EMPIRE SUGAR

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 192, 9 May 1924, Page 7

EMPIRE SUGAR

PROPOSAL TO STABILISE PREFERENCE DEFEATED IN HOUSE OF COMMONS RESPONSIBILITIES TO TROPICAL CROWN COLONIES < A proposal to stabilise preference on Empire sugar at’ 4s. 3id. per hundredweight was rejected by the House of Commons, notwithstanding strong pleas made on behalf of the tropical Crown Colonies concerned. The Chancellor of the Exchequer declared that the total Empire production of sugar had increased by only 10 per oent. in the three years since preference began to operate. By Telegraph—Press Association. —COPYRIGHT, London, May 4. A proposal to stabilise preference on Empire sugar at 4s. 3Jd. per hun-d?ed-weight for one year, instead of for ten years, as recommended by the Imperial Conference, was made in an amendment by Sir William MitchellThomson in the course of the Budget discussion. The mover advanced a strong plea on behalf of the Crown Colonies specially concerned. He pointed out that the effect of the Budget proposals would be to reduce the preference proposals to Is. llid. per hundred-weight. He contended that, preference m the past had resulted in an increase of Empire production, from 18 per cent, of the world’s production in 1913 to 22 per cent, last year. He compared the preference of 335. lOd. per ton given by Britain to the West Indies with the £lO ss. given by the United States to Porto Rico. He maintained that expansion of the Empire s sugar industry was essential on political, fiscal. commercial, and Imperial grounds. Captain Ormsby-Gore, in seconding the amendment, maintained that the Colonial Secretary had failed lamentably in not impressing on file Chancellor the consideration of the interests of the West Indies and Mauritius. which demanded stabilisation of preference. The worst, feature of the Budget was its repudiation of responsibilities to the tropical Crown colonies and the sugar-growing colonies Mr. Philip Snowden, Chancellor of the Excheoncr. in opposing the amendment, said that the total Empire production of sugar had only increased bv 10 per cent, in the three years since preference began to operate, while nt the West Indies, for which a special plea was being entered, the total had actually decreased. Preference simply meant a subsidy by the British faxDavers to the West Indian niaiiters. It had disastrously reduced tho production of sugar within the Empire by 25 per cent. The amendment was rejected by -.43 votes to 182. Lord Percy, on behalf of the Opposition, protested that the Government was acting contrary to its pieego that the Hous'e of Commons . could take a free vote on the Economic Conference resolutions. Mr. Graham, on behalf of the Government, replied that the pledce sole.lv concerned the forthcoming debate on the. Imperial Conference, regarding which a free vote would be allowed. —Reuter. SUGAR DUTY RESOLUTION CONFIRMED London. Mar 7. The sugar duty resolution was con-firmed.—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.