OTTAWA TREATY

Evening Star, Issue 21640, 8 February 1934, Page 13

OTTAWA TREATY

dominion's privileges and OBLIGATIONS Air J. Hislop, of Auckland, who represents the United Kingdom manufacturers on the executive of the New Zealand Producers’ and United Kingdom Manufacturers’ Reciprocal Trade Federation, was associated with Air IV. Goodfellow, chairman of the Auckland branch, in an address to members oi the local branch yesterday afternoon. Air Hislop dealt at some length with tlie privileges and obligations of New Zealand under the Ottawa Treaty. He laid stress on the fact that the Ottawa agreement was the beginning of an entirely new trade era between Great. Britain and her Empire countries. He pointed out that the British Import Duties Act of 1932 definitely pul an end to the unconditional free market that had been enjoyed by the dominion:in Great Britain during the past sixty years. Britain had met the tariff walls of the dominions by putting a fence around her market, leaving only a gate marked “ via the Ottawa agreement, and it was New Zealand’s responsibility to see this gate was kept open, and il was to ask their aid towards this end that -they were there that day. He maintained that Britain’s policy; according to the treaty, was that in • return for her free market and certain preferential treatment referred to in schedule B that New Zealand was to abolish ail purely revenue tariffs. This principle was established by Britain’s demand that New Zealand should remove the surtax of 9-Klths and tlie small 3 per cent primage duty levied even on goods, which were otherwise tree from all tariff. Also under clause 7 oi the agreement it was beyond the power of New Zealand to levy a tariff on British goods unless similar goods were being produced in New Zealand with reasonable opportunity of success. Nor- could New Zealand shelter behind Protection, so high as to debar Britain from becoming n domestic competitor. Tlie speaker expressed surprise that, during the sitting of the Tariff Coinmission. traders under disabilities of high tariffs approached the commission asking for a reduction of these, as the goods in question were not .manufactured in New Zealand, ho claimed that those firms could have demanded! of the 'Commission the total abolition of the tariff. The Ottawa agreement had been ratified by the House of Commons and the New Zealand Parliament. It was idle, therefore, to discuss the private opinions of British or New Zealand Ministers as to what should be done In dealing with the question of revenue, Air Hislop stated that he would never believe that New Zealand would so far forget her dignity and duty as to permit tlie needs of revenue Lo fnlluenco her in giving effect to the Ottawa agreement. Tlie Ottawa agreement was too important a milestone on the commercial . road between tlie Afutherland and this dominion to be treated as a scrap of paper, and the honour of New Zealand was too sacred a tiling ro be treated with-indifference for the mere needs of revenue. The Ottawa agreement, Air Hislop stated, reflected the greatest possible credit upon the Government of this country and those responsible for its creation. The New Zealand delegation, headed by Air J. G. Contes, made an excellent bargain in the interests of New Zealand, and it was an instrument that, if given full opportunity of development, would bring about bettor trading conditions between Great Britain and this dominion while not in any way impairing tlie full economic development of tlie industries of either country.