Import Controls

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28490, 21 January 1958, Page 3

Import Controls

Sir,—“Contented Housewife." in the effort to be withering, only succeeds in being irrelevant. Her previous letter said in effect.

“Think of those poor saps in England practically starving during the war, while, thanks to our Labour Government, we had plenty. Weren’t we clever?” A point of view which decent people whether Kiwis or Pommies, could only regard with disgust. My answer simply said that the bounty of nature was more 9to be commended than political policy in this particular connexion, and I gave my reasons for this, statement. All honour is due to the Dominions for sending us food, when we most needed it, but in return we sent them our manufactures, in the same spirit of goodwill. I fear “Contented Housewife” has become just a little flown on all this publicity, but unless she expresses herself with more moderation she will, like so many unbalanced partisans, do her cause more harm than good.—Yours, etc., ENGLISH HOUSEWIFE. January 20, 1957.

Sir, —A correspondent asks. “What would have happened if the Tory Government had been returned to power?” General opinion says that wages would have been slashed and import controls i r '-.josed. to the tune of “overseas markets have fallen.” Cost of living and other high costs would still have 4 prevailed. Tory governments, past and present, have always placed profits, wars and social aspirations before the needs of the working people. This has amply beeh proved. In the present case, under the Tory Government, New Zealand would probably have gone bankrupt and America, s.iaybe, stepped in, and taken over the country’s finance. - Yours, etc., FINANCE. January 20, 1958.

Sir,—ln the control of our national exp aditure some temporary measures were necessary, but, knowing Mr Nash’s love of controls, “temporary” seems out of the question. He ■ should in the first place apply controls to Government imports and look into departmental expenditure. Mr Nash will learn that people will not submit to the former regimentation associated with the previous controls and he will learn that the nations that purchase our primary products will not continue to buy them unless we purchase their manufactured goods. If the previous Government had remained in power the whole matter would have been cleared up without all the present fuss. —Yours, etc., ONLOOKER. Jar-'ary 20, 1958. Sir, —The coverage of 25 per cent, on 1956 year’s importing licences is very drastic. No doubt some total abolition of unnecessary luxury goods would have given the desired result; every shop seems to have its quota of foreign junk goods and we have the luxury lines, i.e., cars, jewellery, etc., and some of these from Communist countries. As the Government is the largest importer does this restriction apply to government departments? The impact of this legislation will be most severely felt by the worker—those who are being put off and those who are having to lose overtime. How easy for Mr Nash and Mr Walsh to say they will be found other jobs; it will break up many homes when the breadwinner has to go away, and maybe he will be a round peg in a square hole. I wonder if some of your correspondents have given thought to the loss sustained by the man , who started business since 1956 , and who will get no import licence. This man loses his living. What would Labour supporters have to say if Britain cut imports from this country by 25 per cent? —Yours, etc..

SUPERANNUITANT. January 20, 1957.