OTTAWA’S RESULTS

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 29, 28 October 1932, Page 11

OTTAWA’S RESULTS

Migration of Dominions HIGHER MARKET PRICE Discussion in Commons Official Wireless. Rugby, Oct. 26. Moving the second reading of the Ottawa Agreements Bill in the House of Commons, the Dominions Secretary, Mr. J. H. Thomas, said that the Opposition argument that nothing was done by the agreements to ease be unemployment situation was answered if in steel indirectly and in coal directly industries were aided to compete more successfully. • „ t . He asked the Labour Party to consider the future position of unemployment unless the Dominions were placed in a position to deal with the problem of migration. If they were put in a position to welcome hundreds of thousands of British people every, year, something would be done to mitigate the unemployment problem. Meat Restrictions. The British delegates had deliberately agreed to the scheme of meat restrictions as a means of Increasing wholesale prices. Unless there was such an increase there was no possible hope for the producers. Regarding Russia, he said that the British delegates had undertaken that if any nation by any particular action prevented the value of the preference being enjoyed by the Dominions, the necessary steps would be taken to give effect to the intentions of the British Government. He deplored that the Irish Free State by her own action was depriving herself of the benefits of the Ottawa agreements, and expressed the Government’s hope that this would only be temporary. Rejection Moved. The wireless message is supplemented by a Press Association cablegram, which states that Mr. W. Lunn (Lab.) moved the rejection of the Bill on behalf of Labour, on the ground that it increased the burden of indirect taxation and would do nothing to solve the unemployment problem. He said that the Ottawa agreements would not give work to a single man, but had strangled the World Economic Conference beforehand. Whereas international co-opera-tion was required, we were setting out on an economic war which might lead to a blood feud, which would destroy civilisation. Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister, Secretary of State for the Colonies, said that the colonies had reasons for satisfaction in the Ottawa agreements. Hitherto they had received preference only from Britain, Canada, and New Zealand. Now Australia and South Africa, Newfoundland, India, and Southern Rhodesia would also give the colonies preferences. The colonies were reciprocating by giving preferences to all Empire goods. Mr. H. Holdsworth (L.) said that nobody in the woollen industry expected increased trade from the Ottawa agreements. Canada had given Bradford a five-foot wall to jump instead of a wall as high as a house. She could jump neither. The Canadian tariffs were absolutely prohibitive. A BEGINNING MADE

Restoration of World Trade Official Wireless. Rugby, Oct. 26. Referring to the argument adduced during the debate on the Ottawa Conference that the tariff agreements there reached between nations of the British Empire might impede the conclusion of more general agreements for the restoration of world trade, “The Times” to-day says:— “The common-sense view is that nothing would ever be done to revive trade, if it were to wait upon a worldwide agreement. A beginning has been made, and no better beginning could be made than between the members of the British Commonwealth. They cannot, even if they would, be exclusive corporations. But a solid quarter of the population of the world can make a powerful contribution to the recovery of the whole.” The Trade Union Council passed a resolution opposing the Ottawa agreements. TRADE WITHIN EMPIRE Basis for Improvement London, Oct. 26. In the House of Lords, Lord Arnold (Lab.) drew attention, to the Ottawa Conference, which he described as a supreme failure owing to Canada’s refusal to agree to progressive liberation of trade within the Empire. A complete breakdown was avoided only by Britain accepting incredibly unfair and lop-sided provisions. Lord Elibank said that Lord Arnold had failed to awake to the new era. “Free trade,” he said, “as we knew it, is fortunately dead. Future issues only concern high or low tariffs and preferences.” Lord Beaverbrook: “There are no sacrifices about the Ottawa agreements, which benefit the peoples both of Britain and the Dominions.” He regretted that the agreements did not go further in the direction of free trade within the Empire, an ideal which he was sure would ultimately be realised. He strongly favoured a duty on foreign meat. Lord Hailsham, replying, said _ that the Ottawa Conference did not build an edifice, but laid foundations which would result in better trade within the Empire. FREE STATE GOODS Duties Levied in Britain London, Oct. 26. It was explained authoritatively tonight that though the new Ottawa duties will not be levied on Irish Free State goods, these will be subjected from November 15 to a flat rate of 10 per cent, under the Import Duties Act. This will be additional to the 20 per cent, special duties charged on some goods to recover the retained land annuities. Thus butter, which concerns Australia and New Zealand and most other dairy products, will be liable to duties aggregating 30 per cent. The Free State Ministers refuse to comment on the situation. Other de Valeraite members of the Dail declare that they are not in the least surprised. They were prepared for the worst.