Voices of Europe; Sir Herbert Broadley and Dr. P. F. Noach
Voices of Europe in the second programme of this series Milton Mayer interviews two men who will tell you about the work done by two organizations of the United Nations. The FAA or Food and Agriculture Organization and the W.H. or World Health Organization. Milton Maier went to the largest building in Rome which he discovered was not the Colosseum but the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization an organization made up of 66 member countries including some which are not members of the UN itself. There he interviewed Sir Herbert broadly an Englishman who was wartime deputy secretary of the British Ministry of Food. And before that for many years a civil servant engaged in the foreign service of the British government in India. Sir Herbert is today Deputy Director General of FAA Oh here is Milton Mayer. Sir Herbert how well is your up eating at the present time.
Well I would say not too badly on the whole the amount of food for each member of the countries of Western Europe is perhaps a little lower than it was before the war but that has been some redistribution of consumption. The very well-to-do a perhaps not eating as well as they did the poor are a little better. So I would say on the whole fairly well. But if you were to compare them by shall we say American standards. Well it definitely lower on the other hand comparing them with some of the countries of Southeast Asia while considerably better. And how well will Europe be eating in the next 10 or 20 years. Well Mr. Matt that's difficult. You see there are so many new factors now. And one of the new factors is what one of our sister organizations is doing. You know the World Health
Organization has been doing a marvelous job in cleaning up malaria are the diseases of shortcomings that people have to face. I'll just take the case of Salaam for instance. Now in the last 20 years the crude death rate has fallen from 25 to 12000. Half as much as it used to be and the birth rate remains the same. That means that a great many people every year have to be fed. But the cleaning up of diseases like malaria doesn't mean only that it means that the people who live live longer healthier than hungry around and they're consuming a great deal more food. At least they're demanding it. Now that goes for a great many countries throughout the world. The efforts of the World Health Organizations and the National help administrations of the different countries are all contributing to this
and now that makes our job a great deal more difficult if we can persuade the boy to keep up to an increase in food production level with the increase in population which will just break even. But we're not doing that. The world isn't producing an increase in food to the extent to which the population is increasing and that has its repercussions on Europe because it does mean that countries that we call the underdeveloped countries are needing more food for their increasing healthier populations and at the same time these populations reading the newspapers seeing the movie's standards of living in the Western countries are asking for more of a great many things. Now Western Europe doesn't get its food from those countries of Asia but those countries of Asia will become those with Western Europe for the supplies that come from the exporting countries. Now one of those exporting countries
doing Australia and they are doing time. Australia actually is exporting considerably less food than it exports it before the war. And in the mean time it too is eating more than it did before the war. The same with the argument time. They are eating meat in that country than they did before. And that simply leaves northern parts of the Western Hemisphere. The United States and Canada as the sources of supply to all these countries that will be needing more food. So you know there is a real danger that the time may come when the well I won't say famine is but the food shortages of the future may be in the industrialized countries of Western Europe rather than in what we've previously called the backward countries of Asia. One more relevant question on that point. Sir Herbert. To the extent that employment is increased
and chronic unemployment which for example is so serious in a nation like Italy is in some way Levy ated there's a still a further strain on the food supply is there not don't employ people eat more than unemployed people employed people do eat. And insofar as these employed people are in industry they are not producing food. They are increased come Seumas of food. Now of course if we can get increased employment in agriculture to bring more acres under cultivation perhaps this increase of employment can contribute to increasing the world's food supply. But what you say is perfectly true. More employment in the towns and cities of the wild means people have more money to spend a greater demand on the amount of food that's available. And there are far bigger pressure of population on food supplies. Paradoxically then Sir Herbert your job in the
FAA all would be a great deal easier if the death rate in the sea. Remain high and the birthrate fell and there was less employment and more malaria. Well paradoxically as you say backstroke. But if AI wasn't created to live an easy life. We were created because the people who were looking ahead so much some of these things were bound to happen and why. Of course as human beings we welcome all the efforts that the World Health Organization is able to make in removing and reducing disease making people live longer and so on. It certainly does make our job more difficult and harder to see the results we want to achieve brought about. If I understood you correctly a little earlier Sir Herbert you
indicated that the world food supply was not keeping pace with increasing population. And I do understand that mall for us is still right that the population increases faster than food and that there is at least the present indication that it will continue to do so. Well there is no doubt that at the present moment as you say food supplies not keeping pace with the increase in population. On the other hand I wouldn't like to predict that that is a permanent tendency. In the past there have been ups and downs. There have been times in the history of the last century when I knew big areas coming into production like the prairie of Canada the western parts of the United States. The new areas of the Arjen time and Australia have put the balance right. And it's then looked as
if this was wrong. At the moment it's very difficult to say what the future is going to be. So the moment we are not doing as a food producing organization or a food producing the job that ought to be done. Is there any significant hope in new methods of food production. I think that is the hope. There have been improvements in the past. For instance western New York and all that long period between oh the fall of the Roman Empire and the French Revolution the output of wheat remained at about the same figure of 10 bushels an acre. Then came quite a lot of agricultural improvements new discoveries improved methods of distribution and so on. And during the early part of the 19th century to 20 30 bushels an acre and continued more or less of that to get through that century. Now it's come
still further ahead and 40 bushels an acre is the average output and in many farms it's a good deal 50 60 70 and even 80 bushels an acre. And that has been achieved by improved methods mechanize ation the use of fertilizers better kinds of seeds and so on. And if that can be applied extensively then in those areas of the world that are now producing food there is the opportunity how very large increases in production. Now that's only one part of the problem. Increased output for the acres that are being counted today there are vast acres in Africa for instance and in many of the tropical parts of the world that might be brought into conservation. But a great deal of experiment is necessary before one can be sure how those can be best used. You've really got to plan your economic development. You wouldn't necessarily do it for a limited area like southern Italy but taking
big broad areas you have to march ahead with industrialized nation. At the same time as you improve your agriculture. Otherwise improvements in agriculture and very often mean Curiously enough a reduction in the number of people employed on the land. And that's very true in the Asian countries. And unless you can find an outlet for their activities they are just going to be waste and employ people. So you've got to develop your agriculture. You've got to develop your small cottage industries in association with the our agriculture to use that labor usefully and also of course you've got to go into big scale industrialization. Is it not true that the people of your own country England are eating about as poorly as anybody in Europe in spite of the very high degree of mechanization in industrialization.
Isn't the English diet held at a minimum lower than it has been at any time in modern history because of economic marketing and exporting requirements. Wow if I may say so I think that's an exaggeration. It's true that the diet of the British people at the present time is raw and monotonous. The people don't have well as many steaks perhaps as they would like to have. They don't perhaps get to quite as much sugar and come faction as they could eat. But when you take into account the overall diet I would certainly not admit that it is considerably lower than many of the countries of Western Europe. On the whole I think it's a pretty good diet. It's monotonous as I say and it has had has done this. It's more evenly distributed
throughout the country than ever before. The poorer people have more and more varied foods to eat. Perhaps the well-to-do not so much that Sir Herbert brings me to my last question in the way of of prognostication I know how reckless it is in the world we live in. What are the prospects of materially increasing first food output and second food distribution and is on the point of food distribution does. A better distribution of food require a reduction of the standard of living of the so called high standard countries such as my own. Well let's take the two pints separately. Increase production. I think that a very real chance of that being achieved first as I've just been
mentioning in those areas that are producing food. Now if they will adopt modern methods devises I think the output can be considerably increased in the underdeveloped countries where we are rendering what we call technical assistance sending experts giving a little equipment showing them the results of research. There are real opportunities there of increasing production and in the tropical areas as I mentioned. Well we've got to do a lot of experimental research before we can be quite sure what is the best way to use these vast areas in those parts of the world. I do think there's a real chance of a substantial increase in production. But it will be slow to be achieved. It will take many years before we can see measurable results. But I think it will come on distribution that is quite a different problem. You see wherever you go and rig it in food production you've got to do one
thing. You've got to persuade the farmer that it's worth his while to increase his output. If he feels that by doubling his Halfords and putting shall we say twice as much wheat three times the amount of milk or cheese all bought on the market. It's going to result in a slump in prices. Then he will say Why should I walk twice as hard for the same return in terms of money. We have tried NFA on several occasions to devise machinery that would give to the farm those guarantees and the assurance he needs while giving protection at the same time to the comes through. You probably remember that when Lloyd or so John Boyd or he was in those days was the director John. He advocated the food that was to be an organization which would take from the producing countries of the wild sapless out how would it
distributed. Send it to countries which couldn't afford to buy the full market prices. But all the time wouldn't you want to produce a reasonable return for whatever he produced whether it was little whether it was a lot. Sounds sensible enough said Herbert. Why didn't if EO go through with it. Well I think it's a double kind of organization. It's a secretary we people are working together hand and we try to think out these games. It's also an organization of 66 member countries and I guess that's what happened at the time was that some of the member countries felt the financial and perhaps the political implications of that plan was such that they were not prepared to adopt it. Thank you very much Sir Herbert. Milton mayor next travel to Geneva Switzerland to the European headquarters of the United Nations. There he interviewed Dr. APF nor the chief medical officer of Haifa Israel and the chief delegate of Israel to the World Health
Organization Dr. Nora who says with a smile that he's an Asiatic and not a European was a German as far back as he knows the history of his ancestors for many generations. He served in the German Army for four years during the First World War in which he won the Iron Cross then became chief medical officer for 14 years of the city of Gotye in central Germany in 1933 because he was a Jew. He ceased to be a German and went to what was then Palestine. Here is Mr. Mayor. Dr. No Mark will you tell our listeners in the United States what in your view the World Health Organization has accomplished during the few years of its existence. I think it has accomplished a lot. It had many Congolese to fight against such diseases as
my leg. And so on. Send it to Galatians ballz and pull its kinds of clever. I can mention or activities but this indeed. Certainly many accomplishment which can be mentioned and Aquarian your review. Has the World Health Organization failed. Of cause of the despair is too much to say but. But if you consider unity and then and you had betted of eight and a half millions you will tend to expect his questions of that is a doctor no aka The World Health Organization has a budget
of eight and a half million dollars a year not only for 50 so the U.S. is as English less it was the last but for the year of 1953 its budget is eight and a half million dollars and with this budget the World Health Organization is charged with the duty of improving the health of the human race as it is the sickest. Yes Doctor No aka I am going to ask you a question which I am sure you cannot answer. How much money. Would be required in your opinion actually to make a substantial improvement in the health of the human race. How much money per year. So it is a question and answer. But I am sure that
this was in 10 times even that this is not enough. Hence organization has now at its disposal not taking into account what every mission the government has to spend on it. I remember as a professor assembly in his speech said he sings it if at least 10 percent of said would be spend what it now because of them and would perhaps cease with the social position of poor nations of. That is Professor Mary doll of the Economic Commission for Uranus suggested in the last general assembly of the World Health Organization that if only 10 percent of what is now being spent for armament was spent for health the health of the
world would be substantially improved. Then in your view I take it Dr. No on the fate of the Arctic to the extent that it has failed of the World Health Organization is simply a matter of the lack of necessary funds. No I do and sings at the side that you see in new of the music especially in the organisation of fellow human dealing. Come on leave is taken to completion men's activities has to be more behind it. I would say and so I said that I need to love the feel of the idea behind that but don't know if you have the ideal of health of the health of the world. But it's not enough to be the
principle behind it. Does that do to you what I said in the assembly. Please make it perhaps clear and silent that I said that taking can be useful if there is no idea behind it should be promoted only for as a purpose to provide more people for slaughter and butters and was absolutely fight against infant mortality only to Spears it to than to be later on by bombs and starvation shortly put taked all people against infectious diseases. Only in order to deliver them to deaths by their fellow man it would be quite senseless if we would not ask these questions and give all the plight of this hour to cetacean medical men can only be promoters of peace. Would be quite meaningless if not based on the conviction. So it's a distinct
nation of men. It's life and creation. No deaths and destruction. I sing you understand the word was in my mind when I said sit. How can the World Health Organization rise above the governments which the delegates represent. And indeed I think that is one of the main questions for the future of existence not only for its organization but for the United Nation itself. If only the bodies depend on the decisions of SAA governments. Nope I said nor in my opinion buddies about this. If you take it as a meeting of private persons the majority and the minority and a minority has to
accept the opinion of the majority. The majority opinion is often accepted as general opinion. So in my opinion the assemblies of United Nations and specialized agencies have the same trend. There is discussion arguments there are differences of opinion but in the end there has to be accepted a general opinion which may be and perhaps should influence governments to comply. Take it up and afterwards we will have perhaps in at least at least in some basic questions general opinion and a unified opinion of it in my opinion said
decisions taken by all those delegations together that are decisions of United Nations agencies. Obliging all of the governments even opposed him. So we have a unified opinion that doesn't mean that government cannot have its own opinion and to believe Gates north bound to the instructions received. But the decision taken is obliging to his organisation sings it is clear what I mean. So that means a body which is above the governments. I am of course speaking here. My private opinion. Yeah understood. You need effect and the World Health Organization should
act as a body dedicated to the improvement of the health of mankind. Representing mankind itself rather than representing 70 or 80 different sovereign nations. Do I understand is that correct it is like seeing as it is perhaps the main the main aim behind all the activities of the United Nations. If we do not come to a general opinion in basic questions we come to any Seeing that will be the fate of the League of Nations and nothing will come our Duff said. But if it is possible to give United Nations. So much or so only the
member states abide the decision of United Nations Assembly and the Security Council and so on. Then I sing it will be real progress in met the US of peace and security in Iraq. If it's not based on an idea and humanity as a whole then can not see very much. We have to create in my opinion heads movement educating people. In order to make them understand their despair to live to get in peace and in contentment then to seek Pulford expenses of ours us by survey
not the new idea. It has been expressed and pleads already some 2500 years ago by some of my answers that support for itself. And since then by many as a good and wise man from ards of peoples over's about. You have just heard Sir Herbert Bradley of F A O. And Dr P. have no r. of W H O in the second program of the series voices of Europe Milton Mayer American author and lecture broadcaster and professor of social research from the University of Frankfurt has been traveling throughout many of the countries of Western Europe recording the voices of Europeans were alive and sensitive to the tragedy and dilemma of the conditions that surround them. In the next programme of the series Milton Mayer interviews Professor policy last Labine of the University of Rome and soon you're A VENIR Omar son of a government financial institution in Italy. The program you have just heard is made possible under a grant from the fund for adult education an
- Voices of Europe
- Producing Organization
- National Association of Educational Broadcasters
- Contributing Organization
- University of Maryland (College Park, Maryland)
- AAPB ID
- Episode Description
- Interviews with Sir Herbert Broadley and Dr. P. F. Noach. Topics covered include United Nations efforts to combat hunger and poverty.
- Other Description
- Interviews with noted Europeans on a variety of subjects, conducted by Milton Mayer, American author and broadcaster, lecturer and professor in the Institute of Social Research at Frankfurt University.
- Broadcast Date
- Global Affairs
- Media type
Interviewee: Broadley, Herbert
Interviewee: Noach, P.F.
Interviewer: Mayer, Milton, 1908-1986
Producing Organization: National Association of Educational Broadcasters
- AAPB Contributor Holdings
University of Maryland
Identifier: 52-37-2 (National Association of Educational Broadcasters)
Format: 1/4 inch audio tape
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
- Chicago: “Voices of Europe; Sir Herbert Broadley and Dr. P. F. Noach,” 1952-01-01, University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed December 7, 2021, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-500-ww76zf10.
- MLA: “Voices of Europe; Sir Herbert Broadley and Dr. P. F. Noach.” 1952-01-01. University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. December 7, 2021. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-500-ww76zf10>.
- APA: Voices of Europe; Sir Herbert Broadley and Dr. P. F. Noach. Boston, MA: University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-500-ww76zf10