TARIFF COMMISSION

Grey River Argus, 9 June 1933, Page 5

TARIFF COMMISSION

PREFERENTIAL RELIEF For British Goods (L’<’r Press Association). WELLINGTON, June 8. Evidence before the Tariff Connuis sion was given to-day by representd’ lives of various importing firms. It was represented that the duties on watchmakers’ tools were excessive. Claude B. Willis, representative of John Duthie and Co., asked for tho removal of 20 per cent, duty on electrically we’ded fabric wire made in .England. Air Pascoe asked whether importers could compete with Australia if the exchange was at par Witness: Yes. Professor Alurphy asked whether, if ct.rruncv were stabilised, they would not be content to p<iy the duty. Air Willis: Yes. Professor Alurphy: A’ou are asking for incremental tariff adjustments to meet the currency difficulties. Air Wi'-lis: It has be-'n doue. Professor Alurphy said he wanted to get the point clearly, as this might be the basis of contention by a number of business men coming before lh,i Commission. It would be difficult

to have a concertina tariff to meet variations in the value of currency. Embarrassments of this kind W’rc the price the community i>aid for a variable monetary standard. Air Willis said the object of the 01-; tuwa Conference was to foster trade with England. Professor Alurphy said they would get a nice iuter-Empiru kettle of fish if they commenced making preferential tariffs for difi’cr’nt. parts of the Empire. Francis Joseph Alillur, managing director of Aliller--and Ahern, said ho was seeking a reduction from 20 per cent, to five p<*r cent, in duty on woollen piuce goods from the United Kingdom. To a question, be said there were certain lin<’s not procurable in New Zealand Captain Colbcck, representing tho Farmers’ Union, asked whether he should ask a question as to the pro tectivc effect of the exchange rate. • Professor Alurphy said th c matter was one of economic theory, and it was not likelv a layman would be able to give a satisfactory answer. While exchange was depreciating there was a protective efih'ct, but once it had depreciated, internal adjustments took place. Some of these, such as interest rates, took time, but when there was re adjustment, the effect of the rate was lost. Thu time it took for adjustments to take place was a question of fad. He asked whether tho goods on ntione I were high grade luxury I.ih's suitable lor a revenue tariff. Air Miller: Yes Professor Alurphy: A'our real objection js more against the high exchange than the high tariff Air Aliller: Of course we have to include* the exchange rate in landing charges. Professor Alurphy; If the exchange rate were lifted, would you have any (dijection to duty being replaced • Mr Milh’r: No. Professor Alurphy: .You will ivalise the exchange rate is a fugitive phenomenon. It we had a concertina tariff it would be difficu?- to administer. Don’t you think that one of rhe essentials in tariff is its certaiu'y ? Air Aliller: Yes, I ’hat is so. Answer Sought PARCHMENT ’ CONCERTINAS. (P<’r Press Association). WELLINGTON, Juno 8. Ernest Alfred Little, a director in Joseph Nathan and Coy., Ltd., made representations regarding the British vegetable parchment paper agency, which is held by his firm, and asked that a tariff be imposed on the foreign article, at such a ratu as to protect the British paper from undercutting by foreigners. Representations for a reduction of duties on concertinas, and band instruments were made by James Inirio, Tardc Secretary of the Salvation Army. “Thc concertina is practically the official organ of tho Salvation Army,” said Air Inirio, ” as it is used almost exclusively by our organisation.’’ Professor Alurphy: I expect they use it in some places of which you do not altogether approve—l refer to jazz dances (Laughter). The hearing was adjourned. AUSTRALIAN DISSENSIONS. CANBERRA, June 8. Only the support of both section oj the Labour opposition saved the Government from defeat in the Senate. Supported by seven United Australian Party Senators, the Country Party amendment to a motion for the* first reading of tho Customs Tariff Bill, was defeated by 15 to 12. The amendment sought tho return of the Bill to the House, with a request that the duties against British goods should be reduced to the level of the 1921-30 tariff, in all cases where they had been raised above that level, without a report from the Tariff Board.