CRISP SURVEY

Wairarapa Daily Times, 20 October 1932, Page 5

CRISP SURVEY

OF OTTAWA AGREEMENTS DISCUSSION IN COMMONS. Press Assjjhaiua Electric Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, Tuesday. Tliere was an air of expectancy when the House of Commons reassembled today to tackle legislation arising out of the Ottawa Conference. The Chamber was so crowded that many members were unable to find seats. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Air Nevillo Chamberlain, spoke for a little over an hour in a crisp survey of the Ottawa, agreements, and was given a splendid hearing. The Chancellor prefaced his statement by declaring that if tho success of the Ottawa Conference resulted in the increased prosperity of the united Brit-i.-h Empire, that then was the largest contribution which tlie Empire could iuiako towards a restoration of the prosperity of the world. The conference, ho said, had resulted in a better understanding by the different members of the Empire of one another’s difficulties. For the first time India had recognised tho principle of Imperial preference, while Canada and Australia, the two most industrialised Dominions, had given up tho idea that their home markets were to be reserved entirely' to homo manufacturers. A new departure was that for tho first time the whole colonial Empire had been brought into tho negotiations. The general trend of the agreements readied was a lowering of inter-lmper-ial tariffs and further mutual co-opera-tion.

Tho United Kingdom’s policy was, first, to help its own home market, and, secondly, to give an expanding share of the import market to the Dominions. Ho believed that they' had laid at Ottawa the foundation of a real Imperial Agricultural Association, while the British delegation had brought back solid advantages for the manufacturing interests, which would be put into immediate effect.

After Air Chamberlain had explained that Canada and Australia had undertaken to allow British manufacturers a fair competitive diamco by referring the applications of these principles to impartial tariff boards, the Leader of the Opposition, Air George Lansbury, asked if Britain would be represented on these boards. Air Chamberlain replied: “That is an extraordinary question. I should no-t have thought that anyone would suggest that tlie representative of another country should 9it on a tariff board to decide what tariffs it should impose. British interests, however, have been assured an opportunity of presenting their case.” 'Continuing Lis speech, Hie Chancellor said that tho situation was calamitous. Mutton and lamb prices had dropped to below pre-war. These must be raised to avoid the ruin of Homo producers. A tax on foreign meat was useless. The foreigner would only pay it and continue shipments. Excessive supplies had come from Australia and Now Zealand. The Dominions must play their part in regulaing supplies. The Argentine had accepted the position in a helpful, practical spirit. If meat regulation succeeded, it would be useful in dealing with other commodities.

“It is now,” concluded tho Chancellor, “for Parliament to translate into reality the vision of a strong, united, prosperous Empire, which by the strength of example will be ■enabled to lend a helpful hand to a distressful world.

The Leader of the Opposition (Air G. Lansbury) said that the Dominions had obviously driven a bargain giving them a tremendous gain without Britain gaining anything. It was not. apparent from the Chancellor's speech how tho Ottawa agreements were going to produce employment in Britain. For instance, if Britain bought timber from Canada instead of Russia, with the consequent transfer of some export trade, it simply meant that they would be like a housewife who changed tradesmen. The electors gave tho Government a doctor’s mandate, but not a mandate for fiscal quackery. British agriculture was not assisted by the Ottawa agreements, which would bring neither prosperity nor contentment to anvone in Britain.

Kir Herbert Samuel said that it should not be assumed that these agreements were universally approved in the Dominions. The Government had no right to create an impossible constitutional situation, nor attempt to tie up its successors, nor coniine the British electorate within bonds which would surely burst, asunder if the measure were carried in its present form to operate for five years. “We regard it,’’ he said, “as confrarv to constitutional practice. )Vo must, lie free in the future to modify or repeal measures as conditions require.” There was nt.vo, he added, a long list of duties that could only be repealed with the consent of the Dominions. Hitherto the Dritish Parliament had been free to lower or repeal taxes without outside consent. “These measures,” he said, “make us one of the world’s most completely protected countries. This is the maddest. tariff ever thrown together. No political scientist could have constructed it except in a nightmare. Unemployment lias increased by 300,000 since the tariffs were instituted. Instead of uniting the 'Commonwealth, Ottawa lias brought about a vehement controversy throughout the Empire. It has brought the needs of* the poorest classes into con'lllet with the claims advanced on behalf of Imperial patriotism. Mr Seullin has given notice that the Australian. Labour Party would mot be bound by a live years’ agreement if it came into power. The leader of the Canadian Opposition regards the live years’ proposal as fun da mentally wrong.” The Prime Minister, Mr Ramsay MacDonald, replying to the d bate, claimed that no single pledge given by eiiv n stionviidc member of the Government during Ihe general election had been broken by the Ottawa agreement.

“There were definite references to tho possibility of a tariff in the National Government’s election addresses, and after that warning Sir Herbert. Samuel accepted our support,’’ lie said. “Our delegates went to Ottawa charged with the duty of coming to an agreement with the Dominions, and not lotting the Conference break down. All that we have done is to put up the 'stiffest light possible' in order that the' tariffs should be as advantageous as possible to this country.’’ (Cheers.) Mr MacDonald added: “As for Sir Herbert Samuel’s constitutional point, what would have been the use in going 1o the Dominions saying, for example, 'We would like to develop your fruit trade, and we guarantee' you six months’ continuous duty?’ It would have been a farce if we had put our bands to this sort of legislation. We must do it in such a way that the effect wanted could be realised.” Ho personally was prepared to change the method to-morrow if time proved that certain cherished constitutional practices were out of date. The delegates at Ottawa had come to agreements which would undoubtedly expand trade throughout the Empire. He appealed to the House to carry out the agreements in the most generous spirit, and appealed to the Dominions to show the same spirit in applying the agree--1 meats to their own position. The llousio then adjourned.