IMPORT DUTIES BILL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21578, 25 February 1932, Page 9

IMPORT DUTIES BILL

THE DEBATE CONTINUED EXTENSION OF FREE LIST MEAT INCLUDED IN MEANTIME (United Press Association.) (By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) LONDON, February 23. (Received Feb. 24, at 7 p.m.) In the House of Commons the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr Neville Chamberlain) referring to the free list under the Import Duties Bill, said that the Government’s policy in this connection was founded on expediency. Die Government tried to judge each item on its own merits and proposed to ex tend the free list to pearls and semiprecious stones. Platinum would included with gold, silver and bullion. Esparto grass, which was used for making a certain class of paper, was also being included with woodpulp. As a result of representations it was proposed to include all metallic ores, including concentrates and residues. Copper was not produced within the Empire in sufficient quantity to fulfil the requirements of the British copper manufacturers, therefore raw copper in various forms would be free listed. Mr Chamberlain said that the Government had had difficulty in deciding about maize. It was an important foodstuff, of which we imported £10,000,000 worth every year, and two-thirds of it came from the Argentine. The duty thereon would yield £1,000,000. On the other hand, as it was largely used in the production of pigs, poultry and cattle it would be hard on the farmer. Furthermore the Argentine was a country with which it was hoped to make mutual arrangements and the Government had decided that, on the whole, it would be best to put maize on the free list. Regarding the proposal to omit meat from the free list, he said that he was chiefly concerned about the cost of living. It was at present artificially low, but it must rise. The Government had not given a pledge that it would never, under any circumstances, tax meat, but at present it regarded it as imprudent to do so.

Mr L. M. S. Amery (Con.) said that taxation on meat would yield eight times as much as on maize. The Argentine had no other market for her meat but Britain, a duty of a halfpenny per pound would be borne by the producer, and not by the British consumer. The British Ministers at Ottawa must- be free to agree to duties on meat. Sir Henry Page-Croft said that a duty on meat furnished greater opportunities for satisfactory agreements with the dominions than other products would. In Australia, New Zealand, and the Irish Free State meat and pig products were the uppermost consideration. Taxation of foreign supplies would produce a substantial revenue and would assist in obtaining reciprocity with the Argentine. He asked whether the Government was going to Ottawa empowered to offer preferences on meat products or was the door already closed. Sir Stafford Cripps (Lab.) said that Mr Runciman had given a specific election pledge that meat and wheat would not be taxed. Mr Chamberlain, winding up the debate, said that the problem of the stock raiser was not easily solved under the Bill. It was difficult to see how to give adequate protection without duties higher than 10 per cent., but the import duty was not the only method. He asked the House to have patience. The cost of living was at present a vulnerable point, and the Government could not afford to take risks. 'This was not a question of political expediency but of economic considerations. Mr E. J. Ramsden (Con.) sought the information in regard to the suggested transference. of sections of the textile industries to the dominions. Mr Runciman Said that the possibility of British industries and Empire industries making arrangements for mutual and beneficial co-operation was under consideration in preparation for the Ottawa Conference. Mr Ramsden: Has it been suggested that the textile industry should transfer parts of its machinery to the dominions? Mr Runciman: No, I am not aware of any official suggestion in that direction, but any arrailgements made between the British textile trade and the dominions would naturally have our blessing. MEAT AND WHEAT. QUESTIONS FOR OTTAWA. LONDON, February 23. (Received Feb. 24, at 5.5 p.m.) In the House of Commons Mr O. Lewis (Con.) asked Mr Thomas whether the British representatives at Ottawa would be willing to discuss a preferential duty on meat? Mr Thomas said that the Government would be prepared to discuss any proposal. Sir Henry Page-Croft (Con.) asked: May we definitely understand that the questions of meat and wheat will not be precluded from the discussion? Mr Thomas: It is open to any dominion to submit any proposal. Mr Will Thorne (Lab.); Is it the Government’s intention to reduce, instead of increasing, tariffs? Mr' Thomas: Personally I support tariffs because 1 believe as bargaining powers they are the only means of reducing tariffs. THE WHEAT QUOTA BILL. FIRST READING CARRIED, LONDON, February 23. (Received Feb. 24, at 5.5 p.m.) In the House of Commons the Wheat Quota Bill was read a first time. It is entitled: “A Bill to secure to the growers of home-grown millable wheat a standard price and a market therefor, providing for the imposition on millers and importers of flour an obligation to make payments calculated by the wheat quota.”