Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NEEDS OF INDUSTRY.

SCIENTIFICALLY-ADJUSTED

TARIFF.

MANUFACTURERS' NEEDS.

TRADE OUTLOOK REVIEWED.

"Notwithstanding the fact that New Zealand was at that time regarded as a purely agricultural country, these pioneera had visions of the day when their young country would be able to manufacture the greater part of the goods essential to its existence, and would, to a very large extent, become self-con* tained," said Mr. J. A. C. Allum, president of the Auckland Industrial Association, at the annual meeting held in the Chamber of Commerce to-day.

Continuing, he said that the advantage of having manufacturing industries was fully illustrated during the war, but the efforts put forward by Dominion manufacturers were speedily forgotten when the question of revising the tariff was mooted. The Government had promised that the tariff would, be revised during the next session of Parliament.

In Australia tariff revision was carried out by a permanent Tariff Board, which made investigations and recommendations every year. As to the position in New Zealand, the last revision was made six years ago. The usual procedure was to appoint a commission of Customs officials, and, as the evidence was taken in camera, the public had no knowledge of what was being done until the new tariff became law.

"It is true," said Mr. Allum, "that our Minister of Customs baa discretionary powers to deal with tariff matters, but he almost invariably declines to take the responsibility where any increases in the tariff were not of an encouraging nature," Tinkering With Tariff. Tinkering with the duty and defeating the objects of a tariff was one that affected the largest industry in the Dominion, that of timber working. Drawbacks allowed under certain conditions did away entirely with the protection afforded by the duty, and it appeared a wrong application of the principle to allow a drawback of duty in cases where goods were exported in a different condition from when they were imported. Regarding the attitude of *the Industrial . Association towards the present system of making a periodical revision of the tariff, Mr. Allum said:—

"I desire to affirm most emphatically that the Industrial Association is not out for a high protective tariff, but \t is essential to the welfare of a yourig country that reasonable protection should be afforded to our secondary industries, which to-day provide work for over 80,000 employees. With a little assistance from the Government, that would enable the machines in our factories to be run at full capacity, combined with the growth of a patriotic sentiment in favour with the purchase of New Zealand-made goods, there would rpeedjly ensue a wave of prosperity that would eliminate our adverse trade balances and provide work not only for the large number of unemployed, but also for ever-increasing numbers of emigrants from the Mother country. Several of our industries are in the happy state of being able to carry on without any increase in the tariff, but others, unfortunately, require an increase to enable them to meet competition—sometimes unfair competition—even suspected dumping." Prices Not To Increase. A number of manufacturers had made representations to the Tariff Commission, and practically everyone had offered to guarantee that, if an increase in tariff was granted, prices to the consumer would not be increased. On the other hand, they hoped that the increased output, by reducing overhead expenses, would result in a lowering of prices. The New Zealand was not a protective tariff. It was framed with a view to providing revenue for the Government, and can only be described as a revenue tariff.

"What is really required," Mr. AUum continued, "is a scientifically adjusted tariff, which will enable our manufacturers reasonably to compete with oversea importations; and will enable them to build pp industries that will provide work for our children, pay wages that will ensure a high, standard of living for our workers, and provide them with means for bringing up their families in reasonable comfort. Such a tariff will make for a happier and more contented condition of society, and the increased returns from contented y/orkers will add materially to the prosperity of our country. The question of fostering and encouraging our secondary industries is one that must be faced and a protective policy is the only means of gaining that

end. A brief glance at history shows that Britain's strong manufacturing position was built upon protection, and that when she adopted Free Trade she had such a great start upon all competitors in manufacturing and shipping that it took them generations to overtake her. Protection has been the mainstay of America's great progress and success." He said that the policy of the New Zealand Government was to maintain* a comfortable standard of living, and, with this policy, the manufacturers were in full accord. The benefits to be-de-rived from a protective tariff were worthy of more serious consideration than had been accorded to them in the past. Chief among these would be the more rapid increase- in our population. This larger population would provide a better local market for our primary products, and more business for our merchants, our storekeepers, our professions, our builders, and would benefit every member of the community.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19270511.2.142

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 109, 11 May 1927, Page 11

Word Count
859

NEEDS OF INDUSTRY. Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 109, 11 May 1927, Page 11

NEEDS OF INDUSTRY. Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 109, 11 May 1927, Page 11