The Wanganui Chronicle. FRIDAY, JANUARY, 31, 1947. JAPANESE TEXTILES

Wanganui Chronicle, 31 January 1947, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. FRIDAY, JANUARY, 31, 1947. JAPANESE TEXTILES

THE influence of Japan upon the textiles industries of the world has for the time being been eliminated. At the moment she is being given some supplies of coarse cotton. The aspiration of the Japanese, however, is to engage in the production of the better class of cotton textiles, but what the aim is regarding woollen fabrics is not yet known. Japanese manufacturers will probably have to face higher wages costs than before the war; but against this they will be spared the tax burden imposed on them by the militarist aims of their country. If Japan is to be disarmed and is, therefore, unable to spend a large portion of the annual national budget upon armaments the higher wages costs may be absorbed by industry without undue strain. Competition from China may also be less difficult than was at one time feared by Japan’s manufacturers. In a world iu which labour shortages have become chronic Japan will most probably be faced with an unemployment problem, seeing that her activities respecting iron and steel, chemicals and shipbuilding will be restricted in the interests of world security. The textiles industries will, consequently, have no difficulty in recruiting a labour force. With low taxation, a full labour force, and a Government anxious to improve the export situation, Japan may become a serious competitor in the textile markets of the world —and there will be no reason for restricting her activities in this field on the ground of international peace. The Japanese must be given the opportunity to earn their living. This being so the question poised for answer iu New Zealand is the extent to which Japanese bidding for wool will operate in this market. TARIFFS AND BOUNTIES THE freeing of world trade from the restrictive action of tariffs is engaging the attention of the various Governments in the world to-day. It is hoped that the establishing of a world economy as opposed to nationalistic economic policies will result in a greater elasticity of demand and supply. It is only by so achieving such results that living standards may be raised. One country may enjoy a period of special advantage for a short or a long period, but as a world policy the nationalistic programme would lead to a slowing down of the technique of production. Tariffs, however, are only one of the restrictive agencies that operate to break up world economy. Bounties on exports are equally pernicious in that they eventually restrict production in countries more naturally suited to that purpose than the country engaging in the subsidising policy. The cost of production is not reduced by the payment of an export bounty; part of the cost is simply transferred from the producer to the taxpayer. The producer favours such a scheme because, on balance, he receives more than he pays as a taxpayer. The ultimate result of the export bounty is that the foreign consumer feeds at the expense of the taxpayer in the country of export. The hidden results are that production at first stands at a higher level than demand merits, the level of prices is depressed, and in a rich country, or in a country where the producers of the exported articles are politically powerful, the bounty is increased. This sustains production at the unwonted level when a lowering of price would cut back production and bring about a condition of equilibrium between production and consumption. In the countries that are fitted by nature for the class of production that is the subject of an export bounty in less favoured countries, the low range of prices curtails production or keeps current production at consistently unprofitable levels, leading to social unrest and discontent. Eventually low prices operate to curtail production in these countries while leaving it in an over-expanded condition in the countries that subsidise exports. The ultimate result of such a policy must be to shift the production away from those places where it is naturally habituated to places where production at the unwonted level when a lowering of price would cut are to be cancelled out by the “intelligent” political action of man. Unless tariffs are reduced and at the same time trade is not bountyfed, the first action will achieve no worthwhile results. ALBANIA’S ATTITUDE TO INTERNATIONAL ACTION THE damage done by mines to the British destroyers that were passing through the channel between the island of Corfu and the coast of Albania has been the-subject of fruitless negotiations between Britain and Albania. The decision of the United Kingdom Government to lay the matter before U.N.O. is appropriate because what is really at stake is the relationship of the small, backward and unorganised State of Albania toward international action. Albania is one of those small countries which Italy coveted before the war, and through which the Italian armies invaded Greece. King Zog was dethroned, but his hold on the throne and on the loyalty of his subjects was of a sketchy nature. His departure from the country caused nobody great concern. Since the war, however, this disorganised country has become a sovereign State, but how its Government derives its authority is not clear. A de facto government, however, may be treated with according to the practice of international law.

Granting full recognition to the present Government of Albania, for the sake of argument, it would be expected that such small fry as this State would be only too willing to co-operate with all international agencies that are working to promote a pacific world. This policy, however, Albania has decided not to pursue. The Mediterranean Zonal Mine Clearance Board unanimously decided that the Corfu Channel should be cleared of mines in the interest of the safety of international shipping. This decision was communicated to the Central Mine Clearance Board, an international body whose duty it is to see that wartime mines are removed as speedily as possible from the world’s waterways. This international body gave the decision its unanimous approval. The sweeping operations were entrusted to British craft, but before the work was commenced the Government of Albania was informed, of of the decision. Its action was to protest against what it termed “a unilateral decision” of the British Government to send minesweepers into “territorial waters.” The minesweepers engaged in this operation swept up 22 mines, two of which were examined, the rest being sunk by gunfiie. It was after this operation had been carried out that further mines were placed in the channel and caused the damage of vhich the United Kingdom Government complains. It would appear that several issues will be raised before U.N.O. as a result of this dispute. The first is the degree of cooperation to be expected from member States of U.N.O. in international action to eliminate the dangers arising out of the last war. In this ease Albania would be unable, presumably, to engage in minesweeping operations. The second point of interest will be the right of the British, acting under authority of the Mine Clearance Board, to engage in a clearance of what is regarded as a natural waterway for shipping of all nations. The third question which is being raised by Albania is of wide importance, it being to decide what constitutes territorial waters. The “three-mile limit” was established on the assumption that a gun on shore could cover that, range. To-day, with guns capable of firing 25 miles, and even up Io 51) miles, the gunshot range as a measure of territorial jurisdiction is an elastic one, and requires to be reviewed. A theoretical gunshot of three miles is now obsolete and the problem calls for an entirely new approach.