TRADE WITH GREAT BRITAIN

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21085, 9 February 1934, Page 14

TRADE WITH GREAT BRITAIN

"HB IDITO* <-'» THE PRBSS. :-;uy—The tone of your leaders orj subject is not helpful! Neither •• .;u nor Mr Hutchinson can dismiss r, r- rr.aUer by calling it "mischievous : 1 'j foolish." and I suggest you both !■>■,* into it a little more deeply, ancl ;ue it instead of inferring that it is . ! 'sed. and ascribing mischief andl ", ilishness to those who wish for seri- | ~ll,' public consideration of this imj.'irtant case on its merits. Concerning the Danish agreement, •\.;d arc wrong in stating that this was Quantitative on both sides, and lim:,d to dairy produce and coal. It ■ true the agreement rested on Dennark taking from the United Kingdom; rot less than 80 per cent, of her lmv.rts of coal, but beyond that there . re live pages of a schedule of articles .[British exports upon which "duty. • ■ or reduced duties were con-1 ceded by the Danish Government. " loreover" the protocol to the agreeii.cnt specifically declares that thej balance of trade between the two countries will be kept in view in ■ itiministratinfi it, and it further pro- • ides that Denmark's imports from ether countries are to be observed, ■and if they increase it shall be a subject for discussion between the two governments. _ . In return for all this the British Government "undertakes not to regulate the quantity of the imports of bacon and hams, butter, eggs, and .ream from Denmark except in so far as may be necessary to secure the effective operation of a scheme or scheme; for the regulation of domestic supplies of these products," and Ihe agreement proceeds to safeguard Denmark by definitely stating the Danish allocation of butter shall not be less than 2.300.000 cwts (this is equal to New Zealand's total exports of butter last year) in any one year, ; ; nd if Britain's total imports increase Denmark gets her extra share. Denmark is also to be allowed to send in liot less than G2 per cent, of Britain's total imports from foreign countries of bacon and hams, and 38 per cent, i>f eggs. Your remark about State interference in trade and commerce loses its point when it is noticed that both governments in this agreement recognise ,j)id support reciprocal agreements be- ' ween the Dundee and London Chambers of Commerce, the Liverpool Salt Manufacturers' Association and others, vith trade associations in Denmark for the purchase of British jute cloth, salt :mu salt petre, parchment paper, etc. { by Denmark. My contention is that we can and •bould deliberately arrange to promote more imports from Great Britain by favourable duties and duty free -wherever possible, by considered agreement to buy not less than a certain proportion of our total imports and certain specific imports from her. and that 'his cannot be done without careful s'udv and by collaboration between traders and the New Zealand Government. and that it should be done in ilic interests of the Dominion. In all seriousness—despite your ad-! iectives—l do suggest that you are I wrong in stating that New Zealand cannot buy exemption from quotas by I purchasing more British exports. This exemption may be partial. It might, li'M-.'cv. r. possibly be full exemption Uy: certain classes of our exports, but cciprocal business is to-day so eom■mn r> basis for increased business both by nations and individuals, that i' should not be ignored. Oreat Britain's generous treatment <■>(' New Zealand in conceding us nearly a million a year in interest, her polite recognition of New Zealand's purchases from her per capita, and her cc'isfant observance of ties of kinship n-.ust not longer be traded on, for she a commercial nation. It is not a question of "reopening" t!ie matter of quotas. It is surely a question of discussing them, for they ne new and we are new to the whole fi'bject. and should seriously consid- ' - its probable implications.—Yours, etc., WM. MACHIN. P.Ve did not <:c.y that the Danish agreement was "limited" to dairy produce and coal. Other points in Mr Machin's letter are dealt with in a leading article.—Ed. "The Press."!

1U : HI. C UTOR OP THIS I-HBSb. Sji-.—ln his address on behalf of importers' organisation reported '••i February 6. Mr Goodfellow quoted M-ini: truly extraordinary figures. As tiio official figures appear in the ?.lonlhly Abstract of Statistics, it is difficult to know why Mr Goodfellow did not quoio them instead of giving itmc figures which ai'e not official. For instance, he stated that our exports to the United Kingdom during the fir.-t nine months of 1933 amounted to £31,500,000. The Monthly Abstract of October last gives the official figures as .f 26,733,000. It is really amazing t.hat a responsible public man should be guilty o£ such inexcusable carelessness in. regard to the facts. A;;r , in, Mr Goodfellow stated that <ur imports from Great Britain for the nine months amounted to ■C0.900.000. The Abstract shows the? figure as £8.220,000. As export figures are officially in terms of New Zealand currency, and import figures in sterling, it is obvious that both must be expressed in terms of the same currency before any comparison is possible. In terms of New Zealand currency our exports to the United KingcLnm (nine months, 1933) amounted io £ 2<i,733,000 minus about £4,000,000 sent to London merely for trans-ship-mem to foreign countries. That is to ,; ay, we sent about £22.700,000 (New Zealand) exports to Britain herself.

During the same period we obtained from Great Britain imports worth about £ 10,070,000 (New Zealand). In addition, we paid about £7.500,000 (New Zealand) as interest on the public debt; and a further 3,100,000 (New Zealand) for outward freights together with rent, interest and dividends on British capital invested in New Zealand, The fact is clear, therefore, that we have purchased imports from Great Britain up to practically the full value of our exports to Britain after allowing for payment of freights and interest. As Mr L. A. Paish, the late British Trade Commissioner, told the Export Society in London: "You cannot expect New Zealand to buy as she did a few years ago, when her exports have fallen so much in value. She has not the sterling to pay for more imports after paying the interest on her external debt. She can 'mport more goods only if the prices nt her products rise."—Yours, etc., A. E. MANDER, General secretary, New Zealand Manufacturers' Federation. Wellington, February 7, 1934.