The Timaru Herald. MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 1932. HOME TRUTHS FROM MR BALDWIN.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19249, 1 August 1932, Page 6

The Timaru Herald. MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 1932. HOME TRUTHS FROM MR BALDWIN.

It is characteristic of the national ideals of Great Britain that her statesmen should take the first opportunity to make it perfectly plain to the delegations assembled at the Ottawa Conference, in particular, and to the people in the Overseas Dominions in general, that the British delegation has no intention of weighing meticulously the benefits given or received, but is anxious that the outside world shall realise that the spirit animating every member of the delegation has been constantly and consistently displayed in Britain’s actual dealings with the Dominions. Mr Baldwin, in his masterly review of trade relations within the Empire, insisted that any suggestion that Britain has been backward in developing and assisting the Dominions’ trade or not fully reciprocating Dominion concessions in the letter and spirit, is wholly unwarranted. It is pointed out with characteristic bluntness, that the British delegation at Ottawa, appreciating fully the advantages received in the Empire markets entered the Conference with the intention of making a full contribution to the still further extension of Empire trade. Reviewing at some length, the statistical record of the trade relations within the Empire, Mr Baldwin did not hesitate to lay ail the cards on the table, but lie very clearly indicated, although he hardly said so iu as many words that the demands at the Conference must not all be on one side. No agreements are possible, of course, if every delegation takes up the position that they represent selling countries and have interest in the other side of trading. No doubt the proposals of the Dominions will be given the closest and most sympathetic consideration, hut if all the delegations proceed along the lines adopted by South Africa which literally demands a wide range of new and valuable concessions in the British market at the expense of traders outside the Empire, and is not prepared to offer some compensating concessions, the Conference will not make much headway, particularly if on the other hand all the countries follow South Africa’s example of giving favoured trading concessions in commercial agreements, to Germany. Mr Baldwin, on his part, has very calmly but most firmly pointed out to "the Imperial Economic Conference that there is practically no free entry of British exports into the four principal Dominions. Moreover, the head of the British delegation has very properly reminded his fellow delegates at Ottawa, that Britain’s interests in all the Dominions is not confined to the exchange of goods. It is therefore interesting to note that Mr Baldwin hinted rather broadly at the investment side of inter-imperial relations, and in the most lucid way he suggested to the delegations that although the Dominions may feel the fulness of their stature in their equality of status, Britain after all, had more than a passing interest in the welfare of all the Dominions. He pointed out that it was a source of legitimate satisfaction that preferential access to the British investment market, which resulted from close association between Britain and the Dominion had played an important part in the development of Dominion resources. Obviously desiring to bring the delegations from the Overseas Dominions back to earth in their flights of imagination, in the somewhat aggressive presentation of their “demands,” Mr Baldwin showed the extent to which the investment factor had operated between Britain and the Dominions. Mr Baldwin said it was estimated that £3,800,000,000 of the British capital invested overseas before the war was placed in Empire countries.” Although there has necessarily been a diminution in the flow of oversea investment since the war,” Mr Baldwin explained, “the proportion allotted to Empire countries had substantially increased. Out of a total of £1,401,000,000 invested between 1919 and 1931, no less than £843,000,000 had been placed in Empire countries.” The reminder is most timely, but Mr Baldwin ought to have carried his examination a trifle further, and showed that British investments in overseas Dominions involve the borrowers In substantial interest and sinking fund obligations which have to be met every year. Moreover, it ought to be plain to the British delegation that stern obligations are laid on all the oversea Dominions, who, are indebted to the Mother Country to purchase less than they sell, otherwise they cannot preserve their national solvency. Nevertheless, we think it can be said that New Zealand in its trade relations with the Mother Country makes a very creditable showing, more particularly in view of the growing sentiment in this country to trade with those who trade with us. But, Britain on her part, has substantial investments in foreign countries and as Mr Baldwin points out with the utmost frankness, Britain needs not only adequate markets for her goods, (more than half of which goes to foreign countries), but if she is to receive dividends on her invest-

ments abroad, she must trade with countries who are in her debt, otherwise the investing public in Britain cannot be paid. Nevertheless, the delegations at Ottawa will subsequently find many avenues along which substantial and valuable concessions will be found practicable on both sides. New Zealand must face the fact, however, that without the market of the United Kingdom our difficulties would be overwhelming, and it remains for the Dominions to help their best customer by purchasing her goods, and thus increase her purchasing power which would eventually confer mutual benefits to the far-flung Empire.