EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS.
TIIE REFERENDLT11.—A correspondent sends us the follow- ing which he has received from Sir Philip Lloyd Greame on the subject of the Referendum :- "Thank you for your letter of the 18th November. I think the whole question of the Referendum is one that requires the most careful consideration and ought not to be decided without taking into account at the same time the question of the reform of the House of Lords. But there are, too, many practical difficulties which would have to be taken into account. For instance, would it be possible for a Government which was defeated on a Referendum to continue in office, although it had a majority in the House of Commons ? If the Government could not continue in office in such circumstances, the effect of the Referendum would be to make it necessary to have the equivalent of two elections where, under the present system, one would have been sufficient. As regards your question about submitting any Protectionist Finance Bill to a Referendum, I should like to point out that the sole object of the present election is to obtain the decision of the country on this question, and that a General Election affords the only constitutional way of putting this matter to the test. If the country, at the coming election returns the present Government to power, the- Government propose to take action in accordance with that verdict." PROTECTION IN ALTSTRALIA.—Mr. F. T. Hickford, of Melbourne, Australia, writes :—" The policy of Protection is not by any means a settled question in Australia. That policy is building up a few millionaires at the expense of the pastoral and agricultural community who must face the world's competition. The rural parts of Australia are groaning under the burden. The manufacturers are practically exempt from competition. The pastoral and agricultural sections are subject to competition from all quarters. True students of the world's economic circumstances recognize that the insistency of the demand to secure the home market for British goods indicates very distinctly that Great Britain is afraid of losing her trade overseas. It is very clear that the home market alone would be quite inadequate, and without her foreign trade nearly all her industries must close down. Experience in Australia has shown that if industries cannot be maintained without protective duties, then it follows as a natural corollary that she cannot become an exporter of manufactured articles. The manufacturing industry in Australia has reached saturation point. It is becoming pot bound. There is very little internal competition, amalgama- tions, combinations and price understandings being universal. The manufacturers have the consumers at their mercy. But Australia is a large exporter of products from her immense natural resources, which but for Protection would have been more intensely developed. The Commonwealth has followed the policy too much of restricting imports rather than encouraging exports. If Great Britain does the same, then her industrial supremacy will never recover. To live she must export. Restriction would intensify unemployment. Here in Australia it is admitted that every increase of tariff means increased cost of living."
Previous page
