TRADE EMBARGO

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 113, 6 February 1935, Page 4

TRADE EMBARGO

Retaliation Methods Suggested IRON AND STEEL TARIFFS Members of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce at the executive meeting last night received a communication from the New Zealand associated chambers suggesting that In the Australian potato embargo problem “some other method of retaliation” may have to be sought in place of New Zealand’s present citrus fruit tariff. At the end of the discussion that followed it was decided to await the report of the associated chambers’ tariff committee. The associated chambers’ motion, which was carried by the latest meeting of its executive, was as follows:— “That regarding the general trade position, the government should be urged to push on energetically with trade negotiations with Australia, and that if suitable reciprocal arrangements could not be- completed early, the embargo on citrus fruits should be lifted, and some other method of retaliation sought.’” “Not Much Consideration,” “The action of the Ministers of Finance and Commerce, in taking up such a strong attitude as they did in their talks with the Trade Minister of the Commonwealth should be commended.” stated Mr. J. T. Martin. “We know from experience that Australia in these negotiations doesn’t give way and that it sticks most tenaciously to its objectives without much consideration for others. The truth is that there are more than twice the purchases made by us in Australia than by Australians in New Zealand. Unless Australia gives way in reference to the potato embargoes we will not give way in our embargo on citrus fruit.” Mr. W. M. Heinemann: Why shouldn't our embargo be extended to other trade products? Mr. A. Leslie Wall criticised a suggestion that the citrus fruit embargo should be lifted because of Australia’s important position in the citrus trade. He said that would have the effect of giving in tp Australia probably without the return' required. “We might take the stand that the New Zealand embargo should be lifted off Australian fruits simultaneously with the imposition of an equivalent restriction on, say, iron and steel imported from Australia until such time as Australia, removes her embargo on our potatoes,” suggested Mr. P. E. Pattrick. Mr. Wall: The iron and steel trade of Great Britain is suffering very strongly at the present time. Mr. J. Pearce Luke said he thought the motion had been rather unfortunately worde.d. “Full of Difficulties.” Mr. Heinemann: I take it the whole difficulty with iron arid steel is the difference of exchange with England. How are you going to get along with that?. “The position is full of difficulties,” remarked Mr. C. J. B. Norwood. “It would be a big thing to put an embargo on Australian iron and steel because it would be so far-reaching. So many of the products we take would be involved. Even now Australia is having to pay a pretty big penalty in not letting our potatoes through. With them it seems a political affair. “In replying to Australia we have imposed an embargo of a like kind to her own. It is not sufficient to say ‘We will take off the embargo on citrus fruits because of their necessity to us,” and put it on something else. It is necessary to find something for it to lie put on that will not create a commercial war between us. That would give rise to publicity all over the world. We are liable to be touching on the tariff schedule and raising many difficulties.”

Mr. Heinemann: During the whole of this period, if I may say so, a lot of time has been lost by the New Zealand Government.

Mr. Martin: The New Zealand Government has done everything -it possibly could. It is the Australian Government that will not give way. Members agreed with Mr. J. Pearce Luke when he said the best thing was, before approaching the Government, to await the report of the associated chambers’ committee set up to go into the matter.