Minister attacked after dumping charge dropped

Press, 24 April 1986, Page 16

Minister attacked after dumping charge dropped

PA Wellington The Opposition has charged the Minister of Customs, Mrs Shields, with incompetence, after the withdrawal of dumping duty on Fosters beer. After the Opposition had forced a snap debate in Parliament on Tuesday, its associate trade and industry spokesman, Mr J. A. Banks (Nat, Whangarei), accused Mrs Shields and her officials of not dealing with the "wholesale” dumping of foreign goods in New Zealand. Last September Mrs Shields had said she believed existing dumping legislation would deal with any foreseeable problems, he said. But that clearly was not the case in the heavy engineering, liquor and other industries worried about dumping, especially from Australia. The Customs Department imposed the duty of about $1.21 a case on Fosters lager exports after investigating a dumping complaint laid by Dominion Breweries and Lion Breweries. On Monday, Mrs Shields said she had decided to revoke the Gazette notice on the duty. Legislation dealing with the dumping of overseas goods would also be reviewed. Counsel for the Minister told the High Court in Wellington of deficiencies in steps taken to impose the dumping duty and in’ the material on which the Minister based her decision.

Mr Banks said the incompetence of Mrs Shields’ staff had cost $20,000 and was demonstrated by their inability to fill out the necessary forms correctly. “I want to know from the Minister why she hasn’t frogmarched that official or those officials before her in her Beehive suite and told them where to go. "Are those same incompetent officials going to prepare anti-dumping legislation that is going to have teeth?” Mrs Shields said that the relevant legislation, which had been introduced by the previous National Government, now needed to be tightened. Plans for such a review had been under way for some months.

It would clarify some of the difficulties that were being experienced, which were an unhappy inheritance from the previous Administration, she said. Mrs Shields admitted that her department lacked some experience in dealing with dumping investigations. She had been dissatisfied at the way officers had been thrust into a relatively new area. More officers would now be seconded and sufficient training given to ensure they would be able to deal effectively with any dumping cases that arose, she said. The Opposition spokesman on trade and industry, Mr P. R. Burdon (Nat., Fendalton) said dumping was now “wide open” because of incompetence in Mrs Shields’

department and an apparent legislative defect. The Minister of Trade and Industry, Mr Caygill, said that for dumping to be proved, it must be shown the goods were being sold in New Zealand either for less than in their domestic markets or for less than they cost to produce. It also had to be shown the New Zealand industry was suffering and it was on that ground the matter had fallen down, he; said. Mr Caygill said the legislation had applied for only three years and had not been subject to much interpretation from the courts. “It is something we have learned from; it is no cause for alarm or despondancy that we are going on ... to review the legislation.”