QUOTA OR TARIFF?

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 221, 1 September 1932, Page 9

QUOTA OR TARIFF?

PROTECTING HOME PRODUCER COMPETITION BY DOMINIONS. DISCUSSION BY MEAT BOARD. (By Telegraph —Special to “Tribune”) Wellington, August 31. “1 would much prefer to have seen tariffs imposed against foreigners than the quqta system,” said Mr James Begg, of Dunedin, a member of the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board, when speaking at the annual meeting to-day “The quota system can pan out all right, but there is an element of danger about it. The grower at home is just like us: he grows lambs and wants to market them at the best price he can get. New Zealand lamb goes into competition with his lamb just as much as the Argentine product does.” Mr Begg said that the grower of Britain might press for a quota against New Zealand in the future if he saw the advantage that, was to be gained from it. The British grower of lamb loved New Zealand lamb just as much as the Canterbury farmer loved Australian wheat. (Laughter). He felt that there was a risk attached to the quota system, but he was pleased to know that the Ottawa Conference had approved of the principle of trade within the Empire.

Remarking that New Zealand was practically pledged to lower its duties against British manufactures, Mr Begg said that that was all to the good, as it would lower the costs to the farmers. Speaking later, the acting-chairman of the board (Mr T. A. Duncan) said that he was very much in favour of the quota system. Mr A. V. S. Reed (Hawke’s Bay) said that sheep farmers in his district were opposed to the quota, as they believed it would be dangerous and might be used against them. Mr J. H. Joll (Hawke’s Bay) thought that good would come out of the agreements. He thought the monetary problem should be solved. Mr Duncan said that in his view the quota system was no more dangerous than a tariff. “They can use a tariff system against us just as much as they can use the quota,” declared Mr Duncan