CO885-(16-18) — Page 717

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

| | | | | | |

། ། །

Reference :-

C.O.885

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

Thirteenth Day.

8 May 1907.

COASTWISE TRADE.

14

Mr. DEAKIN :. I do not think that policy has anything to do with it.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Of the total tonnage entered and cleared with cargoes at United Kingdom ports in trade with our Colonies and Possessions in 1906, only one-third per cent. was Russian, and none American. would hardly hit America.

Mr. DEAKIN : Do you say we have no trade in American ships?

So it

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: None. Of the total tonnage entered and cleared with cargoes in the United Kingdom in trade with our Colonies and Possessions in 1906, none were American.

Mr. DEAKIN: We have American boats plying on our coast.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I suppose they buy something from you. You would not like to turn them out.

Mr. DEAKIN ; You said we had none.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: None at the United Kingdom ports.

Mr. DEAKIN There are some with us.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Limited in this way, the proposal could confer little practical benefit. If the principle be extended further, it is likely to expose our shipping to reprisals. This is what I want to impress upon the Conference more especially. We have nearly half the merchant shipping of the world, and it is to our advantage to keep open every trade to that shipping so far as possible. If we reserve certain valuable trades to our flag, other countries will probably follow suit. But they will probably do more than this, and will look about to find other means of combating or counter- acting our action either by increased subsidies to their own shipping or by some other steps. Moreover, it is to be remembered that the foreign ships which we should exclude from this particular trade will not be destroyed; they will continue to trade, and will probably compete for freight more keenly than ever in the foreign trade which is still open to them. This foreign trade largely exceeds the Colonial trade in magnitude, and it is quite possible, therefore, that we might lose at least as much as we gained by excluding these vessels from our Colonial trade. That is exactly what happens in France. They exclude us from their cousting trade, with the result that we enter more keenly into the international trade and beat French ships in French oversea trade. This argument refers chiefly to inter-Imperial Trade. The reservation or opening of the coasting trade proper of each part of the Empire is (subject to treaty provisions) a matter for local concern, as I have already pointed out. The matter may be illustrated by one or two figures. find that the total entrances and clearances of British shipping throughout the world do not fall far short of 250,000,000 tons per annum. The total tonnage of foreign ships entered and cleared in British inter-Imperial trade is less than five million tons. This represents the maximum extension of our shipping trade that might conceivably be brought about by a scheme of reserving trade to British ships. Owing to the vastness of our Mercantile Marine in every part of the world the tonnage exposed to possible reprisals or to increased

15

Thirteenth Day. 8 May 1907.

COASTWISE TRADE.

(Mr.

competition through subsidies and in other ways would be many times aS great. It is evident that a country so situated must necessarily look upon proposals such as that made by Australia in a very different light from that in which they may appear to the point of view of Australia, whose foreign- going shipping is relatively very small. As I have already stated, we have half the merchant shipping of the world. Looking at the entrances and clearances of ships of various nationalities in British and foreign ports, I take, Lloyd George.) first of all, the United States of America, which is one of the countries which would be hit by this resolution, and I note that over 25,000,000 tons of British shipping entered and cleared in 1905 in the United States ports, while less than one and a half million tons of American vessels entered and cleared in our ports. There were 15,500,000 tons of British shipping in French ports compared with 3,000,000 tons of French shipping in United Kingdom ports. Take Russia. The British ships in Russian ports came to 8 million tons; the Russian ships in British ports came to 1 million tons. There were nearly 12,000,000 tons of British shipping in Italian ports compared with less than 950,000 tons of Italian shipping in the United Kingdom ports. Even in the case of Germany, the British shipping at German ports is in excess of German shipping at British ports-10 million tons as against 8 million tons--but of this 8 million tons of German shipping 4 million tons were simply in ballast, while of the 10 million tons of British shipping 3 million tons were in ballast; so that, as far as cargoes were concerned, we were in the proportion of five to three. These figures have only to be mentioned, for us to see at once how vulnerable our merchant shipping is. This is not said to disparage the value of the suggestions for the encouragement of British shipping, but to illustrate the special difficulties of our position as compared with that of the Colonies. There are methods by which the Colonies, or some of them, could give a very direct impetus to British shipping if they desired to do so if, for instance, they were to relax some of their restrictions upon British ships which desire to enter into the coasting business in Australia, inore especially. As a matter of fact, in the last few years those conditions have been made very onerous; so onerous that they will drive British ships out of the Australian trade altogether.

Mr. DEAKIN: You are not speaking about what has been done in Australia, because we have no law yet.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I beg your pardon; I mean what is proposed to be done, because Sir William Lyne, at the Navigation Conference, said he proposed some extraordinarily stringent regulations. He read them out, and I am sure the effect will be to drive British shipping almost entirely out of the Australian trade.

Mr. DEAKIN: They were to provide for equality in wages and cou- ditions of employment.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Yes, but not merely that; they involved struc- tural alterations of British ships. They would be prohibitive.

Mr. DEAKIN : Better accommodation for the men.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Well, we have done that ourselves, and are in advance of every country in the world in that respect. If you superimpose absolutely fresh conditions in Australia, the result will be that our own conditions will be quite nugatory, and ships which can enter and do trade in every other part of the world, except Russia and the United States of