CHEAPER SUGAR.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13170, 7 May 1906, Page 6

CHEAPER SUGAR.

The report of the views.of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce on the Premier's proposed tariff-reductions would (says the New Zealand Times) seem to' indicate that the Auckland people think the Premier favours a "reduction on sugar of 3s a cwt." Such a misconception would be excusable, because one of the Christchurch papers, in its report of, Mr. Seddon's speech at Rangiora, contained a statement to that effect, and this was wired to papers all over the colony. That it is a misconception seems to be clear,, for the following reasons :—(1) The other Christchurch paper reports the Premier as advocating a reduction of the sugar duty " to 3s;" (2) if the proposed reduction is to 3s, the present duty being 4s 8d per. cwt, ; ,the reduction will be Is 8(1 per cwt, or five-fourteenths of the pre- ! sent, duty. The duty collected on sugar, molasses, and treacle during the financial year. 1905-6, was £199,212, and five-four-teenths of this- is £71,147, which is the actual reduction or loss of revenue that will result from a reduction of Is 8d in the duty. That the Premier contemplated a reduction, of Is 8d is at least strongly indicated by his statement, reported at the same time, that the reduction would mean a. sum of £69,058. The difference between the Premier's figure cs to loss of revenue and our corresponding figure (£71,147) is easily accounted for by the probability that the Premier was calculating on the Customs total for the calendar year, while the Times' calculations are based on the financial year. The approximate correspondence of the two sums, and the -report of one of the Christchurch papers, are overwhelming evidence to the'fact that the Premier meant a reduction of Is Bd, not 3s, in the sugar duty. A reduction of 3s (or considerably . more than half the present duty) would mean a . revenue ioss of about £128,000, instead of , £69,058. |