IMPERIAL TRADE PREFERENCE

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3011, 23 February 1917, Page 5

IMPERIAL TRADE PREFERENCE

NEW ZEALAND STATESMEN'S VIEWS MR. MASSEY WELCOMES THE REPORT (Rec. February 22, 5.5 p.m.) London. February 21. Mr. Massey, interviewed, said that the report of Lord Balfour of Burleigh's Committee was an important indicatiqn of the change in. public opinion that had been brought about by the war. The Dominions would welcome tho report in the hope that Legislative effect would be given to it in the near future, espeoially as it was a measure of justice to the overseas oitizena of the Empire. ■It would promote unity, and make tho Empire independent of foreign countries as regards food stuffs.

Sir Josoph Ward said that after fifteen years of advocacy of Imperial preference he was highly gratified at the report, which reflected the views pf opposite shades of opinions on Free Trade and Protection, as represented in the personnel of the committee. It was inconceivable that the Motherland and the overseas Dominions would ever again be a party to the resfcorafojn of pre-waV conditions. The war had demonstrated that the Empire was now one «i<aat household.—Ans.-N.Z. Cable Assn. . . . Mr. Massey has accepted an invitation to address the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce on the expansion of New Zealand trade after the war.—Aus.N.Z. Cable Assn. PRESS OPINIONS ON COMMITTEE'S ; RESOLUTIONS STEP TOWARDS IMPERIAL . UNITY London, February 21. The "Morning Post," commenting on the report, says it should satisfy all reasonable men. The committee's reso-, lutions aim at making the Empire united, self-sufficient, and secure. The paper cannot understand Sir F, E. Smith's attitude, as the Allies cannot object to our following their example. The "Daily News" says that the report is most surprising.' No one denies that the war ia likely to cause substantial changes in commercial and Imperial relations, bub we are aeked to swallow the whole tariff reform programme. The war, presumably has not made the Dominions more willing to expose their infant industries to the full blast of British'competition. The "Daily Chronicle" says: "No ono' will disagree with Lord Balfour of Burleigh's Committee's first resolution, as to the necessity of stimulating production. Agreement upon preference to the Dominions may not be diffioultj but the third resolution, in. favour of wider duties which are to be reducible upon Dominion, products, is distinctly controversial, and involves a direot plunge into Mr. Chamberlain's Imperial preference. Mr. Chamberlain's gloomy prophecies wero not fulfilled in spite of adherence to Free Trade, but we are glad to see that the question is to be carefully re-examined. The negotiations after the war must consider our Allies, and must not hold, out a postwar threat against neutrals. Barriers against German trade after the war will drive trade to the neutrals."

The "Daily Express" states that all parties are forced to agree that Imperial preference is desirable. It may make difficulties in framing trade relations with the Dominions and Britain's Allies, but the broadj)rinciple is': now accepted.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn. The "Manchester Guardian" says that the committee's recommendations concern. Britain more than the.Dominions. "We should not have thought it credible that any British Government would endeavour to transform a traditional practice before the nation had assented. It would have been, better had the Committee pursued its inquiries and given reasons for its conclusions. The Committee's obscure recommendations mean a revolution, involving Great Britain. We must have protection instead of free trade within tho Empire and preference instead of open markets for the Allies, a double tariff for neutrals, and a triple tariff for the ehemy ; who is not even mentioned. The Committee suggests—and then seems to have been ashamed of its suggestion —that these proposals are a reward_ to the Dominions for their war servioe. But our Allies have done something— even Britain has made a war contribution—and they should not be sacrificed." The f'Guardian" believes that the polioy of taking, up the Imperial cause would make the chances or suffering among the British workers even more perilous after the war than they were before the war.

The Times" in a loader says: "The report of Lord Balfour of Burleigh's Committee is a great step towards Imperial unity. Its resolutions are based on true grounds for the benefit of the whole Empire. Preference is-essential for the future safety and .closer union of the Empire after the war. An economic alliance must be independent of the enemy's raw materials and manufactures.—The "Times."

[Embodied in'the committee's resolution was a memorandum by Sir F. E. Smith, a momber of the committee, who recommended a confidential discussion with the Dominions before recommending a policy which might involve a fiscal policy towards Britain's Allies.]