THE NAVIGATION CONFERENCE.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8780, 6 April 1907, Page 2

THE NAVIGATION CONFERENCE.

Per Press Association—Copyright. London, April 5,

At the Navigation Conference Sir W. Lyne read a memorandum replying to the shipowners’ statement on practical difficulties resulting from lack of uniformity in merchant shipping legislation. The shipowners remarked that since 1900 British seamen had increased by 6000, although there had been a Royal Commission who based theirrecommendations on the decline of British seamen... SirW. Lyne replied that there are still nearly 40,000 foreigners employed on British merchantmen, besides Asiatics. Ho denied that Australian legislation placed British ships at a disadvantage as compared with foreigners. Referring to the liability of shipowners, he maintained that the Sea Carriage Act could be continued. He emphasised Australia s great desire to give British owners preference against foreigners, and he considered shipowners ought to recognise that fact more. He defined the Australian view as follows That for Australian requirement it is necessary and desirable that foreign ships must he subjected to all requirements of British ships and the latter in carriage of goods shall have ■ preference against foreigners. The proportion of British seamen can and ought to be increased until the foreigners aro reduced or eliminated. Australian coasting trade shall be restricted to vessels complying with Australian conditions, preference being given to British ships engaged in coast trade as far as practicable. Shipping laws requirements should be uniform throughout the Empire. Ho considered that tho lines of New ZealandAnstralian legislation ought to generally constitute a basis of uniform law. Each British colony should give preference to British vessels in all sea trade.

On Sir Joseph Ward’s motion the Navigation Conference agreed to five resolutions providing First, that they hsue Board of Trade survey certificates in the case of non-passenger vessels, also that Board of Trade standards aud certificates respecting hull, machinery boilers and lifesaving appliances should he accepted for British ships by Australia and New Zealand and have tho sane effect as local certificates.

Sir W. Lyne suggested the last provision. The Conference agreed ihat provisions on the scale of 1906 of the Imperial Act be accepted- for use on British ships not

•registered in Australasia, and agreed that provisions of British ships when passed by Imperial officers bo exempt from further inspection in Australasia, except on com-

plaint, or the authorities have reason to believe that inspection is necessary. The Conference also agreed that Australasia’s conditions regarding manning, ventilation, and convenience only apply to vessels registered colonially or engaged in Australasian costal trade. Later. At the Navigation Conference Sir W. Lyno contended that it was necessary to reserve the absolute right of Australasian Governments to make a survey of vessels if they thought necessary. A long discussion took place relative to whether the regulations regarding accommodation should be retrospective. Sir W. Lyne and Mr Hughes were very emphatic on the necessity of bringing British vessels up to Australian requirements, Mr Hughes said the proposed Australian Bill provided that if a shipwright or surveyor’s certificate showed that structural alterations would he too costly or impracticable, accommodation to the extent of only 72 cubic feet might he accepted, provided ventilation and sanitation wore otherwise satisfactory.

Sir Joseph Ward did not agree that the regulation should be retrospective. Sir W. Lyno and Mr Belcher agreed that it was better they should bo retrospective. He suggested that if it was impossible to make alterations reasonably the Minister should decide on the subject with a right of appeal to the law courts. Sir W. Lyno said Australia was not going without a big struggle to surrender her right to deal with this matter.

Mr Mills advised that the Minister might exorcise discretion where structural alterations were impossible. Mr Thomson believed that the Australian Parliament would meet shipowners reasonably. The matter was adjourned. Sir W. Lyno warmly defended the Commonwealth cSiweroo aud AntiTrust Acts.

The Morning Post says that since it is impossible for the Mercantile Marino competing with the foreigner throughout the world to generally adopt Australasian standards, the only solution seems to bo to make special arrangements for the Australasian portion of the voyage and for the coastal trade, Britishers finding ample compensation in the promised preference which thus would ho the basis of Colonial policy, domestic and Imperial. The Daily Express and other Unionist papers accuse the British Government of trying to shelve ’the Australian-British Preference Bill until after the Imperial Conference.

Government newspapers are irritated at Sir W. Dyne’s free criticisms of free trade and at Ins declaration that the verdict of last election was a mere flash in the pan and his assertion that Britain is willing to take help from her enemies while refusing the aid of friends.