Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, TUESDAY, SEPT. 32, 1933. TRADE RESTRICTIONS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18191, 12 September 1933, Page 6

Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, TUESDAY, SEPT. 32, 1933. TRADE RESTRICTIONS

The. possible a fleets, beneficial ami otherwise, of various I mile reslrietlons have been discussed at considerable length ia recent months, and are likely lo be still further to the forefront in the near future. Hitherto, New Zealand has not been vitally interested in this question, because, while she -did not hesitate to erect, barriers of Iter own, either for the purpose of protecting domestic industries or for providing revenue, shewas never seriously effected by .similar actions in other countries. 'Phis was mainly due to the tael that she could rely on Great Britain to preserve an open market for the great bulk of her primary produce. Year] after year production was increased without this great market being materially affected, and, as a result iU feeling of security in the, future was created. But while the British market remained open, not. only to New land and the other parts of Hie Em-] pire, but. to foreign countries as well, other nations were gradually but steadily placing restrictions on ini-: ports. The. consequence was that the one free market in the world became over-supplied, and finally Great Britain was compelled to follow the world wide practice of placing some limit on the quantities of produce which she could economically absorb without unduly penalising her own producers. That is the position at the present time, and, in the absence of remedial measures it cannot fail to Become more serious. .Already some

import quotas are in operation, and t],o danger of another one being applied to dairy produce has - not yet; been removed. From uor own .standpoint, New Zealand can undoubtedly

make out a very strong ease against Die imposition of quotas, for there-is not tine slightest doubt (that they would be extremely detrimental to her welfare, but this is essentially an example of both sides requiring careful consideration. It is not enough for the Dominion to show that sho would suffer under the* proposed policy; she must also be able to show that it would bo incompatible with the treatment which she, on her part, has meted out to the Mother Country. Can she do this! Whereas Britain has always granted New Zealand goods free entry, we in this country have placed innumerable obstacles in the way of British manufacturers selling their goods to us, and the result is all too apparent in the present, disequilibrium of trade. In some respects, New Zealand shows a very real preference for British goods, particularly against those of ioreigners, but the fact remains that she re-

stricts her markets in regard to many commodities, and, at the same time, spends a great deal in loreign countries which could, and should, be diverted to her own best customer, la 109.1, for example, only 70 per cent of New Zealand’s imports came from within the Empire, whereas she looked to the Empire to absorb almost 09. per cent of her own produce. Such a position is certain to cause dissatisfaction, for tin l essence of successful trading is that there should be a reasonable measure of reciprocity. In the negotiations with Canada some time ago, for instance, Die Prime Minister at first set out to obtain a metieulons balance, and although this attitude was not justified it served to suggest, that, the Dominion seeks to establish one principle for herself and another for others. Is this attitude being adopted in regard to trade with Great. Britain? That is one side of the question which must, be considered dispassionately. Then there is the position of the Home farmer, whom it wa.s agreed at Ottawa was emir led to first claim on Die British markets, but

who, owing to overseas competition —■] aided iri several instances by substantial exchange bounties —is in a most difficult, position. Were all other things equal he would still have a reasonable claim for prior consideration, bill, as things are additional weight is given to every argument, advanced on hi.s behalf. The quota policy insofar as it has been adopted is claimed to have been a success, and it is not unnatural that efforts should be made to have it extended to dairy produce. The demand in this con-! ncction lias only been temporarily relaxed, and it is certain to be further pressed in the very near future unless some mutually acceptable agreement can be reached, not only between the producers of the countries concerned, but affecting the whole course of inter-Empire trade. It i.s possible, ol course, that the British movement is merely a by-product, of the hazardous limes through which all produccis aie passing, and that; if action can be stayed until prices are stabilised at a higher level the quota agitation will cease. This is another reason why everything possible should be done to \ effect a compromise, for once the quota comes into operation it will be much more difficult to have it lifted; since any form of protection once obtained is very reluctantly yielded up. Tito one thing New Zealand wants least of all is a restriction of the outlets for her ever-increasing quantity of primary produce, and this means ...,it it is necessary to east round and see what alternatives can be offered in consideration of the continued freedom of the British markets. Simm the Dominion’s claim is for an unrestricted right to export t.° Great Britain, it appears to be only logical and reasonable that she should offer British manufacturers much greater freedom in the New Zealand market than they enjoy at the present time. With a revision of tariffs in accordance with the provisions of the Ottawa agreement and the abolition of the high pegged exchange rate, a great deal in this direction would be achieved, and, not. only would better facilities bo offered the British exporters, but, nt the same time, New Zealand’s ease in opposition lo the quota would be materially sire.iglhoned.