed. AVOIDANCE OF FRICTION. “We feel it very unlikely that we ourselves would be involved in any dispute with another member of the British Commonwealth that might call for the intervention of such a* tribunal, but at the same time it is our intention to fall in with any reasonable proposal for the setting-up of such a tribunal in order to avoid any possibility of friction between his Majesty’s several Governments.

•Referring to the foreign policy, Mr Forbes said: “We wclcoine the growing strength of the'movement towards international peace and disarmament, end we shall do. all. that properly lies M'Our power to further ‘this, movement, dUe .'regard" 'to the safety and

protection of this Dominion and of the British Commonwealth. However en; couraging ■ the continued improvement; in international relations may be, and' there is no doubt that it is encouraging, I think he would be a rash mart who concluded that .possibility no longer exists of international complications and their attendent -conflicts and miseries. I, for one, have no doubt, and it is the duty of the Prime Minister to take such steps, as the international situation may require to provide io’every possible eventuality. Our safety, of course, depends very largely, if not entirely, upon the British Navy, and though we shall welcome any progressive and common reduction in the heavy burden of national armaments, the day has not yet, in our view, arrived w-hen it is possible to igunore the necessity of naval defence. “The question of the Singapore Base is to receive consideration at the Imperial Conference, and it would be premature to discuss the matter in any detail now. The Government and I think the people" of New Zealand have been impressed with the necessity for a base in the Pacific from which the British fleet could operate should the occasion unhappily arise. We have contributed towards the cost of the base £125,000 per annum, with a maximum of £1,000,000, and we have in no wise altered our opinion in that respect.” ECONOMIC PROBLEMS. “Turning to the economic side of the agenda,” continued Mr. Forbes, “we. have first of all the highly important subject of inter-imperial trade. The Government fully recognises the importance of this subject, which is equalled only by its complexity and its difficulty of approach. It will no doubt be sufficient for me to say that apart from our own individual interests we. shall share in th© economic prosperity of the United Kingdom and we shall give the most earnest and sympathetic consideration to-- any proposition that may be laid before the conference. We do not yield to the people of any Dominion in our devotion to the principles of interImperial unity, both economically and otherwise, and we will enter upon the discussion of economic subjects at the conference with all goodwill and with a desire to foster trade within the Commonwealth in every possible way. We should, of course, welcome the fullest extension of capital investments and the establishment of branch industries in the Dominion, and we will encourage in every possible way the development of intcr-Imperial trade by the Trade Commissioner, services or other means referred to in the agenda. We shall enter into any discussion that, may be promoted on the question of mtcr-Im-pcrial tariff preferences in a helpful spirit. I do not propose to commit the Government on the subject of bulk purchases and price stabilisation. I am not yet aware of the proposals that will be placed before the conference in this respect, and it would, certainly be premature to express any views, but I look forward with interest to the discussion of these subjects. OVERSEAS SETTLEMENT. The question of oversea settlement is .one of the utmost importance, and. is at the same time one of the most difficult so far as we are concerned. The unprecedented continuance of unemployment in New Zealand, renders it quite impossible that we should at present encourage immigration, and this not only in the interests of the people already here, but equally in the interests of intending immigrants. ' “Finally, I must refer to that portion of'the report of the'experts on Dominion legislation that deals with merchant shipping. The report proposes' complete autonomy on this subject, as on otliers. The recommendations have been carefully considered by the New Zealand Marine Department, and with one minor exception they are regarded as entirely acceptable. The actual steps, if any, that we may decide to take to put these recommendations into practice here will, of course, be a matteF for the New Zealand Parliament, and it is not proposed to take any such steps during this session.”

Mr. Coates said he thought it would be desirable that New Zealand’s representative at the conference should be accompanied by a legal adviser, and he could think of no one more suitable among the Prime Minister’s colleagues than Sir Thomas Sidey. The continuance of the Government to observe the traditional attitude toward the Mother Country met with the approval of the Opposition side of the House. On the questions of defence and foreign policy he noted the Prime Minister had again followed the lead of Prime Ministers for many years, and that also met with the full support of Mr. Coates’ party. Referring to the experts’ report, Mr. Coates said equal status had not been intended to mean, equal function; it had meant ’the right of 'cjachy Do/pinion

to govern itself within its own confines. It had been seen that unlimited extraterritorial rights might have led to complications. The experts had been called on to decide in what matters the Dominions should have the same autonomy as the United Kingdom. DOCTRINE OF EQUALITY. Air. Coates mentioned that it was hard to recall an instance in which the King’s veto had been used in the case of any Dominion legislation. He considered the expert committee h-" failed to make the doctrine of equality workable by defining limitations; it simply recommended the repeal of the Colonial Laws Validity Act. It was for the conference of 1930 to say whether the committee of experts should again be asked to indicate to- what extent tne repeal should apply. ' That referred to both shipping and extra-territorial rights. So far as appeal to the Privy Council was concerned, he considered the legislation as it stood at present left it possible for litigants to go to the Privy Council if they wished. He thought it best that the position should be left at that. The committee of experts, however, had given no opinion on the subject. Mr. Coates said there was a growing need for the Dominions to build up staffs which should be able to advise the Cabinet on matters of inter-Im-pcrial and inter-Dominion relationship. It was true the -Foreign Office kept the Dominions well informed, but there were histories and details that should be recorded by competent officers. Iheie should be a policy of training young men from New Zealand and graduate them through the Dominion. and Colonal Offices to the Foreign Office. There should be available to the Government at any time expert advice on external matters by word of mouth. He had no fault to find with the communications through the Governor organisation, but for matters of detail there was the need he had outlined.

Referring to the policy of world peace, Mr, Coates said he felt New Zealand! would be well advised .to consider its isolated position, and not to. neglect the matter of defence until the ideal had actually been attained. He thought .the country as a whole was prepared to carry the load cheerfully in the way of contributions to the Singapore Base. Mr. Coates also urged that every opportunity should be taken to bring about closer co-operation in inter-Empire trade. The Dominion should even go to the extent of inducing increased Empire trade. LABOUR LEADER’S VIEWS. Mr. H. E. Holland said he thought it would be advisable to alter the name from Imperial Conference to British Commonwealth Conference. The name “imperial” denoted domination, and it was out of' harmony with modern Dominion status to maintain it. Referring to the representation at the conference, Mr. Holland said he wished to repeat that all sections of the Parliaments of all the Dominions should be represented. There would be a wide range of important subjects to be discussed at the forthcoming conference, and economic questions would predominate. One of the most important would be the proposal for the bulk purchase of Dominion produce, and he was disappointed-that the Prime .Minister had passed over it somewhat lightly. There had- in recent years been a marked tendency towards organising better marketing of primary products. Mr. Holland drew attention to the dependence of Britain upon Dominion markets, and he hoped the Prime Minister would make every arrangement possible to secure a better system of importation of British goods into New Zealand. It seemed strange that the United States, with whom New Zealand had an adverse trade balance, was in a position to pour such an increasing flow of goods into the Dominion, especially when so many of those goods could have been obtained from Britain, which was the best customer for New Zealand products. It went without saying' that as the volume of New Zealand products increased, so would increase the need for more effective marketing. It was for that reason important that the question of bulk purchase and price stabilisation should be given thorough consideration, It was highly desirable that there should be some indication of the quantities of supplies that would be required from 1 the Dominions. ■BULK-PURCHASE -SCHEME; ■ Mr. Holland suggested that from the viewpoint of New Zealand bulk purchase was particularly important. It would systematise supplies and would greatly reduce the number of middlemen between the producer and the consumer. It would guarantee a better return to the former and a cheaper price to the latter. In conjunction with a policy of seeking better marketing arrangements for New Zealand goods there should be a determination to increase the market in the Dominion for British in preference to United States goods. Mr. Holland said he believed that if a direct vote of the people of New Zealand .could be taken it would be against the continuance of payments of £125,000 towards the Singapor > Base unless the British Government insisted on it. He pointed out that Now Zealand stood alone among the Dominions in seeking to continue what might eventually be a futile project.

Mr. F. Waite said he did not consider New Zealand was bearing a fair share of Empire burdens from the point of view of. both naval and land defence. He thought most people in New Zealand, believed . there should be- some naval base in the Pacific, and he believed the people if fully informed would vote to the extent of 75 per cent, in favour of the Singapore scheme. Air. 15. G. Sullivan supported the views of Air. Holland on the subject of bulk purchase, and stated that it was one which concerned not only the producers, but all classes of the community.

Mr. W, D. Stewart said that if “Imperial Conference” was not a satisfactory name, neither was the title- Mr. Holland had suggested, because it would not include such a country as India. With regard to the suggestion that all parties should be represented, it might be found different representatives from one country might voice entirely different views on one subject. It had to be recognised that the Prime Minister spoke for the whole country for the lime be in”-. “GOING TOO FAR.” Mr. W. D, Stewart said lie thought Mr. Forbes was going too far in stating with reference to the experts’ report that he would assent if the recommendations met with the common acceptance of other Governments. The position might arise that the same attitude would be adopted by the other. delegates and a report that was not rpqlly

acceptable to everybody would thus be adopted. He mentioned, for instance, that it might be found that the leader of the Conservative Canadian Government would present views different from those of Mr. Alaekenzie King. It was important,.as Mr. Coates had mentioned, that there should be a clearly defined position in regard to extra territorial and shipping rights. Mr. W. Nash (Hutt) said that if all the Dominions carried to a logical conclusion the tendencies to make themselves self-contained by the development of secondary and other new industries it would be found that Britain would have to look elsewhere for markets for its manufactured products. The consequence of such a course would be an agreement to take primary products from such other countries as would offer a market for Britain’s exports. The effect of such a development on New Zealand primary products was apparent, and *he position was worthy of very serious consideration. As a means of meeting the situation he advocated the negotiation of purchase and price stabilising agreements to place trade with Britain on an assured basis.

Air. J. S, Fletcher complained that New Zealand was being run by officials instead of by Parliament, which should have beer enabled to discuss Imperial affairs a month ago. The Prime Minister was going to the conference in a nebulous state of mind and the House had are insufficient guide as to what his views were. _

Mr. D. Jones said the question would shortly arise in New Zealand whether it should give Imperial preference or whether preference should not become more exclusive, to Britain. The United States had enormous capital in Canada mainly invested in raw materials and manufactures, and the question arose as .to what extent New Zealand Was subsidising- the United States when -it gave preference to Canada. Referring to bulk purchase Mr. Jones said it was impossible in a system of control to let the quality govern the price, and this would hit New Zealand hard. “SIDE-STEPPING - PREFERENCE.” Mr. W. J. Polson said ho regretted that the question of bulk.purchase had not been discussed more widely by the producers. He thought that bulk purchase was a suggestion by tho British Labour Party to side step the question of Imperial preference. Mr. H. G. Dickie said any effort to stabilise prices should be welcomed. He hoped some good would emanate from the discussion of bulk purchase. The position could not at any rate become worse than at present. Mr. Forbes, replying, said as New Zealand had advanced," the value of belonoin" to the Empire had become more and more apparent. The experts committee had dealt with the position of Dominion status and there wp.s no doubt tho matter of more clearly defining the limitations of autonomy would bo the subject of discussion. Tho question of the institution of a delegation as suggested by Mr. Holland had been debated previously but had not found favour, Mr. Forbes said. The Prime Minister attended tho conference not as representative of any one party but as representative of New Zealand. Referring to Singapore Mr. Forbes said with°tho reduction of the number of cruisers in the Pacific tho need for the base was more important than £ver. As a measure of insurance it was wise to go on with it. In the absence of full information as to the proposals in regard to bulk purchase he had been unable.to give an expression of opinion on the subject. It might be possible, however, to make a beginning with a system of the kind though he could not see how it would be possible to evolve a scheme for buyin" the whole of New Zealands pi educe. The question was undoubtedly worthy of full consideration. . Replying to Mr. Coutos tlio Piimc Minister said the Customs Amendment Bill would be brought down to morrow evening. The House rose at 11. IS p.m.