The Grey River Argus SATURDAY, AUGUST 7, 1948. FRANCE’S GRAVE DIFFICULTY

Grey River Argus, 7 August 1948, Page 4

The Grey River Argus SATURDAY, AUGUST 7, 1948. FRANCE’S GRAVE DIFFICULTY

WITH her foreign policy, like that of Britain and other European countries, in a very critical phase, France has an internal situation perhaps more critical still. It is at least as doubtful to-day as it has at any time, been since the war, to go back no further, whether the Parliamentary machine is getting anywhere. Only the other day one more Ministry bit the dust, and a fresh crisis is now at hand, which M. Marie’s Cabinet may not surmount. That the parliamentary method is for France much more cumbersome than it is for Britain, the latest proposal of the new Finance Minister, M. Reynaud, fully illustrates. He is asking for plenary powers to effect an economic restoration without any Parliamentary interference for a period of twelve or eighteen months. It would appear to be the obvious course. The National Assembly is so divided, with its several parties whose aims are almost impossible to reconcile, that any programme is apt to be upset at any moment by a change of Government. Reynaud’s proposal would seem designed to obviate this risk, although it does not define any method of preventing a sudden change in administration. Did the Assembly sanction the making of an administration supreme for a period, it might be committed to sustain such an administration. Yet there is ho guarantee, and both the M.R.P. and Socialists are said to fear the passing of such plenary power from Reynaud to some successor in case of this Government going out. Workers in France are largely underpaid, and the national finances are chronically unstable. The expedient has been to keep down costs, to keep up taxes, and try to exact from the rural community as much as possible. T'he French rural community, however, is enormously larger in relation to the urban and industrial community, than it is, say, in Britain, and is by no means easily plucked in the interest of capitalism, whilst the organised workers are strongly organised, and are pressing for relief from their difficult lot. The politicians have no great status in the national estimation, and their quarrels arc abnoxious to a great proportion of the people. A rich country, largely self-supporting, France is far less .dependent than Britain on external trading, but in that sphere she is very hard up, and unable to meet her financial commitments, including those for many essential capital imports. It is in the light of the successive failures of Ministers to inaugurate and sustain a recovery policy that,the parliamentary system is doubtedi Reynaud’s plan is an obvious effort to effect a compromise. He has a long-time objective, as compared with the day-to-day opportunism of the recent administrations, and it is certain that only a sustained scheme of economic co-operation could restore national prosperity. Reynaud, who is persona grata in Britain, ah.d an admirer of her methods, will focus attention in

the British press should he be given the opportunity he seeks. On the other hand, another upset may again direct the attention of the French nation to another alternative to the suggested compromise. That alternative is the policy of General De Gaulle, whose plan is a national rally, which presumably would be designed to prevent economic recovery being hampered, by the expediency of party politics. Meantime, Reynaud himself looks obviously for powers out of the ordinary, and the fact that these should be envisaged suggests at least that something of the sort may ultimately become a reality.