ANTI-DUMPING LAWS.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20315, 14 August 1931, Page 12

ANTI-DUMPING LAWS.

AUSTRALIAN TRADERS PROTEST. NEW ZEALAND ATTITUDE. oi'v owk couK.rsj'ONii-.K i. DJSIEi?. .August 'j. ' Australian traders say that there is ample evidence that the fueling towards them in New Zealand is not all it should be. and they arc at a toss to understand the reason. They say that the Dominion's anti-dumping laws are directed especially at the Australian manufacturer. Australian traders have no desire to bo other than fair in their methods, and they regret the apparent hostility, and New Zealand's unwillingness to recognise flair trading methods. They are hopeful that the enquiry which is proceeding in Melbourne at the present time on behalf of the .New Zealand Government will convince .New Zealand that no unfair methods are being practised in the battle for trade. Boot and shoe manufacturers are mainly concerned in the enquiries now being made. 1/5 is pointed out that a large consignment 01" boots and shoes from the Clifton Hill Company at .Melbourne were held up for nearly a mouth at Auckland, and were released after enquiries had been made by the New Zealand agent (Mr Firth) into local prices. M ith the recent exchange rate giving an. .18 per cent, benefit, Australian, exporters were not slow to realise the possibilities of trade with -New Zealand. .Nor were the producers of similar articles in New Zealand slow to realise the disadvantages that m ight accrue to j them by this trade. I'lveu with an adverse duty on shoe-) of 35 per cent., the exchange gave importers of Australianmade goods an advantage of more than ii" per cent. Of course, there was an ' outcry, and the New Zealand Govern- ■ ment applied the anti-dumping provisions of the Customs Amendment Act of 1921. Australian manufacturers insist: that there is no justification for this, as 'they are not dumping their goods, but seeking trade outlets in. a purely legitimate manner. The entry into the Dominion of fhiglish boots and shoes manufactured of Australian leather, at a. preferential duty of 25 per cent, was an apparent anomaly pointed out by a Melbourne manufacturer this wee):. ''Not only do we pay duty, primage, and 30 per cent, exchange on all our imported grindery," he said, "and on all the trimmings and bindings used in making shoes, but our raw materials, produced locally, such as leather, cost lis more than they cost in London, because the London buyer has the advantage of the exchange position. An Australian manufacturer pays Is 3d for leather, and he calculates his cost on that basis. The English manufacturer buys the same quality Australian leather for Is and ho calculates his costs accordingly. Jf it is claimed that Australian boots and shoes compete seriously with goods manufactured in the Dominion, how much keener must be the competition from England, where wages are 50 per cent, less than they are here? The n anufacturer there pays no duty on raw materials used, and he enjoys a JO per cent, preference under the Customs tariff. If the New Zealand Government desires to protect the local manufacturer, surely the proper, course would be to increase the tariff. The trading community would like to know the true position, for the present position suggests a, feeling in the Dominion against Australia. •'' TRADING COUPONS BILL, j _ ( A DLNEDIN PROTEST. ! i TKES3 VSSOCIA nOV ItfjEUEAM. i j DUNEDIX, August IM. At a meeting of representatives of business .interests the opinion was expressed that the Trading Coupons Bill had been mutilated by being redrafted to legalise gifts in packets, and that the Bill in its present form fooled traders and made possible all kinds of subterfuge. A strong resolution of protest was passed against "this unfair method of trading by a few large firms who have no care for the harm their pernicious methods inflict on 09 per cent, of the traders of the Dominion.'-' ! CEMENT INDUSTRY. j POSITION IN AUSTRALIA. j •'The ot!uient industry is in a worse position in New South Wales than in any of the other States," declared Mr 0. A. Jaques. chairman of directors, ac tlie annual meting ct' Kandos Cement Company, Ltd., on Friday last. Thero were lar too many companies operating in the State, ho said, ami any one of the five large companies in New South Wales could supply all current- requirements. Since 1.921 capita! invested in cement companies had been increased by over GOO per cent., while productive capacity had increased from lf)6,000 tons in 1921 to 579,000 tons in Hi3o. To make matters worse, it was understood that :t was proposed to lioat. a new company, a step which would make the industry vgrv innch over-developed. Dealing with the company's operations during the year, Mr Jaques said that the practical cessation of work by tlio Main Roads Board and the Water and Sewerage Board had led to a considerable restriction in output, j The position was less acute in Victoria, j whero only one company, Australian Cement, was operating, and with this company Kandos Cement had amalgamated. The wisdom of this step was now being realised. Government interference, he added, had largely been responsible for the drop in profits. The present crisis was the worst in the memory of living Australians. It was even worse than the crash of 1893, when at least recovery was not hampered by "Langism" and the iniquitous doctrine of class-consciousness had not developed. To it, as a holding company, he added, the new property tax had proved a very severe burden, 1 PRICE OF GOLD. j j P'srra; vuess .issociatiost—£x liuscxszci TELEGitAPII—COPYRIGHT A ! I (Received August 13th. 0.0 p.m.i LONDON. August 12. Cold is quoted at Sis ll£d a tine ou nee.