PERTINENT QUESTIONS

Evening Star, Issue 25782, 3 May 1946, Page 5

PERTINENT QUESTIONS

HEW ZEALAND'S IMPORT CONTROL POLICY AGREEMENT WjTH BRITAIN NOT HONOURED LONDON, May 2. Questions on New Zealand’s import control policy are to be asked Mr Nash when he addresses the London Chamber of Commerce, probably toward the end of this month. At the annual meeting of the chamber’s Australian and New Zealand section there was a general discussion on the subject, and though it was felt there were certain objections which could he made, it was also felt it was not the responsibility of the London Chamber to do so. Jt was the opinion of Mr John McLean, chairman of the council, said Mr A. de V. Leigh, who is secretary, that there might be a tendency to get the London Chamber to say things on the subject that might be used as political ammunition, which would be undesirable. There were certain tendentious questions associated with the sublect, and if the London Chamber, which carried a good deal of weight, voiced an opinion thereon it might be suggested that it was speaking for Britain. One question was whether New Zealand had carried out its _ undertaking under the merorandum signed by Mr Nash in London in July, 1939, but, said Mr Leigh, it was not for the London Chamber to say whether New Zealand had carried out its bargain or not, but for the British Government. POSITION CHANGED. While agreeing wijih Mr Leigh. Mr S. Jacobs said that iflit were necessary to answer the question on the memorandum, it was known that the New Zealand Government had not carried out its undertaking. But the memorandum had been signed in 1939. and the position had radically changed during the war. He felt that what the chamber desired was to get Mr Nash to give a fresh exposition on the matter and throw a fresh picture on the screen. He was particularly interested in the question whether New Zealand’s exchange rate should be continued. Mr B. J.- Large said exporters fqlt that the New Zealand Government had not lived up to its promises, but at the same time the hazardous and serious nature of the war had caused many countries to improvise local production, and therefore nothing co.uld be held against New Zealand for not carrying out its undertaking. “They could not have carried it out, and I do not think we should venture an opinion as to what happened in the past.” In a general discussion it was stated that there were certain commodities which Britain could ship to New Zealand, but which the Government would not allow to be imported. This led Mr F. C. (Brown Douglas to state:— “ Somebody has got to voice an opinion on this subject, hut I do not think the British Government will do it.” The Board of Trade would say it was a domestic matter for New Zealand, but actually it was also a domestic matter for Britain, for somehow or other her goods had to be absorbed. “ New Zealand has a very complicated importing system, and I do hope this will be put before Mr Nash.” Quoting figures of the present imports that are allowed, Mr. Brown said they sounded all right until they were compared with the 1938 figures, when they were found to be far below. .'“I do not feel that New Zealand is honouring her agreement of 1939. She has not done her stuff as far as our exports, are concerned, and somebody has to tell the Government.” Mr H. 0. Harries (chairman of the Australian and New Zealand section): “ I agree that someone has to tell them, but I do not think it is the London Chamber of Commerce.” SPECIAL LICENSES. Major P. S. Thomson said he agreed with Mr Leigh, and added that there was no difficulty in going to the Government to obtain special licenses to export certain lines of goods. Mr Harries-: “ I hope when you go back to New Zealand you will tell your Labour Government to take off some of its restrictions.” He added that the position could be summed up by saying New Zealand perhaps could do a little better, but now was not an opportune moment for the London Cham, her to make any statement. The meeting decided to defer further discussion on the subject until the members had had an opportunity of questioning and listening to Mr Nash.