TARIFF PROBLEMS

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 53, 11 September 1928, Page 14

TARIFF PROBLEMS

TOO MUCH LOBBYING AUSTRALIAN EXPERIENCE "Evening Post," 11th September. ■ Efforts made for the setting up of a scientific tariff in Australia are becoming increasingly difficult. The Tariff .Board, in its annual report just presented to the federal' Parliament, draws special attention to this problem. The necessity lor publicity in the hearing of all applications for tariff revision has resulted in the whole of the facts receiving consideration. The board, however, explains the difficulty in the way of framing a scientific tariff. It could not be expected to accept any blame for the position which existed at the time of its appointment. It appreciated the disinclination of Parliament to relegate to any authority full powers to deal with the Customs tariff. The board's powers were limited to investigation and recommendation, and it was doubtful whether any organisation would ever be clothed with greater {towers. On some important questions the Minister or Parliament had nut acted in accordance with the board's recommendations, and if the tariff on those subjects was considered to be unscientific the Tariff Board had no responsibility for it. Frequently interested parties made representations to members of Parliament to influence departure from the board's recommendation, and the weight of public evidence, and the studied recommendation of the board had been set aside. It had been a practice by persons working in the Parliamentary lobbies in the interests of their concerns to obtain assistance for their projects by bargaining for reciprocal aid—by allying one State group with another. That practice had been successful to the parties, but had proved one of the strongest factors in preventing the enactment of a well-balanced tariff. The principal object of the requirement of the Act that evidence should be given publicly had been to put an end to the use of influence. While not imputing wrongful motives to persons who engaged in that method of seeking tariff assistance, the board claimed that the representations put forward were of one side only, and has previously been rejected by the board. Another difficulty was that when alterations in tariff proposals were made in the passage of a tariff schedule through Parliament, their effect could not be fully foreseen. The board had in mind always the effects of its recommendations on other industries, but alterations made hurriedly in the heat of discussion wore liable to result in a badly balanced tariff, with consequent dislocation of industry. TARIFF WALL KEEPS RISING. •High costs of production, the report says, are one of the most serious difficulties confronting Australia. Unfortunately, increases in costs appear to have been maintained. The tariff wall was markedly rising. In 1908 there had been only eight items with ad valorem duties of 40 , per cent, or more. In the present tariff there were 259 such items. In manufacturing industries undoubtedly much of the cause of the high cost of production was due to over-capitalism, high rates of pay, short hours of labour, and other specially favourable conditions of employment and restriction of output. It was evident' that requests for increased wages and better conditions were not always based on bound principles, and , there was au apparent need for co-operation between the authorities fixing the rates of pay and the framers of the tariff. Ko doubt, also, the Customs tariff had had some influence on the high cost of production by making possible -the maintenance of a high' standard of living. The coal industry was an example of an industry not protected by Customs duties, but which reflected unusually high production costs. Its position was lamentable. Another contributing cause of high posts of production was the high rate of freight on the Australian coast. _ Many cases had been found in which manufacturers had produced commodities at reasonable cost, but the charges for distribution had made the selling prices unreasonably high. The maintenance of high costs of production and distribution was alarming, and demanded co-operative effort to discover a remedy. Complaints by the Tariff Board of lobbying,by interested parties to secure departure from the board's recommendations, were referred to the secretary of the Sydney Chamber of Manufactures (Mr. F. L. Edwards). "It is not to be wondered at if business men go direct to Parliament,' &aid Mr. Edwards. "Tariff delays are akin to the law's delays. The present method is inelastic. Manufacturers see session after Fcssion go by without attention to their clamant needs. We make careful preparation of our cases, submit them to the Customs Department, where our inquiries are frequently duplicated, then after months of delay—one case I have in mind has waited now for nine months —they are sub-mitted-to the Tariff. Board, where triplication of our own efforts are sometimes made.; No doubt it is the fault of the system, but business men cannot be blamed for going where they get the best results, and the best results are often obtained by direct.action, by going direct to Pai'liament."- .