Wairarapa Times-Age THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1940. AN ACT OF COOPERATION.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 5 September 1940, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1940. AN ACT OF COOPERATION.

T\j a number of ways the agreement into which Britain has entered with the United States regarding the leasing of naval and air bases and the transfer of destroyers is calculated to hold the imagination. At the most direct view, the British Navy receives an addition 1o its material equipment that will be of immense value and service in the great task of blockade and protection in. which it is engaged. The United Slates, at the same time, is enabled enormously to strengthen the defences of its Atlantic seaboard, and not least those of the vital Panama Canal. Even these aspects of the agreement are overshadowed, however, by its significance as a first, but impressive step—a step that President Roosevelt has fairly called epochal——in permanent defence co-operation between two great and independent nations.

It has been stated that the leasing of bases to the United States on British island and other territories in the Western Hemisphere in no way affects the sovereignty of these territories. No doubt that statement is made quite sincerely, but in the conditions of the leasing, these territories evidently are being entrusted to American guardianship, in the faith and belief that their political sovereignty will be respected scrupulously. The agreement is not less noteworthy in the complete mutual faith if implies than as a far-reaching step in defence co-operation. The action taken is of the kind that must be taken by nations prepared to co-operate in establishing and safeguarding peace. It may be believed, too, that if the foundation thus laid is built upon, difficulties need not arise any more than they have .in the evolution of national communities from conditions of individual self-protection to those of an established rule of law.

One typical expression of Congressional ©pinion on the subject of the transfer of bases to the United States and of destroyers to Britain is said to be that: “This move was necessary for the defence of the United States.” On the other hand, American isolationists are reported to see in the agreement another step towards “bringing the United States into the war.” The answer to the isolationists seems to be that the United States could not in more deadly fashion endanger its liberty and its future than by endeavouring to cut adrift from the struggle in which Britain and her Empire partners are meantime almost the sole defenders of democracy. As an American, Professor Douglas Johnson, of Columbia University, observes in an article in “Current History”:—

America’s history will be settled on the battlefields of Europe, whether or not we will it so, and whether or not we participate in the settlement. The American people are just awakening to that unpalatable fact.

Professor Johnson, who urges that for its 0 own sake the United States should support Britain with the whole weight of its material and financial resources, maintains that if Britain shared the fate of France, the United States would at once be menaced by dangers it could not hope to survive. The totalitarian Powers, he points out, would then have little difficulty in establishing themselves in selected areas among the feebly defended Latin republics.

Who can doubt (he asks) that a final supreme blitzkrieg would soon be launched against the last survivor of the “decadent democracies?” Vary the picture as we may, it remains something unspeakably dark and ugly for the American people to contemplate. With the free nations of Europe destroyed, and triumphant militarism let loose upon the world, no reasonable sequence of events can be conjured up which holds out any hope of a decent future for ourselves or for our children.

The historic agreement just concluded is the best proof yet afforded that these truths are commanding practical recognition in the United States. Whether America is or is not destined to be drawn into the war, her fate plainly is at stake in the war. In the supreme emergency by which all free nations are now faced, American isolationism is the ally, or the servitor, of totalitarian aggression. In the agreement now concluded by the English-speaking nations there is a tangible assurance that this unnatural combination will be defeated. There is some promise and forecast, too, of broader and bolder international action to safeguard liberty and justice in the years to come. OUR ECONOMIC PROBLEMS. AT the conference which opened in Wellington yesterday, the economic problems confronting the Dominion were on the. whole outlined well and clearly by the Prime Minister (Air Fraser) and his colleague, Air Nash. What is demanded of the conference is a programme of action by which these problems may be solved and if the programme is to serve its purpose it must be simple and clear-cut. The essential objects to be aimed at are those of making the greatest, immediate contribution that is possible to the war effort and of doing what is possible (consistently with the pursuit of that primary object) to maintain the national standard of living. It is impossible to be satisfied with the current adjustment of our national finances under which upwards of sixty per cent of our available resources from revenue and loans is being devoted to domestic requirements and less than forty per cent to the prosecution of the war. There is serious danger, too. in the state of affairs described by the Prime Minister when he said :— Although the total of goods and services available for civil use has decreased (as compared with last year) by some 14 per cent, the amount of money that is available for spending by individuals, after taking into account increased taxes, is still about the same this year as it was last. A situation like this no doubt means that prices must tend to increase with the increased pressure of purchasing power on goods to be bought. That, I believe, is the situation with which we are faced today. The price increases bring forth a demand for higher incomes, which, if obtained, again force prices up and put stability as far away as ever and so it goes on.

As Mr Fraser suggested, it is in increased production and in saving that means must be sought of arresting and preventing a dangerous and devastating development of inflation.

Rightly handled, the situation is open to remedy, but quick and purposeful action is demanded imperatively. There is a call here on the whole community, but a lead .is needed from the Government in cutting down expenditure that, is non-essen-tial or can he postponed. Saving, too, should be promoted as a present patriotic duty and because it is very much in the interests of all to whom that course is reasonably open to postpone a portion of their expenditure to a period of more ample production and supply.

The greatest and most positive contribution that can be made, both to the war effort and to the protection of living standards, is to build up useful production to a maximum. Although the need of a better regulation and adjustment of Government spending most certainly should not be overlooked, it, is upon the possibility of increasing production, in conditions consistent with the circumstances of a country fighting for its life, that the conference may concentrate most profitably. This is not a time in whirl) to insist either on high profits or on minimum hours of labour.