OTTAWA RESULTS

Southland Times, Issue 21849, 28 October 1932, Page 7

OTTAWA RESULTS

TRADE RECIPROCITY LORD ARNOLD’S CRITICISM SACRIFICES BY BRITAIN (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) London, October 26. In the House of Lords, Lord Arnold drew attention to the Ottawa Conference which he described as a supreme failure owing to Canada’s refusal to agree to a progressive liberation of trade within the Empire. A complete breakdown was only avoided by Britain accepting incredibly unfair and lopsided provisions. ' Lord Elibank said: “Lord Arnold has failed to awake to a new era. Free trade as we knew it is fortunately dead and future issues only concern high or low tariffs and preferences.” Lord Beaverbrook said there were no sacrifices about the Ottawa agreements which would benefit both Britain and the dominion peoples. He regretted the agreements did not go further in the direction of free trade within the Empire, an ideal which he was sure would ultimately be realized. He strongly favoured a duty on foreign meat. . Lord Hailsham, replying, said Ottawa did not build an edifice but had laid the foundations which would result in better trade within the Empire. RESTORING TRADE VALUE OF OTTAWA CONFERENCE. (British Official Wireless.) Rugby, October 26. Referring to the argument adduced during the debate on the Ottawa Conference that tariff agreements there reached-between nations of the British Empire might impede the conclusion of more general agreements for the restoration of world trade The Times says: . • xu 4. “The commonsense view is that nothing would ever be done to revive trade if it was to wait . upon worldwide agreements. A beginning had to be made and no better beginning could be made than between members of the British Commonwealth. They cannot, even if they would, be exclusive corporations but a solid quarter of the population of the world can make a powerful contribution to the recovery of the whole.”

DEBATE ON BILL EASING UNEMPLOYMENT. REPLY TO CRITICS. (British Official Wireless.) Rugby, October 26. Moving the second reading of the Ottawa Agreements Bill in the House of Commons, Mr J. H. Thomas replying to the Opposition argument that nothing was done by the agreements to ease the unemployed situation, answered that something had been achieved in the steel industry indirectly and the coal trade directly. He asked the Labour Party to consider the future position of unemployment unless the dominions were placed in a position, to deal with the problem of migration. If they were put in a position to welcome hundreds of thousands of British people every year something would be done to mitigate the unemployment problem. The British delegates deliberately agreed to the scheme of meat restrictions as a means of increasing wholesale prices. Unless there was such an increase there was no possible hope for producers. Regarding Russia the British delegates had undertaken if any nation by any particular action prevented the value of preference being enjoyed by the dominions the necessary steps would be taken to give effect to the intentions of the British Government. He deplored that the Irish Free State by her own action was depriving herself of the benefits of the Ottawa Agreements and expressed the Government’s hope that this would only be temporary. Mr W. Lunn moved for the rejection of the Ottawa Agreements Bill on behalf of Labour on the ground that it increased the burden of indirect taxation and would do nothing to solve unemployment. The Ottawa Agreements would not give work to a single man, hut strangled the world economic conference beforehand, whereas international co-operation was required. We were setting out on an economic war which might lead to a blood feud which would destroy civilization. Mr Phillip Cunliffe Lister said the colonies had reasons for satisfaction over Ottawa. Hitherto they received preferences only from Britain, Canada and New Zealand. Now Australia, South Africa, Newfoundland, India and Southern Rhodesia also give to the colonies preferences, the colonies reciprocating in giving preferences to all Empire goods. Mr H. Holdworth said that nobody in the woollen industry expected an increase in trade from the Ottawa Agreements. Canada had given Bradford a five foot wall to jump, instead of a wall as high as a house. She could jump neither. IRISH FREE STATE SPECIAL DUTIES ON EXPORTS. (Rec. 5.5 p.m.) London, October 26. It was explained authoritatively tonight that although the new Ottawa duties will not be levied on Irish Free State goods, they will be subjected from November 15 to a flat rate of 10 per cent under the Import Duties Act. This will be additional to 20 per cent special duties charge on some goods to recover the retained land annuities. Thus butter which concerns Australia and New Zealand and most of the other dairy products, will be liable to duties aggregating 30 per cent. Free State Ministers refuse to comment on the situation. Other De Valeraite members of the Dail declared they were not in the least surprised. They were prepared for the worst.