N,Z. Wool Textile Policy Hit

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30426, 28 April 1964, Page 13

N,Z. Wool Textile Policy Hit

(Special Crspdt. N.ZPA.)

LONDON, April 27. Whatever might be happening in BritishNew Zealand trade in other fields, British wool textiles were having a sorry time in the New Zealand market, says the “Yorkshire Post’s” wool correspondent. The “disturbing” export figures, be adds, might seem to do less than justice to a British industry which bought more than a quarter of New Zealand’s entire wool clip, and in so doing acquired nearly as much as any other two countries. “Even so,” says the correspondent, “there could be

little complaint on this' score alone if it could be shown that New Zealand possessed an efficient manufacturing

industry capable of supplying domestic requirements.” The British textile industry, he goes on, submitted that in spite of tariff, and quota protection, the domestic industry in New Zealand had been unable or Unwilling to produce certain categories of wool textiles to replace excluded imports. As a result, wool consumption in • the Dominion had been substantially reduced. People Deprived

“New Zealand Government policy in this matter has aroused much criticism from New Zealanders, who find themselves .krgely deprived of British goods of a style and quality to which they have been accustomed over

the years. Local woolgrowers also regard it as a threat to consumption of . wool on which the country’s prosperity depends. “A storm of local controversy has impelled the New Zealand Government to initiate a tariff inquiry to determine, among other things, the competitive efficiency of the domestic industry which enjoys a high degree of protection.” ■ The correspondent says that the contention of the New Zealand. Department df Industry and Commerce that domestic wool textile mills need not only tariff but qouta protection—a departmental but not necessarily a Government view—was meeting strong opposition within Britain. He pointed out that G.A.T.T., to which New Zealand subscribed, laid it down

that protection of industry must as a general policy be by tariffs, but that to correct a payments imbalance, temporary use might be made of quotas. “New Zealand has availed herself of this latter proviso. In four of the last six years she has achieved a payments balance surplus but, fgr from modifying wool textile import restrictions imposed as an emergency measure, she has made them—according to the British brief presented to the New Zealand inquiry—progressively more severe. “This, it is contended, is not only contrary to GATT, principles but contrary to the spirit of the British-New Zealand agreement Of 1958 which pledged both to continue their traditional policy of expanding trade between the two countries,” says the correspondent.