LOW-PRICED GOODS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19139, 7 October 1936, Page 6

LOW-PRICED GOODS

CHEAP LABOUR PRODUCTS PERIL TO EMPIRE TRADE STAT!•; WATCH REQUESTEI) debate by congress (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The congress'“of Chambers of Commerce of the British Empire continued this morning with the debate on lowpriced goods from countries with low standards of living and wages. .Mr. Percy Ainiey, of Huddersfield, strongly supported the resolution designed ’to .have restrictions imposed on elieap labour manufacturing countries, particularly Japan. He explained lmw Japan established factories with British machinery, supervised for a short period with British expert teaching, to compete with Huddersfield and Bradford. 81ie never required spare _ parts Iqr Hie machinery, at first filling tlm necessary requirements from her blacksmith s shops •i,id. now with modern engineering factories. She bought old machinery and made it. modern, and now was a real menace in trade. Mia A. A. Ross, uf -Auckland, pointed out that Japan was a, great nation of 60.C00.0C0 people, and her_ population was increasing rapidly. She had. to expand. He look the view that Japan s cheap goods increased the standard of living of British purchasers, lie asked was the resolution not just anolher turn of the screw of economic nationalism? 'the world would never he prosperous again till international trade resumed something like the old volume, and he asked the congress to he consistent and vote the resolution out. Mr. T. B. Hooper, of Brisbane, said that Australia, had taken the right, step in loading cheap Japanese goods with a tariff "that was really prohibitive. Britain should take a -leaf out of Australia's book. He impressed on the delegates, by specific industries, Japans skill”and high, standard of work.

JAPANESE! WORKER, The Japanese worker, he said, reached a higher standard than Australia or Europe. We could not blame Japan if she improved her machines and operalives. so that we could not compete with her. It was time we looked for the |,eam in our own eye and put our house in order.

Mr. S. Leatherin', of Plymouth,_quoted an instance in Britain ot a tariff being placed against Japan and a ring Being formed among! British maufacturers to put up their price. The prices would have gone up had one manufacturer not put his foot down and broken it. When, a committee went to the Government and asked for a tariff or an increased tariff, it would also see that the Government dealt in no uncertain manner with those likely to form rings and combines to keep up artificial prices. ■Mr. A. Spencer Watts, of Sydney, said that* they had imposed duties in Australia, but'they had no effect , and did not benefit Britain. He pointed olii that, as Mr. Ross had said, things adjusted themselves. Japan had to import its well as export. Tie said that the standard of living in industrial areas in Japan was not below those of other countries, lie saw more poverty, dirt and ill-nourish-ment in some oi the British nidnstiail areas than he. saw in Japan. Mr. C: Urr.mille-Gihson (Leeds): Nonsense. That is not true. ORGANISATION URGED Mr. Spencer-Watts moved an amendment to omit from the resolution the words: “Countries with low standards of living.” Mr. F. If. Cook, of Dudley, seconded the amendment. He said lie thought they were on the wrong lines. Britain turned out the world’s best goods. Tn cheap goods Japan was supreme. He recalled that Germany was a. former producer of cheap goods, not Britain. It was a question of organisation and pulling together. British manufacturers were fighting each other and so also were the workers. Mr. W. 13. Darker, of Adelaide, moved to carry the resolution with the following one to read as follows: “That this congress views with grave concern the increasing importation into the British Empire of low-priced goods, and being aware that the conditions of labour and wages in some foreign countries do not give fair competitive opportunity to Empire producers, urges His Majesty’s Governments to lay before the next Imperial Conference tbo seriousness of such competition.” This met with general approval, and the congress passed on to the next business.