FOOD FOR BRITAIN.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 June 1923, Page 5

FOOD FOR BRITAIN.

PRODUCED BY THE EMPIRE QUESTION OF PREFERENCE. ITS BENEFITS STRESSED. r— , - By Telegraph.— Press Assn.—Copyright. Received June 12, 9.15 p.m. London, June 12. The question of Imperial preference duties as a whole was discussed in the House of Commons on an amendment to abolish the tea duty. Mr. A. J. Bonwick (Liberal), the mover, declared Imperial preference was a farce, since it could not be effective without taxing food. Mr. J. R. Remer (Conservative) would welcome an extension of preference as leading to free trade within the Empire He thought the Liberals had gone mad over free trade. He pointed out that as a result of preference Canada, Australia, and South Africa had considerably modified their tariffs to the advantage of British trade. General 11. Page Croft (Conservative) pointed out that trade with Australia has increased enormously since the introduction of Dr. W. A. Chapple (Liberal) eaid the people in the Dominions were not deceived by preference debates in the House of Commons. They knew preference was advocated in the interests of protective duties and not for the benefit of the Dominions. Mr. Bonwick’s amendment was defeated by 255 votes to 150.

Mr. T. Johnston (Labor) moved an amendment to abolish the tea duty altogether on December 31. He said the revenue could be obtained in other directions instead of hitting the poor by the tea duty. Sir W. Joynson Hicks, in refusing the amendment, said it would cost the Evchequer £11,000,000 yearly. The price of food as a whole was now B 7 per cent, above the pre-war level, and tea was a little higher, 73 per cent, above. Imperial preference had benefited both British consumers and colonial growers, the former by a reduction in the prices of tea, cocoa and coffee by twopence, and the larger demand had increased the Empire’s production of tea, coffee, cocoa and sugar. The result was that 90 per cent, of ihe tea and cocoa, 45 per cent, of the coffee and 22 per cent, of the sugar used in Britain came from within the Empire. Preference had led to the increased importation of Australian wines, Empire-grown tobacco, and dried fruits. The Dominions in the last few years had increasingly demanded preference, which had proved good business from an Imperial viewpoint. Mr. W. M. Pringle (Liberal) argued that the ultimate effect of duties would bo the separation of the Empire. The present paltry duties were intended to be a step towards duties on wheat, meat, wool and other raw materials, : hence the Liberal and Labor opposition.

The amendment was defeated by 231 votes to 160.

Mr. W. Adamson (Labor) moved an amendment to halve the tea duty, and this was defeated by 231 votes to 105.