BENEFITS OF OTTAWA.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 260, 2 November 1932, Page 7

BENEFITS OF OTTAWA.

Candid Statement By Dominions Secretary. STATE REPUDIATION. (United I*.A.—Electric Telegraph—Copyright) (Received 1 p.m.) LONDON, November 1. The committee stage of the Ottawa Agreements Bill was continued yesterday in the House of Commons. Major C. R. Attlee (Lab., Limehouse) moved to apply the Ottawa agreements to the Irish Free State during the present dispute and during the operation of Britain's special duties on Irish products. If a settlement were reached the Free State would be left to be treated as a foreign country or as a Dominion without special arrangements.

The Dominions Secretary, Mr. J. H. Thomas, aaid the amendment proposed to give a premium to Dominions which sought to repudiate their obligations. It was known before the Ottawa Conference that the free entry of Dominion products would cease on November 15 if an agreement were not made.

Having failed to reach an agreement with the Free State the free entry of her goods must cease. Did the Opposition really believe the workers and trade unionists of the country, who were accustomed to collective bargaining, approved giving special privileges to those who repudiated their obligations?

The Government would welcome the earliest opportunity of making a trade agreement with the Free State, but it must be an agreement within the British Commonwealth of Nations. The Free State could not expect to remain within the Commonwealth for economic reasons and outside it for political considerations. The amendment was defeated by 255 votes to 32. Further Amendments Defeated. Mr. Rhys Davies (Lab.. West Houghton, Lance.) moved to exempt raw fruit from duty, as home orchardists would not benefit. This was negatived by 270 votes, to 53. Mr. F. Kingsley Griffith (Lib., West Middlesbrough) moved to delete all the duties if the Empire producers were unable or unwilling to offer commodities to Britain at world prices in sufficient quantities. The Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mr. L. Hore-Belisha, said that, though the proviso in this direction differed in the cases of Canada and Australia, the Commonwealth Government had agreed that the requirement as to quantities must apply to Australia.

The amendment was lost by 228 votes to 50. Clause 1 was carried by 232 votes to 52. Mr. Hore-Belisha informed Lord Scone (Con., Perth) that no immediate reduction of the Australian whisky duty of 45/ per gallon was provided in the Ottawa agreement, but the duty could be reviewed by the Commonwealth when the finances permit.

On Clause 2, providing for the freedom of products from the Dominions from import duties, Sir Stafford Grippe (Lab., Bristol East) said there was a proviso giving the Treasury power to impose the duty in certain circumstances. He moved an amendment to prevent this.

Mr. Hore-Belisha said the intention of the Government was to protect, first the home producer, and secondly the Dominion producer. If it were found after experience of these agreements that the home producer required a modicum of protection, even against the Dominions, in respect of poultry and other agricultural products, he would not be deprived of an opportunity of obtaining it. That was why the clause was so framed.

The amendment was defeated by 239 votes to 51. Clauses 2, 3 and 4 were added to the bill and the debate was adjourned.