SHIPPING LINES

Waikato Times, Volume 119, Issue 19816, 21 February 1936, Page 7

SHIPPING LINES

I COMPETITION IN PACIFIC. ! I 1 I CRITICISM OP GOVERNMENT. I ! ’ NEW ZEALAND CASE CITED. United Press Assn.—Elec. Tel. Copyright. (Received Feb. 21, 1.15 p.m.) OTTAWA, Feb. 20. Declaring that the Government is shirking its great responsibilities for Ihe Empire in the fcaciflc by opposing shipping subsidies, Mr G. G. Me Geer (Vancouver),' in the House of Commons, clashed with his party, denouncing the 149,000 dollar cut in the grant for the Vancouver-China service. They should realise what was being done by the Mother 'Country at Singapore and Hongkong. Japan had become a leading war power. x Mr R. L. Baker (Conservative, Toronto) interjected. “Therein lies the danger.” He denounced the attack as heroics. Mr C. A. Dunning defended the cut as a needed economy. Mr W. O. Euler cited that a 100,000 dollar increase in the New Zealand subsidy was necessary through American competition, in view of the Canadian-New Zealand trade. Replying to the demands of several members that only whites toe employed on the Oriental ships he said that it was impossible, as most vessels were registered in London. THE NEED FOR ABSIBTANCE. GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY DEBATED. INCREASE IN MEN’S WAGES. (Official Wireless.) (Received Feb. 21, 1 p.m.) RUGBY, Feb. 20. As a result of negotiations between shipbuilding employers and the trade unions adult shipyard workers will receive in April an advance of 2s a week or 4 per cent, in the case of pieceworkers. The agreement is for nine months. Mr Walter Runciman, in moving the second reading in the House of Commons of th© Government’s bill to continue the subsidy in aid of tramp shipping amounting to £2,000,000, and to make eligible for the grant certain vessels previously excluded, said on national grounds every effort must be made to preserve the efficiency of tramp shipping, which was one of the 1 most valuable elements in the British , mercantile marine. Mr Hunciman reviewed the year’s working of the subsidy, and claimed that it had resulted in benefit to all interests concerned in shipping, commenting with pleasure on the agreement reached toy the National Maritime Board for the restoration of the cuts in the seamen’s wages. The rejection of the bill was moved for the Labour Opposition by Mr E. Shinwell, who contended that no case had been made for the continued expenditure of public money towards the promotion of private interests. Sir R. Horne, supported the bill, which he held was justified by the necessity of meeting subsidised foreign competition, which had been driving British shipping off the seas. The second reading of the bill was carried by 234 votes to 126. Danger of Loss of Trade. Sir R. Horne said he sincerely hoped we were not going to lose the British trade in the Pacific entirely, and that the flag was not going to be hauled down. It would toe an admission that; our glory at sea had departed. The Pacific lines had been splendid and had performed a great function for the Empire in the past. The situation had been deteriorating. One of the lines had already given up, and the other was in a condition of considerable jeopardy. He alluded to the subsidy and the privileges at Honolulu of the Matson Line, and said the result was grievous. He believed that Mr Runciman was sympathetic towards the action which the speaker hoped the Government would take.