CHILDREN'S FOOTWEAR

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LXXXI, Issue LXXXI, 15 May 1920, Page 4

CHILDREN'S FOOTWEAR

REMOVAL OF DUTY PROPOSED, At last night's meeting of the Borough Council Cr Hay ton moved: "That with a view to affording, som© measure of relief to the parents of families during the present abnorKial times, and taking into consideration the fact that .New Zealand1 manufacturers are unable to cope with the demand for adulfc footwear, that the Government be requested to immediately take the necsssary steps for the removal «f the duty off children.^ footwear.''

Cr. Hayton saidx that if this duty of--6d per pair, and 15< per cent. ssdditioisai were removed, the oomnarativs coat of footwear for a child?, up to twelve year.* <*f- age would be eoual to infaat footwear which was admitted into the country free. They frequently received copies of EesolutionsS from otter befcough councils suggesting different forms of relief, and? he saw no reason why they should, nofc in this instance take the initiative. On going into the m&4cer with a mans in the boot trade, he had found- that the duty ore ehildre&'s boots-amounted to 3s 6d ia the £. It appeased that a child of four or 6*e years vrofe- oat an average? size «n en, »n(d for this size the dut^r of 6d p«* pair and-15-per cent, was p&snVe. Eia resolution aimed! at the admission oft Boots for children up to twelve and thir%enn years? of age, and up t® size one free. The: present time was vary oppor- j tunefor Bringing his proposal ikio operation,- for) Dominion manufacturers were unabie?to cope with the orders for adult footwear.. He would also move that eopies^of t&e resolution Resent to the various-lbcal: Bodies for endorsement, andf tb the Frime Minister. ' :

Cri'GiiimHing; seconded. Or: Reid'.said* they knew that;a reduction '.was necessary in some tEings, but Be dJdfnqt know .whether chli.fren'3 footwear was one. It was very haraJ for a man with a? family whose earnings ranged^ffom Tiato 16s per day tonrake his m«m©y. go round, but for some cases of higirpricesrhe feared the manufacturers were to blame. He was dou&tful if the removal of the duty wotrid altogether meet the case.

Cr. Osboraer aeked if Cr. Haytfcn could inform them as to the -umber of pairs of'childtea's boots imoorted?

Cr. Hayton-. No. But the bu'k «f children's footwear was imported. HTs information was-from a v^tn in the line*, and he said" that the -fleet o f the removar of the duty would undoubtedly be a reduction of the cost to the users.

The; Mayor said that anything thai* would 'giwredief to the parents of larger families would have his support, bufc this would* assist the man with one1 child only as well. He was of the? opinion" that children should do as they had done before—go without bootsv This would" be one way to bring down; prices-r Things were coming to such a pass that something would have to be* done' tb" Bring down prices, and he thought the Best way was to refuse to buy. One thing he could not understand) Vas the- high prices of boots madein New Zealand, where the manufacturer was so- favored. If they had 'to« pay £2 10s or £3 for a pair of New Zealand-made1 boots they wanted' to know why.

Cr Hayton said that up to size seven children's boote were admitted free, and* with sizes above that which bore the duty the prices jumped up. Cr. Lewis thought they did not have sufficient knowledge of the matter to warrant any action. The duty may be put on- to protect the New Zealand manufacturer. He suggested that thematter be referred to the Chamber of Commerce.

Cr O^Borne suggested writing to the Federated! Bootmakers, Wellington, for information.

Cr Cameron: Tf the duty was put'on to protect the manufacturers, we will have; .the boot operatives up in arms. On t"h'e- otter hand, there was the lossof revenue to consider.

Cr-G'ormTey "agreed with Cr. Hayton. He took it that his information was* sound', and it would do no harm to send'out the resolution. It was a stepin- the- right direction, and! may havethe desired effect.

Cr Joll said he would like to knowwhere' tie- information came from.

Cr Hayton said he could only say that it came from a man who knew andvhb was trying to do something along-th:e lines-of the resolution.

T&e motion was carried.