WELLINGTON NEWS

Hokitika Guardian, 13 August 1930, Page 2

WELLINGTON NEWS

SAFEGAURDING. WHY

(Special Correspondent.!

WELLINGTON, August 11

Britain is allegedly a free trade country in the. world. Its markets are open to all the world, and so it is a convenient- country in which to- dump foreign goods. The standard of living in Britain is higher than an any other Continental country, consequently foreigners are able to best the British in export markets. It was the Baldwin Government that first introduced safeguarding or protection for certain industries.. Motor cars and lace being two of .them. The Socialistic Government now in power rescinded these duties or rather allowed them to die off by effluxion of time. On June 28 a .monster meeting to protest against the removal of the safeguarding duties was held in Hyde Park, and addresses were delivered by leading men. Sir Henry Page Croft, M.P., who was one of the principal spe-akers, said that every minute, day and night, £SOO worth of foregin manufactures were pouring into Britain, and these £SOO worth of goods meant the employment of two foreigners all year round. Each minute two British workers were being driven to the Labour Exchange bv foreign manufactured gocds. Lord Lloyd said that he had sgen the great Lancashire cotton trade knocked out of the Eastern markets by .Tamm. America and Italy. These markets could be regained if they could produce sufficient goods to reduce the costs of production. Air L. £, Amerv, Af.P., said that wherever industry had been safeguarded there had been progress and increase of output. It had been the means of bringing new capital to Industry and finding greater employment. Air A. C. Radford, President of the Federation of Race and emI'froide.ry Employers’ Association, stated that under the safeguarding duties the lace .trade had done splendidly and had set an example of determination and unity to all the other trades. They had lost the fight for the time being, but next time there must be no fine calculations as to the amount of duty that- would put them on equal terms with the foreigner. The advantage must be on the side of the Englishman, and the duty must he sufficient to ensure that the foreigner -•onId not take'bread and butter from them.

The Economic Advisory Council set up by the British Government recently sent a delegate to the Continent \o inquire into the iron and .steel industries of European countries. The report of the delegation was issued as a White Paper. The delegation made a survey of the condition of the iron and steel industries in France, Belgium, Luxemberg, Germany and Czechoslovakia, and the findings are thus summarised.

Wages in eAch country are considerably lower than in Britain,'and hours of work longer, Plant has been modernised, resulting In the minimum of manning of each Unit; AVorkers were everywhere hard at work, and there is a general atmosphere of keenness and good relationships with managements; France, Belgium and Luxemberg have no unemployment. Czechoslovakia little, and Germany about 14 pet cent, with 16 per cent, on short time.

In none of the countries visited except Germany, is there any effective organisation of the workers comparable with Great Britain.

Tn France and Belgium the iron and steel industry has considerably in creased its capacity and plant lias been modernised mainly with the aid of Reparations. In France development was so great that over 260,000 foreign workers had to be imported and this continues. Luxemberg, too, has had to import 40 per cent, foreign labour, Germany is suffering from unemployment, the high rate of interest charged for borrowed money is proving a serious handicap. Average weekly earnings were: France 37s Id, Belgium 35s 6d. Luxemberg 37s 6d, Germany 50s lid and Czechoslovakia 30s od. In Britain the average is 63s Id for pigiron workers and 61s 5d for steel melting and rolling workers. Expressed in another way for every 100 s onid in Britain, Germany pays 675, France 50s. Luxemberg 495, Belgium 47s and Czechoslovakia 425,