STRONG OPPOSITION
AGREEMENT WITH GERMANY HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE. CONSERVATIVE RESENTMENT. “INADEQUATE CONCESSIONS:” , (United Press Association —By Electric Telegraph,— Copyright.) (Received 9 a.m.) LONDON, May 2. Discussion on the Anglo-German j trade agreement was continued in committee in the House of Commons today. The three Birmingham members strongly attacked' the agreement, • on the ground that Mr Rnnciman, in the interests of the coal industry, had almost lightly thrown overboard the Paris advantages so recently given to small industries in the Birmingham district. The owners of those industries- were just preparing to take full advantage 1 of the new tariffs, and in 301110 cases had built new factories for the purpose, when Mr Rnnciman undertook to reduce their protection.
The in embers contended that the eoal advantage obtained only gave Britain rights she had previously enjoyed under the quota agreement, whir'll Germany had broken since. Mr Runciman, in replying, said it had been made clear during the Paris debates that the new duties were intended to serve as a bargaiifing power, which was an essential .part of the Government’s tariff policy. He had driven the hardest bargain obtainable. The advantages to tne coal industry outweighed the advantages to the eight or. ten small industries affected, which still would retain reasonable protection. The Government must have the confidence of the House, for negotiations, or trade agreements would be impossible.
Sir Austen . Chamberlain’s motion was defeated by 2(in votes to 80.
A number of Conservatives, headed by 'Mr Amcry, Sir H. Page-Croft (Bournemouth), Mr Hannon, and Sir Basil Peto (Barnstaple) tabled a motion for the rejection of the agreement, on the ground that inadequate concessions were obtained under its provisions.
The extent of the Conservative revolt against the agreement came as a surprise. Fifty Voted against the Government and about 100 others abstained from voting.
Not only the German 'agreement, but the Danish and Argentine pacts were equally criticised by different sections.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19330503.2.37
Bibliographic details
Northern Advocate, 3 May 1933, Page 5
Word Count
319STRONG OPPOSITION Northern Advocate, 3 May 1933, Page 5
Using This Item
NZME is the copyright owner for the Northern Advocate. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of NZME. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.