THIRD READING.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 263, 5 November 1932, Page 9

THIRD READING.

Debate on Ottawa Agreements

Continued.

OVERWHELMING VOTE.

LONDON, November 4.

The Ottawa Agreements Bill was read a third time in the House of Commons last evening by 416 votes to 68.

In moving the third reading the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mr. L. Hore-Belisha described the measure as a superstructure founded on the Imports Duties Act and the fulfilment of the electoral mandate to restore the adverse balance of trade.

Mr. Morgan Jones (Lab., Caerphilly, Glamorgan) moved the rejection of the motion. He said that under the cloak of a national mandate the Government had presented a measure embodying the policy the Conservatives had advocated for 30 years. It was a hazardous experiment.

Sir Herbert Samuel (ex-Liberal member of the Cabinet) said Parliament had not been permitted to alter a single word iii the bilL Seven members of the Ministry went to Ottawa and returned with a new decalogue on tables of stone, of which it was impious to alter a single jot or tittle.

The Liberals' objections to the agreements were justified by the vehement controversies taking place in Canada and Australia. The Liberals especially objected to the provision that the duties should not be reduced without the consent of the Dominions. Such a provision was unprecedented in the history of Parliament.

The chairman of committees had ruled that the schedules had no statutory validity and were only included in the bill for convenience. This was the cause of surprise both in Britain and the Dominions.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Neville Chamberlain, in replying, said all Governments coming into power found agreements and conventions, but they had to await fixed periods before they could vary them. It was true that Parliament, if it chose, could lower the duties, but it was extremely unlikely that it should want to do so.

Referring to meat Mr. Chamberlain said confusion had been caused by the use of the term "quota." The problem of the fall in prices due to unregulated supplies had become intense in_ recent years. He believed it was possible for producers to make voluntary agreements among themselves and avoid alternate gluts and shortages, with the Government merely acting as policeman or umpire to see that the agreement was carried out. '