BRITISH POTTERY FOR N.Z.

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25679, 16 December 1948, Page 7

BRITISH POTTERY FOR N.Z.

IMPORT CUTS CAUSE CONCERN QUESTION ASKED IN COMMONS (Special Correspondent N.Z.P.A.) (Rec. 8 p.m.) LONDON, Dec. 15. Reductions in New Zealand imports of British pottery under the 1949 import licensing schedule are causing concern in the British pottery trade. Mr A. R. Hurd, Conservative member for Newbury in the House of Commons, recently asked the President of the Board of Trade (Mr Harold- Wilson) whether it was true that the New Zealand Government’s recent restrictions on British pottery imports had reduced the amount of pottery Britain could export to New Zealand to 8 per cent, of the volume permitted in 1938, and, if so, what action the British Government proposed to take to protect pottery exports.

Mr Wilson replied that the New Zealand Government’s programme of import licences for 1949, reflected its policy of keeping New Zealand’s imports within the limits of the Dominion’s current earnings of exchange. He knew that the schedule meant a reduction in imports of British pottery, but he could not say. to what extent. He understood, however, that the matter was being further considered by the New Zealand Government.

The British Pottery Manufacturers’ Federation has now issued a long statement sent to one of its members by its New Zealand agent, a wellknown Wellington pottery firm. According to this statement. New Zealand importers estimate that the present licences will satisfy only 12| per cent, of their requirements for next year. “The position is unanimously considered to be the worst ever imposed and the trade in this country has been stripped of its means of carrying on business,” says the statement.

The New Zealand agents suggested that British exporters should take advantage of the presence in Britain of the New Zealand Prime Minister (Mr Fraser) and lay the facts before him. Statement by Federation

The British Pottery Manufacturers’ Federation, in an accompanying statement, says: “We did not see the New Zealand Prime Minister during his visit here, because we did not think it would do any good.”

The federation explains that the reduction in New Zealand crockery imports and the general effect of the New Zealand licensing policy have been the subject of constant representations.

“At first the -British Government took the attitude that the matter was entirely a domestic one for New Zealand,” it says, “but on the other hand when representations were made to the New Zealand . Government, they implied that their policy was in soifte way bound up with that of the British Government.

“We have made representations directly to the New Zealand Minister, of Customs (Mr Nash) and we have kept rubbing it in dn all our conversations with the Board of Trade here. While our first representations appeared to produce little or no result, we think mat the last time we met the New Zealand people we left them with a clearer understanding of our problems.

“One argument we had to counter on this side is. that if New Zealand imports are cut we can divert the ware to hard currency markets in the United States. That is not so. however. The two markets are quite different and. moreover, we have not skilled decorating labour or ceramic transfers to enable us to do it.”

In conclusion the federation says that New Zealand is evidently encouraging the local pottery industry, whose wares will. compete with those of British manufacturers.