BAD BALANCE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 253, 26 October 1933, Page 7

BAD BALANCE.

TO BE CORRECTED.

hopes for treaty.

Trade Between New Zealand

And Australia,

COMMISSIONER'S VIEWS

(TJnited F.A.-Elcctric Telegraph—Copyright)

(Received 9 a.m.) ~ CANBERRA, this day. The New Zealand Trade Commissioner, Mr. L. J. Schmitt, was present in the House of Representatives Avhen the Australian-New Zealand trade agreement was tabled. In an interview, he said the agreement would enlarge the bonds of friendship between Australia and New Zealand. He hoped a more favourable trade balance' would result for New Zealand. Judging from comments lie had heard among Ministers and members* the agreement should make for greater stability between the two countries. 1 Mr. Schmitt pointed out that for the two years 1931 and 1932 the value of the exports of Australian goods to New Zealand had been £5,119,000, and the value of the imports of New Zealand goods by Australia £2,185,000. Thus in the two years Australia had enjoyed 72 per , cent and New Zealand 28 per cent .of .the. trans-Tasman trade. During the past ten years New Zealand had purchased goods from Australia valued at £35,250,000, and in the 6ame period Australia's purchases from New Zealand were valued at £24,300,000. The balance in Australia's favour was £13,950,000. .. increases in Recent Years. Mr. Schmitt added that New Zealand had increased its proportion of several important classes of imports from Aus- ' tralia in the past three years as follows: —Confectionery, by 57 p.c.; hosiery, 12 p.c.; stationery, 20 p.c.; paints and varnishes, 19.8 p.c.; iron and steel, 47.6 p.c.; fencing wire, 17.5 p.e.; electrical machinery, 11.2 p.c.; leather and leather goods, 24.4 p.c.; glass and glassware, 16 ip.c.; books, papers and music, 16.2 p.c. Australia's share of the grand total of imports to New Zealand was 11.64 p.c. in 1932, and of all British countries, excepting the United Kingdom, Australia was the largest supplier of New Zealand imports. Federal Minister's Comment. The Minister of Customs, Mr. T. W. White, who tabled the proposed trade agreement with. New Zealand, said that it safeguarded the interests of Australian primary industries and provided: substantial benefits for Australian secondary industries. Th^ r Minister also revealed that the exchange dumping duty on Australian • goods had been obviated. He detailed the terms of the agreement. In moving the second reading debate, Mr. White, referred to Sir W. Massy'Greene'a visit to New Zealand and his smoothing out of the difficulties in regard to citrus fruits; also 'to the recent happy decision of the New Zealand Government to admit South Australian oranges and Queensland pineapples. He expressed the opinion that Australia, with t;he preference now granted, should be abler to oust foreign competitors with raisins, also to capture the market for canned pineapples. The debate was adjourned.

AUCKLAND OPINIONS.

MORE INFORMATION SOUGHT.

There is a difference of opinion in 'Auckland commercial circles, concerning the new treaty, but a general view is that the-position' will have to be clarified before definite statements can be made. '

Comment amongst produce merchants is to the effect that something should have (been dpne in reference to the admission of potatoes from New Zealand. It is pointed' out that a greatly increased duty has been placed on potatoes, from Australia. One merchant said that the extra duty might mean the exclusion of Australian potatoes, the importation of which under the former duty was a check on New Zealand prices. Another produce merchant said that the exclusion of New Zealand potatoes, under the pretext of disease, had 'been a sore point with New Zealand growers for a considerable time, and that New Zealand's embargo on Australian citrus fruits was regarded as a retaliatory measure. This embargo had only been removed within the last few weeks, and then in. respect to South Australian fruit alone. It was significant 'that no reference was made in the new treaty to the admission of New Zealand' potatoes into Australia. A merchant who has done considerable business with Australia said that the dump Lad been in existence for four years and in three years the exports from New Zealand to Australia had been, practically cut in half, while Australia's exports to New Zealand had not fallen to the same extent. There had, however, been a noticeable improvement in the last twelve months. The agreement appeared to make more concessions to New Zealand than to Australia. It was evidence of the fact that Australia had more to give. He considered that with the new duties Australia would be in a position to do considerably more business with New Zealand in the export of sultanas. Australia was endeavouring to secure a market for her fruit on a ®ore competitive basis. Raisins were arriving in New Zealand under the old arrangement at an average price of 3fd per lb from California as compared' with an average price of 4Jd to 4|d for Australian saltanas. The duty of Id per lb now imposed under the general tariff undoubtedly mean larger imports from the Commonwealth. The general effect, however, would be that the pubhe would have to pay more for raisins. A leading merchant commented upon the facts that wheat and flour had been omitted from the treaty. These items, 'he thought, would have been strong Weapons for use in making a better arrangement. A reduction in the duties would Lave constituted a fine basis for bargaining. If the duty on wheat and flour had been absolished or reduced ne was of the opinion that Australia would have been glad to take New Zealand potatoes. Flour could be bought in Australia at £7 10/ f.0.b., compared with £14 A 5/ the retail price' in New Zealand.