COMMONS DEBATE

Hokitika Guardian, 16 December 1932, Page 5

COMMONS DEBATE

ON WAR DEBTS • THE SITUATION REVIEWED (British Official Wifeless.) RUGBY, December It. The House of Commons, debate on the (American war debt payment opened w:th an impressive statement by Mr Neville Chamberlain, who said that ‘br.-ly by examining the whole history of w’ag it possible to realise - how. stijong was Britain’s claim to revision, j how consistently and per‘sisfemly successive British Governments had urged cancellation of the reparations and war debts, how relucant’.y other countries had accepted that view, and how steadily they had been forced by hard facts and bitter experiences to come closer and closer to the viewpoint originally expressed by the British Government. “All our war debt to America had been incurred,” he said, “after the United States entered the war, and it was entii’ly expended for the purpose? 'of war on goods purchased in the United States. Whether oh munitions blown t 0 pieces in Flanders, or in the war, the whole expenditure was juSt as non-pro?luctive as if spent on food consumed by the people and sol-

diets, or on uniforms worn to mgs, tanka, artillery or ship-*. Very early after the war, the British Government came to: tVe conclusion that payment of the great inter-Governmental obligations would postpone economic recovery.’* He lengthily outlined the debt and reparations negotiations from 1920 onwards and continued: “Owing to a remarkable change, in European public opinion it wag possible to achieve at i Lausanne a success far more complete ! than . .anticipated. The effect was to I put an end to the existing system of 1 reparat’ons, because the maximum liability in respect to reparations i>s now j only £150,000,000 instead of £2,600,000,000 as under the Young Plan. But the Lausanne settlement was only provisional whereas if the United States *had been willing to send a representa- | tive to Lausanne, we could have made ' a final settlement on the spot. I “In diplomatic circles, we wens given ■ to understand that cash, and cash only, 1 would coritent the members of Congress. | If we had declined to pay, it would j have been equivalent to default, and default by a British Government for a sum which we could not say we were I unable to pay would have resounded . around the world, and might have been taken as justification for other defaults in other circumstances. As a second alternative, we might have asked that the required notice for postponement of the principal be waived but after requests for suspension of the whole, payment based on very wide consideration, has refused, it would not have been dignified to make a plea in forma pauperis, and might have prejudiced the final settlement. “Therefore, we decided on the third •alternative to pay in full. To have paid in full, and said nothing would have taken this payment out of the purview of the final revision of debt, and would have obliged us, at once, to inform our Allies we expected them to make a. corresponding payment to us jn respect ,of their debts. Th e mischief would not have stopped there, because the Allies would necessarily have passed on tbeT? request to Germany, to begin again the payment of reparations. Therefore, it was considered necessary to intimate our intention, when discussing the final settlement, to put forward our contentions that the old regime, interrupted „by the Hoover moratorium, can never be revived. If in the final settlement some reduced capital sum should be fixed, our de'btor s must still discuss a, 3 on what terms and what extent we will be prepared I to remit their debts. Our position will I remain where -is was at the time of the Balfour Note. We , s hall not ask our debtors more than we are called upon to pay our creditors, but they can - hardly expect us to be content with j lees. |

He added that payment would be made in gold at New York on December 15th. As to the Budget, h« proposed to deal with the deficit by adjustments ; partly to lower the rates of interest on Treasury Bills, and partly to the funds provided by sinking funds, which were no longer required by the State owing to tile rise of giltedged securities. All were depiroiv; of making -a final satisfactory settlement with the United -States, in the interests not only of the two countries, but the world. It wa s equally important to save- the Lausanne settlemen. It was only by a policy of isincerity and loyalty that we eould hope to obtain cooperation of the other -nations in securing the . .prosperity ’ of the world. Sir.iß,. is[! 'ftprrie' 1 agreed that Britain ■should act alone. life said ; Our American debt agreement was more exactin" than any other. With the best will in the world towards France we are entitled to .separate consideration. He agreed that if we won. forced to nav now. we should nay in gold, hut ho stated : We -did not intend to increase the fiduciary "'«ue. would like to remind Mr C' 1 " mhoi-hiin Out anything of a <lefb.O'onnrv process ..-"old be ent ; rely contrarv to t’ lf> (>t-t-awa monetary conference’s decision. •Tf n disagreed with 'Mr Chamber] “n’s attne’-s on T ••usnnne, which d rftw Europe back from the edge of disaster and chaos.

Sir R. S Horne Joncthi'v (JefemVd IMr Baldwin's debt settlement, describing the circumstances of the Coalition period, when it seemed much more

onerous terms were inevitable, At this time of the day, propaganda agaitist .Mr Baldwin was entirely unjustified, and unworthy of ordinary .Britich method's. Hu concluded; l“We (i»re «ti!l tlie greatest creditor nation in the world, which ow<M ns something like £4,000,000,000. We have a vast interest in preserving the sanctity of contracts. If Britain defaulted, advantage would be taken thereof by peoples throughout the world. We are at least buying up opportunity ,for negotiations whereby we hoped for a revision of the agreement.”

Sir S. Cripps (Labour) said that he believed’' and always had believed in the -complete cancellation of war debts anu reparations. He hoped the American people realised that there must be cancellation if civilisation, trade, and . industry were to continue. Labour agree with the Government’s action in making th e present payment, as it had no time to make arrangements with the United States. If the Government ha-d more actively pushed disarmament at Geneva and settled th e ridiculou.3 dispute in Ireland, it would improve the chances of the Anglo-American negotiations, in which it might eventually be necessary to reverse some of the Ottawa decisions. M. r Churchill said that while an overwhelming majority of the House approved the decision to' pay, he wished the Government had taken the decision -more promptly, unitedly and strongly. H e attacked th-s Government concerning Lausanne, the results of which he described as nugatory and illusive, because they depended on a settlement with the United States. “We have only to think of de Valera in Ireland, Lang in Australia and the Shah of Persia, in order to realise that we have considered interest in paying our debts. Britain ought never to have associated herself

with France, or encouraged the idea that France could be allowed to pay the United States and not pay us. Fortunately, the vote of the French Chamber liberated the Government against its own errors. We are now perfectly free to start fair.” Ho believed that new m-“n assuming power in the United States were animated by warm sentiment,* towards us, as ArnericaVi best customer. To morrow’s payment would strengthen this friendly movement. A number of the back bencher? .continued tlie debate. LONDON, December 14 In a written answer in the Conn runes fn a question, Mr Ilore Bel is ho. paid Uw -average taxation per h-d-d (all -l-Il'ing.s at par) fo r the year ending March 31st I opt was Britain 328, -France 190, Germany 115, America 99, Italy 92.