YEAR'S EXTENSION

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 136, 10 June 1937, Page 9

YEAR'S EXTENSION

IMPERIAL PREFERENCE

JUSTIFIED BY CHANCELLOR

TRADE WITH U.S.A.

(British Official Wireless.) (Received June 10, noon.)

RUGBY, June 9.

During a debate in the House of Commons this Evening on the Finance Bill both the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir John Simon), and the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Oliver Stanley) referred to the prospects of an Anglo-American trade agreement. Their intervention arose out of a Liberal amendment proposing to limit to six months the authority given in Lhe Bill for the continuance of Imperial preferences.

It was urged by Liberal speakers that nothing should be done which might interfere with the success of the efforts to secure a trade agreement with the United States, which were at an informal and exploratory stage. The Chancellor of the Exchequer saia that no advantage was to be\gained by exaggerating what was at present, the fact. Informal and explbratory .work was being done to determine whether a basis could be found for trade negotiations. The Dominions had been kept, informed of What was going on. There was no reason to think that matters would be facilitated by the limitation proposed in the amendment. It was most desirable that these negotiations and all other negotiations leading towards a freer exchange of goods should be conjducted in the right atmosphere, but they 'would not do that by failing to recognise that there was a vast deal still to be discussed. I ani rmt Moitag to undertake to 'make any further slate'ment on the subject, he said: I sUbmit that it is plainly right in the circumstances to cohtintie stabilisation Of the rates of Imperial JDreferehce for another twelve months. A MISTAKEN IMfcttESSibN. Somewhat later, in the debate Mr. Oliver Stanley ■ said he regretted the impression that there was necessarily an antithesis between the principle of Imperial preference and the possibility, of a trade agreement with America. He did not think that antithesis existed. Agreement with other countries need riot necessarily impinge on—far less destroy—the policy of Imperial preference. If it had been the desire of the United States in any discussions for a possible treaty with Britain to use those discussions to destroy Imperial preference it would have be£n impossible for the British Government to give any answer but a negative one. But that had never been the American attitude.

Mr. Stanley deprecated the idea that all the impetus for an agreement came from America and all the obstacles from London. . it had no justification. The House of Commons and the country, and certainly his Majesty's Government, were anxious in these exploratory conversations to find some' basis for negotiations. If practical difficulties were overcome, if negotiations took place, and if an agreement was arrived at, he hoped it would riot be only Britain and the United States but the Empire and the world as a whole that would find solid advantages in expanding trade.