TARIFF RATES

Southland Times, Issue 22131, 27 September 1933, Page 6

TARIFF RATES

TINNED MEATS EVIDENCE BEFORE COMMISSION RETENTION OF PRESENT DUTIES (Per United Press Association.) Christchurch, September 26. The first evidence before the Customs Tariff Commission to-day related to meat meals and tinned meats. Mr C. G. Wilkin, secretary of the North and South Island Freezing Companies’ Associations, asked that the present duties on animal foods, British 20 per cent., Australian 20, foreign 40, should he maintained. He said that the manufacture of these products in the Dominion was a recent development, but the plants were adequate to cope with the demand. He also asked that the present duties on tinned meats, meat extracts and meat pastes should be retained. He said that the maintenance of productions of canning as an adjunct to the freezing industry was necessary in the interests 'of farmers. Mr L. B. Stevens, director of H. F. Stevens, Ltd., wholesale druggists, in discussing flavouring essences, asked for a reduction of the excise of 20/per proof gallon to 12/- per proof gallon on alcohol. If this were done he would not oppose a corresponding reduction in the Customs duties, now 40/- per gallon British and 40/- per gallon foreign. He said that the high excise on spirits compelled manufacturers to make synthetic flavours instead of natural flavours. He made a similar request in respect of perfumed spirits.

Mr James Purbell, secretary to the New Zealand Biscuit and Confectionery Workers’ Federation, said that the manufacturers had asked for the retention of the present tariffs. He claimed that the purpose of the tariff was to protect workers in an industry as well as the manufacturers, but since the last award had expired, the workers had been unable to secure a new award unless they were prepared to agree to a 43 per cent, reduction in wages and an increase in hours from 45 to 48 weekly. Professor Murphy: What inference do you want the commission to draw from this statement? Witness: I make this deliberate statement, that if the employers will not agree to anything better than they have submitted, they are not entitled to any protection at all. Mr Dudley Venna Wilson and Mr Henry Burrows Duckworth, for Duckworth, Turner and Co., boot manufacturers, asked that the present protection on leather and felt slippers be maintained, saying that if the duties were not reduced the industry would continue to progress. They would ask, however, for adequate protection against Japanese Competition which was increasing.