The Press FRIDAY, JUNE 14, 1946. Lend-Lease Settlements

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24901, 14 June 1946, Page 6

The Press FRIDAY, JUNE 14, 1946. Lend-Lease Settlements

Much more plainly than the British settlement fa December, which was overshadowed by the loan agreement announced at the same time, the Australian lend-lease settlement with the United States is a reminder that New Zealand too has a final balance to strike and clear. Like the British settlement, which reduced the visible debit against Great Britain to the small fraction of 650,000,000 dollars, the Australian settlement, which reduces a debit of more than £ 60,000,000 to £8,400,000, exemplifies what Is by all previous standards in international transactions a magnificent generosity. It is also a reminder, however, of the fact that the accountancy of mutual aid has been no mere exercise in abstract book-keeping, to be terminated by cancelling both sides of the ledger without regard for their balance; that the Lend-Lease Act indeed did not say that cancellation was to be the end of debits and credits alike; that President Roosevelt, its author, swiftly repudiated a lend-lease report issued over his name but without his authority, in which a settlement of this kind was predicted; that the mutual aid agreement laid down the very different principle that settlement, whatever terms and forms might be decided, should not cramp or obstruct international trade exchanges; and that Mr Nash, who has more than once dogmatically prophesied settlement by cancellation, was wrong. New Zealand, in other words, must be prepared to square a debit on lend-lease account. The precedents now in view strongly suggest that the balance shown in the accounts will be much reduced. Even if the argument has only been represented since settlement came under negotiation it remains a powerful argument that the balance against New Zealand has been piled up by the disparity between the high and rising price levels at which American supplies were accounted and the relatively low and stable prices at which New Zealand deliveries were accounted. Had representations to this effect been made and repeated while transactions were being recorded .it is theoretically possible that Mr Nash’s prophecy, so far as the New Zealand settlement is concerned, would have been vindicated in the result There is no evidence that the argument was used plainly and in time and it is therefore safe to assume that the terms of settlement will require New Zealand to pay a considerable sum, say, between £3,000,000 and £5,000,000. It should be said again, settlement on such, terms as have been accepted by Britain and Australia is settlement on terms of unexampled generosity—and wisdom; and there should be no hint or whisper of grievance. The point is specifically illustrated by a provision in which the Australian parallels the British settlement. Little heed was pajd in New Zealand to the clause under which the British Government agreed, on request from time to time during the next five years, to make available to the American Government the sterling equivalent of -50,000,000 dollars to be credited against the 050,000,000 dollars due and to be (feed “ exclusively “to acquire land or to acquire or "construct buildings in the United “ Kingdom for the use of the Gov- “ erfiment of the United States and “for carrying out educational pro- “ grammes in accordance with agree- “ ments to be concluded between the “ two Governments ”, The Australian settlement . exhibits a similar provision that devotes a large part of the settlement sum to the cultivation of educational and cultural rela tions, If jt may be anticipated that the New Zealand settlement will repeat this provision there is no need to say that it will be welcomed as one liberally designed—within an already fruitful American tradition —to influence relations between the American and New Zealand peoples lastingly and for good. It is more necessary to say that the full profit of such honourable enterprise depends as much on the response as or the initial act and intention, it is to be hoped, if the opportunity is afforded, that the New Zealand Government will use it to match the wisdom of Washington.