Cc

The twenty ninth annual coaching conference several months ago in this conference is being planned jointly by the Canadian Institute on public affairs and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Many people felt that the Latin Americas was not a topic which would arouse much interest among Canadians here at Geneva Park Lake Ontario. Two hundred of us have been discussing since last Saturday the various problems facing the Latin American countries and we have found that the delegates far from being apathetic have threatened to overwhelm us with the force of their enthusiasm even passion. Communism. Poverty. American aid religious influence. Slavery and of course Fidel Castro. All these issues have been fiercely debated with a fervor rarely found in Canada even at other conferences. Tonight we're getting down to fundamentals the hard facts and figures of economic development and expansion. The three speakers Victor was I forget us have already made their mark on the conference. Here to introduce their further

investigation of the ailments and aspirations of the Latin American countries is tonight Chairman Mitchell Sharpe vice president Brazilian traction Light and Power Company. Mr. Sharp. Ladies and gentlemen tonight as you know from the program and for the introduction to this evening's proceedings we're going to discuss economic development and expansion in the Latin Americas. This may sound rather dull economics usually do much less exciting than politics and revolution. The menace of communism and even religion. But before you make up your minds to be bored let me suggest to you that this is indeed one of the key issues in the struggle for men's minds in the Latin American Republics a struggle for men's minds may indeed be settled by the ability to

fill man's stomachs. It also has a particular interest for Canadians because Canada too is a growing country and our problems of development and expansion although differing greatly in degree from those of the Latin American Republics are remarkably similar in many ways to those facing our Latin American friends. How to attract foreign capital without incurring the disadvantages of foreign ownership or foreign debt. Sounds remarkably familiar doesn't it. Or how to expand without inflation. That has a familiar ring to it. These are some of the questions that are being asked in Buenos Aires in Rio de Janeiro in Lima in Mexico City as well as in Ottawa. If I were to learn about the Latin American approach to these

problems we have with us this evening. As you know three authorities in Latin American affairs and I would knowledge like to introduce to you the first of our speakers Mr. Victor who is well known to you. He has participated actively in these sessions as you know Dr. Erkki is a renowned economist from Mexico who has made a special study of the problems of economic development in Latin America. Dr. Keating thank you. I. Thank you Mr German ladies and gentlemen. Looking up down and out from the other side of our common neighbor much of the admiration that we have acquired for Canada is centered on the image of a rapidly growing economy.

Canadians are young people have in a relatively short historical span achieved a very high standard of living among the highest in the world. It is in fact about six times the Latin American average. And you can safely say that Canadians have never known the low levels of economic poverty that Latin America has had to live with for more than four centuries. In a study of Canadian economic development since 1867 by Dr. Firestone I have seen the following statement. I quote it in the 1860s. The people living in six British colonies scattered across North America faced two challenges loss of markets in the United Kingdom and the threat of expansion northward of the United States. End of quote your own answer to those challenges. He goes on to say I was

to form a new nation a confident aeration which I again called facilitated the intensive development of the Interior and the growth of industry catering to the wider domestic market. Now with the usual warnings about historical analogy but with more than a mere desire to play with words if you appropriate changes would make Dr Firestone's summary description applicable to Latin America today in the 1960s. The people of 20 Latin American Republics face sluggish markets abroad and from our geographical location as compared with yours. Expansion northward means of course southward. Regarding the type of answer to the challenge we have yet to speculate on the future of our 2011 American republics. But some helpful signs are beginning to appear both as to internal girls and as to cooperation among ourselves.

Now let us look at the present situation. First how poor are we. The Latin Americans we are you know almost 200 million inhabitants or close to 7 percent of world population. On the average we enjoy. This is hardly of course the appropriate term a standard of living which is about one ninth of the United States level are two hundred and twenty five dollars per capita is about one fourth the average European income less than one half. An estimate that has been made of income in the Soviet Union. However it is about twice as high as the Asian figure or slightly more. These are gross estimates but I think they suffice to give also broad orders of magnitude. Level of us within Latin America as in Europe

there are considerable differences as between countries in several For example in Venice where lack Yorba Argentina and Chile were why even Costa Rica and Panama real income per head is higher than in Europe's backward areas such as Spain Portugal Greece or southern Italy in at least two countries Venezuela and Cuba. The net product per head is similar to that in Germany and the Netherlands. On the other hand the two most populated countries in Latin America Mexico and Brazil which account for one half of the total population have an average income roughly equal to the lowest in Europe and at the bottom of the scale. We have three countries Bolivia Haiti and bara y where income is barely above the levels of South-East Asia. Now not only does income per capita range in

Latin America from 1 to 8 in that magnitude but some of the larger nations conceal very large very extensive differences within their territories. Extremes. For example the standard of living in the industrialized and highly productive east central Brazil is not far below the European average whereas in the Northeast of Brazil which is the largest underdeveloped region in Latin America there are close to 20 million people with an income brigade of only one hundred dollars. In other words the level and similar extremes can be found in the other countries. Another important qualification is that in most Latin American countries the vast majority of the population lives on a level which is way below. The national average. There is medical average millions live at the subsistence level

maybe more than half the population of Latin America. I'm sure conditions like this were never known in Canada's early development. It is therefore very difficult to generalize about Latin American development as in other fields of Latin America. Anything you say can be challenged by the National of one country who says Oh yes but my country is not poor or another one would say. But we are not illiterate or somebody else will say we don't have inflation. So long as we keep in mind this diversity that also occurs in economic development and economic matters we can continue to speak of Latin America. Now it would be too much of a task to dry to explain why the standard of living is so low. Briefly we know that not all countries have been gifted with the same resources in the same climate. We know also that past trends in world demand for primary products have left

a different imprint on the various Latin American economies. We know of the social and political conditions of change have not been the same everywhere or not being always favorable. We know that some countries are very small in size which is a limiting factor but instead of going into a detail of all this I would rather try to give you a picture of recent growth at least of the more important aspects of it to begin with. Population it grows at the rate of two and a half percent per year which is higher than any other region in the world. In some countries it approaches a frightening 4 percent per year. Death rates are of course falling almost everywhere especially infant and child mortality and birth rates are not falling nor is fertility except in two or three countries. So we don't have a very young population

except in three countries from 40 to 45 percent of our population is under the age of 15. To compare with Canada since 1880 you have not had such a high proportion of young people. Put differently and taken into account the shorter life expectancy in Latin America. The labor force is today in much smaller proportion of total body elation than in Ghana the United States or Western Europe. This means that we have this young population means that we have a future labor force which is going to be very large. That's another contagious factor. But it also means that meanwhile we have a very heavy burden of nonproductive people who have to be fed clothed housed and educated except for two countries incidentally rural population is more than one half of the total. In some

countries even as much as 90 percent is rural Haiti for example. Again with notable exceptions you find out about that more than half of the labor force is engaged in agriculture. Again comparing the Canada in Canada only about two out of every five people live in rural communities and agricultural population has declined to less than 20 percent of the labor force. In the past Latin America was unable to grow mainly because world markets were growing very fast and because there were some foreign investments connected with this type of growth. There was little development of the interior. As a Canadian author I quoted put it in the 30s as elsewhere in the world markets came to an end and it wasn't until the war the Second World War that we were

again in a position to keep ahead of population growth both with because of the foreign demand for our products and because of industrial development within ourselves in the postwar decade. The average standard of living in Latin America was raised roughly by two and a half percent a year. But again since 1955 we have only been able to keep the head of population by 1 percent a year. Of course in different countries you have different figures some countries are growing very fast and others are growing much less. The Economic Commission for Latin America recently stated in a report that the center of gravity of Latin American development is moving northward meaning that Argentina and Chile especially have not been able to keep up with other countries. But the point I want to keep in mind is that the overall rate of growth has been declining and it is true today in most countries.

Part of the explanation can be found in the fact that exports have ceased to grow as fast as before. In fact they are below the rate of growth of population. Also the terms of trade have moved against us they have declined steadily over the last 70 years and although they improved in the post-war decade they have again declined by about 10 percent since 1950. This has a very high impact of course in some countries that depend on very few export commodities. So that the glut in word markets increased competition from other parts of the world higher yields in the advanced industrial countries and the substitution even of our products by synthetic products have combined to weaken seriously. Latin America US foreign trade and this is a very grave problem since agriculture and mining which provide our

exports including still account for a larger part of total output than manufacturing agricultural share alone is still bigger than industry share in our product. Now Latin America has also been slowing down due to the lag in our agricultural development. I mean our agriculture that produces for the domestic market it has increased a little bit over the last 10 years. But if you leave out of account the blooms in coffee and cotton and to some extent in other commodities the remaining output has not yet made great strides beyond population growth. We are sizeable importers of food with exceptions naturally. But the overall picture is of pressure on the supply foodstuffs. As more and more people move off the land due to a technical advance to the attraction of more productive occupations of city life

and to some mistaken policies in agriculture the growth of manufacturing has played a vital role role in raising our standard of living. Industrial output in Latin America has increased roughly twice as fast as population in the last decade and employs already about 15 percent of the labor force in some countries. Industrial growth is very rapid indeed. But strangely enough this sudden growth of industrial development has also created very difficult problems for us. It has even slowed down growth in some countries. I don't want to be misinterpreted on this point. I want to be more explicit the perhaps more paradoxical. What I mean is. The trouble is that industrial growth has not been too fast it has not been fast enough. We have not been able to build up the

complete structure of industry the complete picture of industry that we need to supply many of our essential raw materials and semi processed components. We have found that development breeds imports despite the high rates of industrial growth and many of our restrictive commercial policies imports have increased almost as quickly as manufacturing output. And certainly twice as fast as exports. This means that we have to make a very great effort from here on to reduce the import component of what we consume and of our investment. It means he means that we have to manufacture locally. Many things including more steel more chemicals all kinds of raw materials fuels certain E without which further industrial development is going to be extremely difficult because we will not have

sufficient foreign exchange to import all the things we must go further. We must manufacture machinery in fact we are doing it in many of our countries. Machine tools automobiles trucks all this will help to reduce the strain on our balance of payments. What we need is an industrialization in depth not a superficial kind of industrialization. I don't mean that agriculture should be set aside and not improve of course it has to be improved. But there is no question of all the choices sometimes. Some people say either or. We need both industrial and agricultural development just like here in Canada. To do this we have to invest more. We have to raise public investment. We have to increase private investment going to be done without inflation. That is the big question. We're going to be done without a massive inflow of assistance from abroad.

Inflation is a commonplace today in Latin America. But the real causes of inflation have not always been studied properly. It is more than a coincidence that inflation occurs while development is taking place. This does not mean that we want inflation. What we want is development. But I do think that economic development has an inflationary bias in our countries insofar as certain. Resistances appear to change. We create new kinds of demands we create a different composition structure of demand and our supply our own supply does not change to meet those demands. One of our big bottlenecks is of course Ford which I mentioned a while ago and you can always raise the production of Agriculture agricultural production without much more investment which helps to promote

inflation so that the problem is much more complex than would appear on the surface and is not something that can be solved by purely monetary measures. Of course there are bad policies we must admit that in some countries and in many cases our banking systems and other institutions are not sufficiently adapted for this purpose. Now what about foreign investments or assistance from abroad. The picture is not a very promising one so far. We have been told many times that we must put our house in order that we must have monetary stability. Sometimes this means stopping development so that a false dilemma has been created to develop without inflation or to achieve monetary stability without

development to develop or not to develop. You might only use I think the political choice is unmistakably in favor of growth. There is no hesitation in the people about that. But we have to make a much more concerted attack on the real causes of inflation. We must break the bottlenecks as the phrase goes. And for that we need some assistance from the outside. You can be sure of one thing and this is why we worry so much. Population does not stop growing at any moment. Now the flow of investments into Latin America has been not very large. Here are some figures on private investments. A little over four and a half billion dollars was invested in Latin America between 1950 and 1958. But 30 percent went into Venezuela

half of the remainder went into mining petroleum bananas and sugar in only a few other countries and very little went into manufacturing which is what we need most in fact in two years Venezuela in petroleum alone absorbed one billion dollars. The earnings of all this foreign investment are very large. It is not always fair to compare the investment with the earnings but the earnings are greater than the amount of the annual investment that's a fact. Venezuela alone Services Foreign Investments to the extent of Eight hundred million dollars a year. Many obstacles stand in the way of further private investment. But I think that the stumbling block is really apart from minor things is really that we don't develop enough. If we were growing more quickly foreign

investments would have more interest in coming to Latin America. And I think that the other arguments connected with foreign investments are certainly quite secondary. We're not growing quickly there is no mass market yet in Latin America. But don't forget the two countries Brazil and Mexico two expanding nations have attracted a lot of foreign investment into manufacturing through subsidiaries and mixed enterprises and so on. Whatever else private foreign investment has done in Latin America it has played so far a limited role in the kind of development that we need. We place our faith largely on loans on loans from international organizations and any other source that can make us that type of loans for the big projects for which there is no private capital. We have not got much. The World Bank made a billion

dollars of loans to Latin America since 1947. Most of it went into six countries and over 12 years it is not a lot of money. The Ex-Im bank loan excluding some rather important stylization operations or rather it is excluding them has average only about 100 million dollars a year also to Latin America. So that is why we have always strongly felt in Latin America that we needed some new source of loans of finance for our development. This explains why we insisted so much on the Gration of the interim Merican bank which after almost two unbelievable decades of discussion has finally materialized. This does not mean that we have a bias against private investment against our own private investment but private enterprise cannot do much without power without roads without all the basic facilities

that only governments can carry out properly. What everybody expects of government in Latin America is to be an agent and a leader of economic development. A helping hand should replace the old fashioned invisible hand in development. One of the future Ghana Latin America perform an operation bootstrapped as in dramatized in Puerto Rico. Or does our salvation lie in the recently coined operation on America. I must say that I don't care too much for this operation. It sounds sort of military. I also think that but America is might imply some kind of isolation as if we were to cut ourselves off from contact with Europe. The

British Commonwealth Canada of course and a centrally planned economies from which we have a lot to learn. I think the real meaning of these so-called aberrations is that through financial support from abroad. And this is true of Puerto Rico domestic efforts to develop can be facilitated and can become much more productive. For this we have to prove naturally our own policies our own programs especially for industrial development. We have to try to cooperate with each other. We cannot duplicate every industry in every country. We are too poor in resources. We models must not make mistakes. It is realized that the planning of development on a national scale is more and more necessary in Latin America and we're taking a further step. We're beginning to form what is called a common market. At first through a free trade association of seven

important countries in Latin America if external trade should again resume its past trends. And that is quite likely for some countries so much the better. If price fluctuations could be moderated substantially we would all stand to gain if the flow of foreign funds should become much larger than up to now. Many countries would find it much easier to develop without inflation. In any event Latin America where the 300 million inhabitants in 1975 is not likely to diminish its overall Burgess's from the rest of the word. We may buy different things but not less. A lot in America with a prosperous and productive agriculture and a more highly developed manufacturing industry is bound to be a better trading partner to the countries that already like

yourselves enjoy high standards of living. I don't think we can be optimistic and there's no reason why we should be this a mistake. What we do know is that we have to work very hard to achieve our purposes. Thank you very much. Thank you Dr. Eric E.D. for a comprehensive and may I say a brilliant exposé all of the problems and possibilities of development in Latin America. Dr. Katie's paper raises many questions in my mind and I'm sure it does in the minds of the audience. And in due course we'll have an opportunity of cross-examining you to open the discussion and to make comments on the problem. We're fortunate in having on the program this evening

another old friend who has participated actively in these discussions. Mr. Paul Mr. Bush has a very distinguished academic record. But on this occasion them for this purpose. I would just like to emphasize that he is the professor of economic geography of Latin America Africa in the faculty of Commerce that lvalue an aversive day. And it is also the president of the Spanish Center University. And it's particularly appropriate I think that to open the discussion we should have an economic geographer who can bring us down to more of the fundamentals of this serious and interesting problem. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentleman I find myself in complete agreement with Mr Key D's conclusions

on the necessary industrialized nation of Latin America. This part of our continent is becoming a weak spot in the defense of the Western world and it is highly regrettable because the Latin Americans with their natural resources and their cultural heritage form a very important group among the Western nations. The only way out for the Latin Americans is certainly to produce themselves a great pot of the goods they want to satisfy and die a primary their primary needs. But unfortunately. They find in their path several obstacles that time why I can't point out all of them with and eight

minutes. But I won't point out. First I will point out first geographical obstacles those who have never traveled through Latin America don't imagine the incredible size of some of those countries. Let's think for instance Brazil. Who is area is the third in the world. It's deferred largest country in the world after the Soviet Union and Canada. Let's take the example of Chile. Do you realize that from Arica on the Peruvian border. To Cape to Cape Horn there is a distance of 2400 miles roughly the distance between Montreal and Vancouver. Apart from the problems created in transportation by the distance.

We have to realize the extreme ruggedness of certain parts of their of their territories. Some countries are still covered by inextricable jungles and slums. Others are deserts not one part of Chile August's the Pacific coast of Peru. Some countries find their area occupied by a very high ranges of mountains. Think for instance of the NDIS and Peru and Bolivia where cities have been built at such altitudes. I like to see a thirteen thousand five hundred feet of the capsule of Bolivia at twelve thousand four hundred

feet. You imagine the incredible obstacles the Latin American Republics found to develop down means of transportation and duct explains also the isolation of those nations. And in a way the difficult days to maintain a constant flow of free trade from one country to the other. Before 20 years ago before the completion of large stretches of the Pan-American Highway most of those countries were not trading between themselves. They were trading directly with the United States or with the countries of Western Europe. Now this situation is changing. I should make probably an exception for that of our paid countries which have always been trading between themselves and the Argentine Republic. And I would

say I well it's not a repeat country but Chile. Now the greatest problem solver in Latin America has to settle today. In the meantime as it is getting industrialized is the transportation problem and I think that's a considerable amount of the national budgets ought to be spent in the building of railways and highways. No debt is not a problem in the policy. Just realize ation it is the size of the very small size of certain internal markets Brazil with sixty five million inhabitants. Argentina with 20 million inhabitants. Mexico with 32 million inhabitants can become industrialized because they have their own. They have an internal market but some small countries. I won't mention bra

sizes particularly cannot expect industrialization because they did there is no internal market. Not this is one of the very serious problems of Latin America. There was a difference between deliberate errors of knowledge and also on part of the continent and assaults on parts of America. Done also on the bright side as Washington and Jefferson laid the foundations of an imperial Republic Day integrated a continent this sucker never a tourist. Just drawing a magnificent imperial unity they disintegrate to the continent. Of course this was not their expectation. They probably expected to build for big states along the frontier as the viceroy of days bought an arcade installed in South America and certain countries

will have to form certain the federations in central the central American republics have no fall down or a regional organization dey want to build a common market and I think that in the you know way deal with the organization of the Central American States which is seriously studying the economic integration which I name two Federation in that part of the continent. Israel is showing Dar right away to all the republics of Latin America and I think it's a great hole right now and many country Latin American countries that the dreams of sun believe ah bill not seek entrees but Grant ya might be a realized within the near future. Thank you Mr. Bush are now my pleasure. Ladies and gentlemen to

introduce to you again a man who has made such an outstanding contribution. Probably the most distinguished visitor that we have with us Dr. hosts a Garry's who was until 958 president of Costa Rica. If I may presume for Garry's to give us some guidance I hope that in the course of your remarks that you will. Also have something to talk to Dr. Keiji said in particular about these problems of foreign investment and inflation which seem to me to be so central to the whole question of the development or the success that the Latin Americans attain in developing their continent. None of us expect you to remember all of that I say OK they mentioned. But we do hope that these figures

and the reasonings of the specialist will make you realize that Latin America is making a consistent effort to study its problems and to find scientific and rational solutions. We're not all revolutionaries. We have a very fine school of Latin American economic thought. Mr. Rickett is an exponent of it. I have given some thought to international commerce. A cause of our relative poverty. In Latin America and I find my own I mean many of us many of us find that although we do have to make a consistent effort internally in our

countries to increase productivity and to increase savings and capitalization the international relations of today with all the communication we have with the growth of population with the growth of Commerce of international advertising connects with the rest of the world especially with indoctrinations in such a manner that unless these relations are examined and and any defect in them are corrected all that we do inside our countries would be sterile. I think that most of your people present will understand what I mean. If I can if I compare this to the United States and Canada before the labor movement before the New Deal and the United States and Canada today there was a time as there was in Europe particularly in the 1850s and until very recently in which the the minorities did not receive a

large compensation for their work and therefore did not constitute a market for growing industry so that we had here a phenomenon of Spring of stagnation which partially came from the erroneous notion that the lower the wages the cheaper the product would be and that therefore the richer the country would become. The fact is that the increasing income of the majority of Canadians and of the majority of Americans to mention only these two foreign countries. Has not made the nation poorer but richer. This is because of certain characteristics of the industrial era. Now we have to do the same thing internationally we have on the one hand the few countries that are comparatively rich and many countries that are relatively poor. The idea still exists that by horse trading and by saving every possible nickel that international trade goes to the poor countries that the rich

countries are making themselves richer. And this is erroneous. They have preventing our growth and they are preventing the expansions of our market markets which will eventually make the indoctrinations richer. A perfect parallel could be traced between the social struggle inside each democracy which has had such a beneficial economic result and has made business even bigger and the international business of today and the same reasons apply. There are many avenues by which the rich countries are receiving an undue share of international trade and by which the poor countries are being consciously and deliberately exploited is the word exploited. But I make it very clear that this no intention on anybody today to exploit us. It's just a question of for lack of knowledge of the International Relations.

Why don't these relations is what is called the PRI's relationship. The prizes that our countries pay for industrial products and the prices that industrial nations pay when they buy raw materials or primary products. Our ex bought. I have been keeping a little secret from you up till now and I have been with Canadians for several days. We Costa Ricans sell a great deal of coffee to Canada and we buy a great deal of wheat from you and buy a great deal. I mean READ IT WAS size of our country where everything is small. Thank God. When. When we buy your wheat we pay for the standard of living of the wheat producing areas of Canada and we pay for the amount of the Canadian farmer has to pay to his government in taxes

for general services and we make it possible for the Canadian farmer to send his daughters to the university. I hope at least I have seen this on the stage. When you buy our coffee you really pay for our low standard of living for our lack of taxation or our lack of capitalization. And you are in the US therefore paying an hour of work in Latin America. Probably one fifth or one variable some articles what we pay for an hour of work in Canada or the United States. Now this has to be what I would call a stabilizer that has to be corrected and there's no use saying that it has to be a free market because as you know there's not a free market in wheat just as there is not a free market in in machinery and also there's not a free market in sugar in which because of our foreign investments we have had the quota system for many years

now. Another thing the way you have given some thought is this. When my mother wanted to buy a sewing machine she would save cent by cent until she had the money and buy it cash. This is considered to be the good old way. I don't know how good it was when my daughter now gets a dishwasher landed there with no cash payment and they just asked to pay in 20 installments. We used to capitalize before we had the goods. It is a characteristic of modern times that we are capitalizing after we enjoy the use of the goods. It's a way of capitalizing Europe and the United States and Canada. Capitalized at a given time when the aspirations of the people were not high when the social struggle had not begun and when it was possible for

those who owned industry to create capital by profits and this moment of higher social aspirations of higher standards of education there is a moment of democracy in many of the countries certainly in the Latin American countries. This process of capitalization of saving until you can buy the sewing machine is very difficult. People want to buy the refrigerator and pay for it afterwards. And this explains why we are asking for credit from the countries that have been able to capitalize. Why we believe that long term financing of our own industry of our own enterprises at the proper rate of interest with new precautions and guarantees for Morty's Asian is a logical way in which the industrial nations can help us without giving anything to us. I think that there's a number one there

that I can see which is a terrible man of the Very soon I would be saying a thing that goes around like this with men were made in my time is over. Thank you Doctor for Garrison. It's a wonderful thing to be chairman of such an agreeable meeting where they participants make their own stop at the right times. Ladies and gentlemen there are many questions and I would like to put to these gentlemen tonight and I'm sure there are many you would like to point out. It's open to you. Gentlemen there. Mr. Chairman I wonder if Dr. Keiji would care to comment on the progress of any that has been made in Latin America by those advocating the adoption of measures of birth control and if you would share my

opinion that this juncture some measure of our station in the rate of population growth is a vital vital component for rapid economic development of this. That kind of problem. I honestly don't know. My grandfather had 13. I have no information really that I can on this question but I would like to make this remark if it is a suitable reply. People speak of what they now call the population explosion. We're having all kinds of explosions and all kinds of fields now. But all of the population problem it grows too fast. But I think we can do very much about it for a long time. Birth rates are declining a little bit in the big cities and some countries but not generally. And I think that the

problem we have is not a population problem so much as an investment problem that is we have to provide the means increasingly for at least another generation until something changes in the birthrate to enable all these growing people to be fed and clothed better. And in order to increase our industrial capacity. I take it then Dr. Acadia do you think that the population explosion may may go on. That things will be exploding even more rapidly than now. Well I don't know enough about population problems demography to give you a proper answer but I don't think there is much chance that the birthrate will decline much. As I said in that same the next 25 years. Just when the middle of the back nor the right is fine. Sorry. Please we ask your question for Dr. C again.

In connection with private investments in America which I'm sure none of us would reject outright we ever had occasion to discuss a D. Possibility that owns private investment may lead to what you have to her quite happily. Economic occupation and economic occupation quite often leads to political complications which are very dangerous now and he is specially when we speak in terms of entire American sorted out. Would you care president to get us to say something about this possibility. Where and on what condition you think that private investment may become economic occupation. With that assault and dangers. Thank you.

Our chairman has said that the controversy between a permanent private investment from abroad and debt abroad is not unfamiliar to Canadians. It did seem to be a question of proportion. Mr. O'Malley we would like to have a great deal of credit from abroad which would make it possible for us to own our countries and we would like to pay back of course the debt and not to confiscate them. And if there is. It was very large of the capitals of comes from abroad is a permanent investment which establishes a right of ownership. Undoubtedly we are all in for trouble in the first time in the first place. Economically it will mean that not only dividends but the capitalization of the enterprises will go abroad and the dude will mate. It tends to widen the

gap between the level of living in one country and another and then maybe the psychological and political consequences would be worse. I think that a very large proportion of ownership from abroad especially in a poor country creates a sort of economic occupation. A new kind of colonialism and there is bound to bring about trouble for all. There should be a very high proportion of graduate land for Indigenous development which leaves ownership in the hands of the Nationalists. Of course you cannot be radical and each business has to be started in its own merits. Another on my own. Dr. O'Keefe he has an idea of the necessary scope of a 10 year Marshall Plan for the development of the Latin Americas. Well I wouldn't use the expression Marshall Plan. But

some estimates have been made of what Latin America can safely absorb in foreign capital to meet its basic needs without creating too much of a burden not repayment for the future because we have to rip me out of our growing exports. The figure is in the neighborhood. Obs three billion dollars a year which is a billion more of them is coming into Latin America at the present time. What do you think that if trade were made available to us all our capital investment in any way for that amount. Do you think in the first one or two or two years we would be ready with the necessary studies to use all this money. Well this is an old discussion. Do we have the projects ready when the funds are available. I think that there is a has been a much more profound study of the Latin American problem of the last few years and that many projects

are ready and can be carried out and I think that as soon as we know that there is a steady source of steady access to the type of foreign capital that we need for our development then it won't take us long to prepare the projects. Thank you. QUESTION Yes please. Mr Keelty has very admirably and quickly traced the economic development of the postwar year and given the reasons for them. But there is a time problem that bothers me. As I do feel is that Latin America's long term economic outlook is strong it has the resources it has the growing labor force. But he also pointed out that in the short term the export prospect is weak. The internal agricultural production for consumption has been relatively stagnant and since capital transactions tend to be influenced by export

earnings in the short run there seems not too bright an outlook for capital account either. Sol given the rather bleak outlook in the short run what I am interested in is this dichotomy of when where how does he visualize this so-called take off to sustain growth can be initiated as was said we live in the short run not in the long run but I'm really thinking in terms of the next five years when Latin America's economic growth as he stated stated has slowed down. Well that's certainly a very big question. I think we might learn a lot from the experience of some countries that have achieved a fairly balanced type of growth. I mean internally in that sense of creation of industry improvement of agriculture I think Mexico and Brazil provide the best examples in Latin America of this sort of thing.

The timing is very difficult I think but we must have if not detailed plans we must have projections of what is likely to happen we must have a series of alternatives points of reference. We must have goals of some kind we cannot just proceed in a haphazard fashion. I think if you want me to say something about timing I would say it is later than we think. I think an awful lot can be done to improve immediately our domestic programs so this can be done in the fairly short run. But I think what would help the most to get off on a good kind of takeoff is really a steady as I said before a steady access or a sufficient access to the kind of investment capital that we want so that we can get it where we need it most to break the bottlenecks.

So many hands here that gentleman right at the back. Doctor OK has mentioned wonderful progress of Canada and Canada has indeed developed in a most fantastic man of the last 20 25 yes. You know this is where we must leave tonight's quitting conference session on economic development and expansion in Latin America. The main speaker was Victor or kitty with comments but it was a forget us and Paul Bouchard the chairman was Mitchell sharp tomorrow evening at the same time social and political change in Latin America. Copies of a booklet containing the speeches may be obtained jointly price one dollar and fifty cents per copy by writing to University of Toronto press Toronto Ontario program produced by Christina McDougal technical operations by John Skelton.

This is Bob Wilson speaking from the National YMCA conference center Geneva park. Like good teaching Ontario. Listen with us again tomorrow night. This is ABC Radio the Trans-Canada network.