FILLING THE EMPIRE.

Taranaki Daily News, 28 April 1922, Page 5

FILLING THE EMPIRE.

BRITAIN’S BIG SCHEME. SETTLERS FOR DOMINIONS. UNEMPLOYMENT r L~JSF. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received April 27, 5.5 p.m. London, April 26. In the House of Commons, Colonel L. C. Amery, moving the second reading of the Empire Settlement Bill, pointed out that a large proportion of the ex-service men who emigrated under the earlier overseas settlement scheme would probably have emigrated of their own accord if the war had not broken out. A considerable percentage of the ex-service men thus sent out were progressing well towards substantial prosperity, whereas if they had remained the majority would certainly have needed employment benefits. The cost of their passages, therefore, was well spent. The present Bill enabled the Colonial Secretary and the Overseas Settlement Committee to co-operate with both the overseas Governments responsible and private organisations in an approved emigration scheme. It should be remembered that Britain had a surplus of 1,750,000 women, while a shortage of women in the Dominions was prejudicing their social life. The first year’s Imperial expenditure was limited to £1,125,000, while £2,000,000 would make possible the assisting of sixty to eighty thousand persons yearly before long. He belieyed the House would regard the amount as quite inadequate, but in view of the present financial difficulties, and with the object of gaining experience, he had prepared a substantial instalment of the larger future policy. Imperial expenditure was contingent upon the Dominions undertaking considerably larger expenditure on land settlement. The direct settlement of men on the land must be the foundation of any policy of the economic regeneration of the Empire. After the first year the Imperial expenditure would be £3,000,000 annually, of which about £1,000,000 would be devoted to the provision of passages on a half-and-half basis with the Dominions. Colonel Amery commended the Bill as the first step towards the Empire’s economic recovery, and as an economical and unprovocative

measure of Imperial defence. Mr. J. R. Clynes (Leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party) pointed out that while some might support the Bill under an impression that emigration would relieve the burden of unemployment, as a matter of fact the Bill did not touch the root cause of unemployment. He feared that Colonel Amery would be disappointed at the ultimate consequence of the Bill’s working. He could not accept Colonel Amery’s conclusions that ti was advantageous to neglect trade opportunities in Europe in order to cultivate closer economic trade relations with the Dominions. He hoped no attempt would be made to subsidise private agencies like shipping companies, which were merely pecuniarily interested in emigration. He asked whether Dominion Labor organisations had been consulted.

Sir Donald McLean (Deputy-Leader of the Liberal Party) said he hoped free passages to ex-servicemen would remain open another year, and that the fraudulent emigration agents drawing fanciful pictures of conditions really not existing in the Dominions would be swept away. The removal of land restrictions in Britain would mitigate the need for the present measure. Sir Newton Moore (formerly AgentGeneral for Western Australia) expressed disappointment at the smallness of the first year’s expenditure. Sir Frederick Young said the Bill offered only a slight immediate contribution towards the solution of unemployment. Eventually, if a long view prevailed, it wo M prove a great factor in that connection. He stated that Australia afforded great opportunities for settlement if expenditure was confined to schemes definitely offering emigrants a proper livelihood. Mr. J. Hood favored an extension of boy emigration. Colonel Wedgwood said Laborites could not be enthusiastic regarding the emigrating of people to Australia when they could more cheaply be enabled to take up small holdings in Britain. Major the Hon. E. F. Wood, replying to the debate, admitted that the Bill was not a panacea for all industrial ills, but it would ease the situation by giving people opportunities of re-making their lives elsewhere, and it would benefit home trade and commerce. The Bill was read a second time.—Aus.N.Z. Cable Assn.