Imperial Conference

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 312, 27 May 1911, Page 5

Imperial Conference

THE IMPERIAL COUNCIL SCHEME. SIR JOSEPH WARD'S MOTION WITHDRAWN. By Cable—Press Association—Copyright London, May 25.'

The Imperial Conference sat all day, Mr. Asquith presiding. Mr. Harcourt was also present. Sir Joseph Ward outlined his proposals at length. Imperial organisation, he said, was the more urgent now that two of the greatest dominions had already embarked on naval policies. New Zealand looked forward to substantially increasing her naval contributions, and was surely entitled to some voice in the question of peace or war. He suggested that the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and Newfoundland should elect an Imperial House of Representatives for defence, ■with one representative for every 200,000 population, the members to be elected for five years; also an Upper Council of twelve members, giving equal representation to each part. Mr. Murray, Premier of Victoria, interviewed, said he thought Sir Joseph Ward's proposed Imperial Council ought to be simply a consultative body.

Replying to a. suggestion that such an Imperial. Council would be useful in coordinating the efforts of different parts of the Empire in matters of defence, he said he believed the Imperial Committee of Defence was quite able to co-ordinate them. He did not think Britain's naval advisers required to be told what to da with the British Navy by Australia.

"AX IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT OF DEFENCE." ITS FUNCTIONS EXPLAINED. SIR JOSEPH WARD'S IDEAS. Received 26, 10.5 p.m. London, May 26. • At the Conference, Sir Joseph Ward stated the fact that two of the greatest i dominions having already embarked on naval policies emphasised the need for an Imperial Council to co-ordinate and harmonise in connection with naval defence. Independent polities would not, make for the strongest position in maintaining Imperial ties. He preferred to call the suggested body an "Imperial Parliament of Defence," as defence was a vitally paramount question, being even more important to Britain than to the overseas dominions. Considering her naval burden, the day for partnership had arrived. The question was, on what basis should the partnership rest? It could not rest on the present relationship, i.e., not giving the partners a voice in the management for the protection of British ships, goods and people on the sea. Canada's and Australia's local provision, however good, was inadequate. IMPERIAL ORGANISATION was necessary. The present lines of national divergence in regard to naval defence would increase as the dominions grew to full stature, unless British statesmen promoted a partnership with representation. The Council would only deal with Imperial essentials. The framework would be elastic as efficiency and durability demanded. There would be no interference with one portion of the Empire with another in regard to local land forces. The proper naval unity would secure peace for the world for generations.

QUESTIONS ANSWERED. Mr. Fisher asked whether the Council would have power of coercion by a legislative Act. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said he understood the proposed Council would have power to vote contributions which would have to be fixed by the different dominions. He strongly objected to that. Sir Joseph Ward replied that he wanted uniformity preserved in the whole overseas interests. Mr. Asquith said apparently the proposed Council would have power to impose contributions and policy upon dissentient communities.

Sir Joseph Ward, continuing, said that under the scheme, Britain would have 280 members in the House of Representatives, Canada 37, Australia 25, South Africa seven, New Zealand six, and Newfoundland two, while the Imperial Council would consist of two members each.

Mr. Asquith asked if in the proposed Council of twelve Britain would have two representatives and the dominions ten. Sir Joseph Ward said the proposed Council would be mainly A CONSULTIVE AND ADVISORY EXECUTIVE, and consist of not more than fifteen, of whom not more than twelve would form the senate. The Defence Parliament would deal exclusively with matters common to the Empire, including peace or war treaties, foreign relations generally, Imperial defence, and provision for raising revenue for these purposes. For the first ten years Parliament would have no power of taxation. but the amount unpaid by the dominions would be taken as a debit by them afterwards when the amount to be provided was agreed upon. '

TWENTY-FIVE DREADNOUGHTS. TO PROTECT THE TRADE ROUTES. HOW TO RAISE THE MONEY. Received 26, 10.55 p.m. London, May 36. ffhe proposal, continued Sir Joseph, presupposed the autonomy of national divisions of the United Kingdom, placing the same on the same footing as the dominions. If £50,000,000 were borrowed on a basis of six per cent., including three per cent, sinking fund, twentyfive Dreadnoughts could be built to pro-

tect the dominions' anil the British trade routes. On this basis*, the 13,000,0u0 whites overseas would be taxed ten shillings pel head. Three millions would !») i'.ii'i'i -t and sinking fund on the construction of the vessels and the remainder would provide docks and naval yards for Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.

THE POSITION OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.

Mr. Asquith asked the position of the British Government—were they to conduct negotiations with foreign Powers? Then, if they came to a point of rupture, should the matter be held over for the decision of the new body? Sir Joseph Ward said the executive would be responsible for the Defence Parliament, in which Britain would have greater representation. The dominions would be expected to share the burden of any war and were entitled to a voice in connection with it. "INDEFENSIBLE AND IMPRACTICABLE."

Sir Wilfrid Laurier said the resolution favored a Council advisory to the Imperial authority. Sir Joseph Ward's arguments favored something different, namely, a legislative body with power to create expenditure, but with no responsibility for providing revenue. Such a scheme was indefensible and impracticable. GENERAL OPPOSITION. Mr. Fisher said the plan was impracticable and would violate every principle of responsible government and the very basis of the British Government. The systems of defence adopted by New Zealand and Canada could be better discussed on another occasion. Australia relied on the British Government generally to safeguard the whole naval interests of the Empire, and the Commonwealth naval and military forces. He would not say there was no possibility of an advisory council being set up to deal, with matters arising from time to time and communicating their substance to representatives on the spot. That was an ample question involving the whole reconstruction of the Empire and could not be considered and decided off-hand. General Botha declared that the scheme would become meddlesome and would interfere with the domestic concerns of the various parts and would occasion friction.

Sir Edward Morris (Premier of Newfoundland) sympathised with the underlying motive of the proposal, but pointed out that N the representation was practically valueless. AGAINST EMTOREfS FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. BRITISH PREMIER'S SUMMING UP. THE PROPOSAL KILLED. Received 26, 11.25 p.m. London, May 26.

Mr. Asquith said that Sir Joseph Ward had brought forward a concrete proposal, but no other representative was able to accept it. Ilis scheme would impair, if not altogether destroy, the authority of the Imperial Government in the conduct of its foreign policy, the conclusion of treaties, maintenance of peace, or the declaration of war. The responsibility for these; acts must rest with the Imperial Parliament. These matters could not be shared. The proposal might impose upon the dominions a policy from which one or more might dissent and involve an expenditure and taxation that the people of the dominions might not approve. Speaking on behalf of the British Government, he could not assent to a proposal so opposed to the fundamental principles jon which the Empire was built and carried

Sir Joseph Ward, In the face of the unanimous opposition, accepted the position with equanimity and withdrew his motion.

MESSAGE FROM THE KINO. London, May 25. The King, in a message thanking the Imperial Conference for its asurances of loyalty, stated that lie was keenly interested in the deliberations and trusted the Prime Ministers would convey to their peoples his Majesty's deep regard for their welfare and prosperity.