FARMERS AND PROTECTION.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 14054, 27 May 1911, Page 3

FARMERS AND PROTECTION.

PROPOSED DUTY ON MACHINERY,

At the conference of the; North Canterbury Fanners' ITnion, a discussion took place yesterday afternoon on the subject of tho proposed imposition of a duty of 33 J per cent. on imported machinery. The discussion arose out of tho deputation from the Ironmasters' Association that waited on tho Conference on Thursday evening. Several remits on the subject protesting against the,proposal were on the order paper. Mr. G. \V. Leadley (AshburtoiO

moved the substitution of the toilowing in place of the remit from Ashburt-on:— "That this Conference, having heard the deputation representing tne Ironmasters' Association and the Implement Makers, relative to the proposed imposition ot a 33£ per cent customs duty on all imported farm implements and machinery, is of opinion that such duty will not be ot any permanent benefit, as it is more than probable that (as already indicated by the Trades and Labour Council) its imposition wouli le urged as "a reason for further doiiihtjds from the employees. That inasmuch Jβ this Dominion is largely md almost entirely dependent upon Great Britain as a market for its primary products, j which Britain admits tree of duty, and is the source of supply in the matter of loans, it is at once impolitic and unstatesmanlike and unfair to place Buch an embargo upon imports from there. And also that it lias been proved from past experience that high protective duties have not succeeded in fostering I the growth of manufacturing industries to 3uch extent as to warrant this further impost." Mr. Leadley quoted from a pamphlet issued by tho Ironmasters Association, to show the genesis of tho movement of the articles proposed to be taxed. There were 54 used by farmers. _ A traction engine importer had written him that New Zealand was too small to go in for their manufacture; and in the absence of local manufactories the imposition of tho duty would mean an addition to tho cost of £300. Thns an engine now costing £825, would cost £1100. That was only a typical case of what would happen in respect to other lines. Tho deputation had alleged that tho New Zealand iron masters could manufacture all the articles on the list. (A voice: "Rubbish.") It was not likely that motor cars would be manufactured in the Dominion for many years. His opinion was that the ironmasters were asking too much. Mr R. B. Luscombe seconded the remit and referred to the probability of tho imnlement-makers forming a trust. Mr Leadley, replying to Mr O'Halloran, said that on a previous occasion an attempt was made to form a trust, but was not successful, though a tacit agreement resulted wherennder, each firni undertook to respect the others' prices.

Mr Jones thought it would have been the best thinjj that could have happened, if the trust had been formed. Tho Now Zealand manufacturer could not hope to compete against the imported article, so long as they worked with small plants onvaluable city sites. Mr. W. F. Pannett said that they nmst concede that the New » Zealand manufactured. implement was better suited to the-requirements of farmers than the imported article. No nation, could bo truly great that did not find employment for its people in the calling for which' their individual ability best fitted them.* In the absence of outlets: iii the, p_omimon 3 young men had to seek openings in other countries. Tliesb young men would >be wanted later, especially if tho necessity for defending the country arose 1 . They were neglecting; to" support" Great Britain by purchasing implements ".arid macliinory from America. . ' . ■ "

Mr Chas..Heidsaid tljat';the industries of tho Dominion - ireouired. the best.possible•■Siippors,:bu^• he .was prepared -to - pay > tho - nt ice • demanded. . Mr C, H. Ensor,;said-t:hat if the implement .makers were • getting the raw material, duty free;,, and could .not produce, the machinery cheaper than other countries, • thefo. must be something radically, wrong; with the Labour laws of .the Dominion.-. ■. . :....

_ Mr T. E..L: Roberta suggested that instead of giving a rebuff to the deputation they should appoint a committee of three to confer, with ithe Ironmasters' Association. Hβ moved as ■an amendment:— "Provided: that -th,e ironmasters are prepared to give a sufficient guarantee that there will be no rise.in the cost of implements to the users of such, and assumi'njj that they would allow a revision of the list as it now stands, that a committee, consisting of Messrs Pannett, Hprrell, and Leadley, be appointed to confer with tho ironmasters, and collect information on the subject, and report to the executive at nn early date. , ' Mr T. B. Howson was prepared, he said, to support tho pro»)osal"> if the ironmasters cave a satisfactory guarantee that prices -would' not be increased. Mr O. F. Clothier said it seemed hard that men should be out ofemployment who would cet employment if the duty were imposed. The new tariff should not apply to Grea.t Britain, and thejist of articles should bei revised, and arty cles like traction engines, which could not be.made in the Dominion, struck out.

Mr R. Evans said the remit would bo a most dangerous one to sena to the Dominion Conference, as it was almost entirely a Canterbury matter. Tho amendment was and the motion was to.

It was decided to reply to the Ironmasters' Association, "that as the proposal for a duty is contrary to tho constitution of the Union, ence is unable to recommend the Dominion Conference to comply with tho reauest."