BOTTLES AND JARS

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 21, 25 July 1934, Page 5

BOTTLES AND JARS

THE NEW TARIFF

REPRESENTATIONS MADE

An appeal "by the Australian Glass Manufacturers' Company, Ltd., Auckland, fiom the iindiiig of the Tariff Commission was made to the Minister of Customs (the Right Hon J. G. (Joaios) yesterday. The appeal was uiadu <m the grounds that the Commission had failed to appreciate two fundamental facts relating to the industry. 1 tt was stated that it' the duty was lowered, as proposed, the United King-1 dom glass manufacturers would be ablo to "pick the eyes out of the market." They would certainly not endeavour to compete in the whole of the Dominion market, and would be content to take the business of the largest "users, thus" saving themselves the heavy- ;cost of selling and distributing; throughput the whole of the Dominion, and supplying the smaller. users;; They would leave all the more costly and less portion of the business to the' appellants. In the glass industry'it'-* was the largo order which made it possible to meet small orders economically. The second'point emphasised was that in glassworks, perhaps more markedly than in any other industry, a reduction of output meant an immediate increase in costs of production. In-the industry j production costs varied in ratio to the number of hours that the furnaces were in opeiation duiing a year, as standing chaigeb and overhead had to be distiibuted each yeai o\er the number of weeks m the year that the lurnace.s wore in operation. If the Commission had concluded that a duty of 20 per cent, would equalise costs between the New Zealand ihdustiy (with its. present output) and the industry in the United Kingdom, and if the lowering of duties to 20 per cent, would, as it would undoubtedly, result in the United Kingdom taking busi ness from New Zealand and reducing output, then it was obvious that New Zealand's costs' being increased, the duty of 20 per cent, would be insufficient1 to equalise costs' between the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Dealing with bottles of; under onooilnco capacity, it was stated that the company was now capable of meeting the Dominion demand. They were, however, able to sell only a small proportion, as . the Japanese had captured practically the' greater part of the 'market. It was submitted that,no distinction should 1)0 made legarding capacity. I Mr. W. J. Jordan (Labour, :Mahu kau) pointed out that when the previous tariff revision was made the- company was not making the smaller bottles. Mr. \V. Keins, manager of tho company, said that it might pay the company to go to England and manufacture bottles for New Zealand Mr. Coatcs: Would 3 per cent, do all that? Mr. Kerns: Yes, I'm afraid it would. Ho quoted a case where tho company had enabled tho Ijlow Zealand public to buy a bottlo at threepence, tho imported price of which had been Is 6d. Ho also emphasised that British bottles were laigely made of foioign raw material. Mr. L. .Elliott; secretary of the company, said that practically all the small bottles previously camo fiom Australia, but Japan was beating Australia in' Australia and would probably beat the New Zealand company. He contended that the company had helped many industries in New Zealand. _ . Tho Minister promised to consider the representations. Mr. W. E. cPairy (Labour, Auckland Central) was also p/esent at the deputation. t