MINISTER IN REPLY

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18503, 15 September 1934, Page 5

MINISTER IN REPLY

.. POLICY DEPENDED AIDING NEW INDUSTRY NO BENEFIT TO BREWERS (Purliamontary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. “The objection I took to the speech of the Leader of the Opposition was his imputation of motives,” said the lit, Hon. J. ; G. Coates, Minister of Customs, in replying in the House yesterday to the criticism of tho action in reducing the duty on boor by 3d pci gallon. . Mr. Savage: 1 did not impute anything. Mr. Coates: You asked what was the reason behind it. Labor members: That is what we all want to know. “Right behind the Leader of the Opposition came the cry, ‘ The Brewers,’ ” replied the Minister. “I wish to make this statement: No brewing interests, in New Zealand, big or small, have approached me, either directly or indirectly, since the tariff negotiations .were opened up. The approach has been from the point of view of the agents of hop growers and those who have agencies for the sale of British, Irish, and some Scotch beer. I don't. thi.uk there is much Scotch beer consumed in New Zealand. ” NO LOSS OF -REVENUE Tho Minister emphasised that the origin of the negotiations- was at Ottawa. These had boon followed up by Mr. I\ Hamilton, of Nelson. Then there had been negotiations between the New Zealand and the United Kingdom Governments, the outcome being the making of the arrangements for the sale of the surplus production of New Zealand hops, the disposal of which surplus, up to 1932, had been a real problem. Mr. <T. A. Lee (Labor, Grey Lynn): Who were the agents? Mr. Coates: There were several.

Replying to the "suggestion that there .would be a loss in revenue of £IIO,OOO through the reduced duties, the Minister said the assumption was erroneous. On the contrary, there was a possibility that the figures would just about balance at the cud of the year by reason of the quantity of beer used. Had he had sufficient confidence, he would have supported a reduction of fid a gallon, which would have left quite sufficient in for excise taxation on New Zealand-produced beer. However, those with whom the Government had been in negotiation were satisfied with 3d, and quite understood that there would be. no reduction unless there .was a corresponding lowering of the excise duty. REDUCTION PASSED ON

According to information supplied to him, the Mortgagors’ Relief Commission had dealt with G 9 applications from Wellington hotelkeepers, and consideration had been given to those applicants. Mr. Leo: They have been trading in goodwill that does not belong to them. The Minister said it had been argued that tho brewer would get the benefit from the reduction, but a price list-which was to’tnkc effect as from Monday showed that that was not so. This list' provided for the following reductions in prices to hotelkeepers: Fifty-fonr-gallon casks of beer, 13s fid; 36-gallon, 9s; 18-gallon, 4s 6d; 10gallon, Is 3d; large bottles of ale and stout, fid a dozen; small, 3d a dozen; and nip, lid a dozen. Mr.'A. J. Stallworthy (Ind., Eden): It i.s clear now that the reduction will not be. passed on to the consumer. “I cannot say what will be handed on to .the consumer,” replied Mr. Coates. ‘However, the 3d a gallon duty advantage is not to be retained by the brewer. The whole of the reduction is being passed on; someone else is to get the benefit. Members: The publicans, BEER INSTEAD OF BREAD

Mr. Coates: There is still competition aruosg them. Is it quite fair that men whose business it has been to run respectable hotels should be so criticised?

Mr. Lee: You arc taking £1 in £4 away from the unemployed. Mr. Coates: I have shown that as far as the unemployed are concerned this is quite outside the question. Mr. P. Fraser (Labor, Wellington C.): Give them beer instead of bread. Mr Coates: 1 am not arguing whether there should be, or should not be, beer in the country. Mr. Fraser: We are not bringing that in at all, but why worry about the price .of beer when people cannot get bread? Mr. W. J. Poison (Coal., Stratford): This does not affect the price of bread.

Mr Coates repeated that it was incorrect to say that there would be a loss of £IIO,OOO in revenue. If there .wore a reduction of (id, he believed that the revenue would increase.

Mr. W. ,T. Jordan (Labor, Manukau): We will drink ourselves into prosperity. Mr. A. S. Richards (Labor, Roskill): What value will the new hop business be to New Zealand. Mr. .Coates: All forms of new industry are worth a tremendous amount. I haven’t before me the details in this case, but I shall make them available to the Leader of the Opposition. I wish again to say that I took from his remarks an imputation of motives. Mr. Savage: That was never in my mind. ,