TARIFFS IN BRITAIN

Taranaki Daily News, 11 July 1929, Page 13

TARIFFS IN BRITAIN

SAFEGUARDING INDUSTRY FIRST VICTORY FOR LABOUR TRADING WITH DOMINIONS CLOSE RELATIONS SOUGHT By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. Australian Press Association. Received July 10, 10 p.m. United Service. London, July 9. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Rt. Hon, Philip Snowden, replying on the debate on the Conservative amendment to the Address-to-the-Throne, said there was no analogy between the McKenna duties imposed for a specific purpose during the war and the duties for the safeguarding of industries. It was upon that fact that he would base the right of the Government to make no announcement as to the date I when it proposed to deal with the repeal of the McKenna duties. As to whether or not those duties would be repealed in the next Budget, the Opposition would get no satisfaction. Mr. Snowden said there was no justification for the Opposition’s charge of uncertainty regarding the McKenna duties. These were introduced for a special national emergency and Conservative Chancellors had repeatedly emphasised their provisional character. The Conservatives did not give notice of their intention to reimpose the duties after their repeal in 1924, but everyone knew that if Labour was returned to power the duties would be repealed. In every constituency where safeguarding operated the protectionist candidate was either beaten or there was a heavy vote against safeguarding. If there was uncertainty in certain industries this was blameable on those who imposed the taxes, as it was inseparable from a tariff policy. The Government was most anxious to promote the closest trade relations with the Dominions and every part of the Empire, but it did not believe these relations could be placed on the best footing of mutual advantage by a system of preferential tariffs, least of all by such 'a proposal as had been put forward with recklessness by Lord Beaverbrook. The late Mr. Joseph Chamberlain -had stated there could not be Imperial preference without a tax on food and raw material, and to that policy the Government would never subscribe.

SWEEP AWAY EOOD DUTIES. Mr. ‘Snowden hoped that when lie left office he would have swept away all food duties, including those on sugar and dried fruits, and the .preferences on those articles would naturally go too. He meant to inquire into the difficulties of sugar producing in the colonics, but would not assist them by tariffs.

‘‘We have no intention of abolishing the Empire Marketing Board,” added Mr. Snowden. “We want prompt and closest commercial relations with every part of the Empire. We have held out the open hand and we are connnunicating with the Dominions to see if it is possible to hold an Imperial economic conference to see what we can do to extend inter-imperial trade. The development of trade with Australia, New Zealand and Canada must be slow. With India it is different. There there, is an increase in., the people’s purchasing power due to the eno’rmous addition to trade.”

The Rt. Hon. L. C. M. S. Amery, who was Secretary for the Dominions in the Baldwin "Ministry, expressed the opinion that Mr. Snowden did not appreciate what Empire trade meant.. The Dominions’ preference to Great Britain amounted to £14,000,000 and British preferences to the Dominions to only £2,000,000. Britain’s best purchasers were -within the Empire and 91 pec cent, of British exports which went to countries within the Empire were manufactured.

“From the viewpoint of creating employment,” said Air. Amery, “we could better afford to cut ourselves off from the whole of the outside world than from the Empire. “Conditions to-day are infinitely more favourable for closer Empire union than ever before. We may not be able to obtain complete free trade within the Empire, but let us take steps to bring us nearer to it when the disposition to meet us half-way is stronger than ever.” He appealed to the Government to approach the Imperial Conference with a free hand. LIBERALS ATTACK .PROTECTION.

The Rt. Hon. W. Runciman (Liberal) said industry as a whole gained little or nothing from safeguarding duties. They had complicated the industrial machinery and clogged warehouses and quays in some ports. It was most surprising that so many Conservatives still thought tho volume of trade could be increased by taxing it. When an industry depended on artificial assistance it was bound sooner or later to meet catastrophe. - The only way an industry could hold its own was by putting its own house in order and rationalisation would bo far more effective than any temporary tariff.

Everyone wanted closer trade within the Empire, but many believed preferences would do more harm than good. If they had to proceed along the lines of taxation as a means of binding the Empire there would be a gloomy outlook for the future. He welcomed Imperial conferences. Mr. Runciman added that if European countries had lowered instead of increased their tariffs after- tho war there would be more prosperity everywhere to-day. Hitherto 'Britain had never been satisfied with anything less than world trade and it was world trade they wanted to-day. Commander Wedgewood Benn (Secretary of State for India) having spoken, tho amendment was. negatived by 340 votes to 220. The Liberals voted solidly with the Government, but 40 Conservatives did not vote. The size of the Governments majority after its first- division in the House caused a stir -in the lobbies. It is learned a group of younger Conser--rathe®' deliberately avoided the division as an expression of displeasure at the

way the leaders handled the debate and the divided voices with which they spoke. It wag urged the Conservative leaders should get together to settle their policy before the next election, and In the meantime not expose their differences in public debate.