CONTROL OF CABLE AND WIRELESS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 90, Issue 118, 23 May 1946, Page 5

CONTROL OF CABLE AND WIRELESS

DEBATE JN_COMMONS BILL READ SECOND TIME

Recd. 5.5 p.m. London, May 22. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Dr. Hugh Dalton, in the House of Commons, moving the second reading of the Cable and Wireless Bill, said it was not only a measure of Socialist advance, but a practical measure of united Empire policy. The British and Dominion Governments were as one on the matter. There had been increasing dissatisfaction in the Dominions with the present set-up. They felt they were not getting reasonable consideration. The Government had not yet decided whether the tele-communica-tions service was to be operated, by the post office or by a public board. It was anxious to consult all the interests concerned before deciding. A small board would be appointed to carry on in the meantime.

The company'.; assets included 155,000 miles of submarine cables, five cableships, and five wireless stations in the United Kingdom, about 200 offices and stations scattered throughout the world, including 40 in different parts of the Empire. The company operated 140 wireless circuits. That illustrated the importance of the Bill. The change of ownership would not disturb the existing contracts of employees. Changes in conditions of employment would be made only after a staff association was consulted.

Mr. Oliver Lyttelton said the overriding authority was to be charged with a task of collecting all Empire communications revenues and then redistributing them, by agreement, with partner Governments. There was no agreement likely to lead, to greater friction, or more likely 1o lead to legitimate grievances. Mr. Lyttelton said some Governments in whose territories Britain had concessions might wish to follow Britain’s example and take over those concessions and make them Government-owned. Pointing out that there were noints in the communications system which, politically, commercially and strategically, were very important, Mr. Lyttelton said it would be a grave matter, from a military viewpoint, if it turned out necessary links in the chain had io be transferred to foreign ownership. If foieign concessions were damaged as the result of the change, Britain would be _ losing a valuable source of foreign exchange. The Bill was read a second time without division.