The World Economic Conference
BEFORE the Conference meets again at Geneva in the autumn what more shall we hear of Great Britain's action upon the Resolutions unanimously adopted in May ? At present we stand where we were left by the brief debate, still more briefly reported in the Press, that took place in the House of Commons last week when Mr. Runciman brought up the subject on the Board of Trade vote and drew a statement from the President of the Board.
The preparation for the Conference in May was long and on a massive scale, but it worked smoothly and produced tangible results, for the Conference had an agenda ready containing real eggs for it to hatch out. Instead of platitudes or reference of everything important to somebody else, it passed with unanimity resolutions which might change the face of Europe and vastly increase the material happiness of the world if the Governments acted upon them. The British Labour Party put forward a good memorandum on economics and peace and, as we have often said since the War, goodwill and confidence are needed above all things for the happiness, moral and material, of Europe. Though we put first those two needs of the spirit we do not despise the more material needs of trade and industry with which the Conference was mainly concerned. To begin with, it dealt fully with the vital industry of agriculture, and it came to the conclusions that our Prime Minister also reached in his speech at Hainton last week ; that technical means exist for a considerable development of agricultural production ; they must therefore be put into operation ; but the improvement of agriculture must in the first place be the work of the agriculturists themselves. The Conference added that all hindrance to the free circulation of agricultural products should be removed so .far as possible.
In regard to trade the most important piece of prepara- tion for the Conference was the Report of . the Trade Barriers Committee of the International Chamber of Commerce, to which we drew attention last April, because we realized its great importance. Sir Philip Cunliffe- Lister very properly gave praise to the Chamber in the House of Commons. What was still more worth having was the appreciation expressed by Sir Arthur Salter at the Stockholm meeting of the Chamber in June. Fresh from the Geneva Conference he could estimate the value of the Chamber's work both in itself and to the League of Nations. The Chamber had put forward recommendations based on conclusions reached by its NaC,onal Committees in many countries and carrying great weight in consequence. People need only glance at tip; Report of the Geneva Conference (we hope they will do more than glance at that remarkable shillings- worth) and they will see that the influence of the Report of the Trade Barriers Committee permeates it. The Conference proposed in particular four lines of action : (1) Independent action by the several States to remove or diminish tariff barriers ; (2) concerted action through commercial treaties ; (8) the abolition of the practice of imposing tayifs de combat in advance of negotiations ; (4) an Inquiry by the Economic Organization of the League into the best methods of securing further action to the same end. Effect has already been given to number 4 by the .special meeting of the Economic Committee of the League this month. These proposals were unanimously adopted, for we leave out the Muscovite delegation which went through the farce of voting against everything merely to point out that they are not as other men are. Already the Governments seem to be hastening to approve the votes of their representatives by which, of course, they were not bound.
Belgium, Czecho-Slovakia, Germany, Austria and Holland have all declared their acceptance of and their adherence to the Resolutions. It is as though the nations of Europe, at any rate, if not of the whole world,. were marching along, hand in hand and singing as they go, towards freer trade.
It is certainly the best concert of Europe that we have heard for a long time and the savage breasts of our Protectionists here could not help being affected by it. In our chronicle of Parliament last week we said that the President of the Board of Trade did lip- service to the findings of the Conference. That was a somewhat frigid description of his exuberant speech in praise of the British Free Trade policy. We should be glad to feel able to repent and believe that it deserved a warmer acceptance. Mr. Runciman had asked what this country would do now to advance the cause, and Sir Philip's answer was in effect, " Look at what we have done already ! " That is plausible. It is true that by our example in the past and by the fact that we are the best customer in our free ports of nearly every other nation, we probably haVe .done more than anyone else to introduce the present tendency to freer trade. Sir Philip gloried in what we have done, and we grudge none of the glory that may justly be claimed for himself and his colleagues. But lie gave no indication that he was not content to let our past leader- ship fall into the hands of anyone else who might be willing to take it up. The debate ended with no answer to a question which Sir John Simon suggested that the President should put to himself. He imagined him saying, " I thoroughly applaud these Resolutions they embody in suitable language my dearest aspira- tions," but " is there any single direction in which my Government has reduced any tariff since it came into office ? " That is a fair hit at Sir Philip, but, after all, barring the " safeguarding " violation of our principles, if not of the Ministry's conscience, Mr. Baldwin's Govern-- ment can claim to have upheld in practice the theory of tariffs for revenue only.
But we feel strongly that we ought to encourage those who are setting forth on the right path for the first time ; we must strengthen their feeble knees as they try to step out. The least we can do is authoritatively to announce our adherence to the Resolutions. That would, for one thing, encourage peoples to. believe in our readiness to meet more of them in making long- term commercial treaties. If there is nothing else for Great Britain to do, as Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister thinks, at least let us encourage others. If we seem to hold back we shall certainly seem to discourage them actively.
Sir Alan Anderson at Stockholm urged the delegates of the International Chamber of Conimerce to work upon their Governments and persuade them to act on the Resolutions. The British. section is doubtless approaching our Board of Trade, but we want the Board. to feel that there is a strong public opinion in the country that urges it to act. Loyalty to the League demands it : sincerity in our profession of belief in international goodwill and confidence insists upon it : pride in our place as the greatest international traders and championS of free exchange bids us not lag now behind the nations wild arc learning from us the les- sons that we taught ourselves.
Previous page
