EXCESSIVE PROTECTION

Taranaki Daily News, 20 December 1932, Page 5

EXCESSIVE PROTECTION

NEW ZEALAND INDUSTRIES REPLY TO MANUFACTURERS ... ■ .< I. OTTAWA CONFERENCE AIM STATEMENT BY MR. COATES By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. - “I do not grudge any company-:its ‘ reasonable profits, but I believe by avoiding excessive protection and by correcting any undue margin in costs and prices we are helping to restore industry to a normaL and profitable basis,” said the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates in reply to the statement of the Canterbury Manufacturers’. Association published last Saturday. The association’s statement was in reply to remarks made in the House by Mr. Coates to. the 'effect that the prices of woollen goods made in New Zealand were excessive. It was stated in a retort on behalf of the manu--facturers that they were not afraid of competition from abroad, quality for quality. : - “It will be recalled that among the objections to New Zealand ratifying the Ottawa agreement, under which substantial and much-needed advantages are given to the Dominion, was ths charge that local industry was being sacrificed,” said Mr. Coates. “The ■ alleged sacrifice was the removal of the surtax- on goods imported from the United Kingdom and a few small reductions in tariff rates. The surtax was nine-fortieths' of the previous duty, and as has been repeatedly proved, it was imposed for revenue purposes and not on the ground of additional protection. I did not believe, and it was certainly not shown that the existence of any. New Zealand industry was menaced by the tariff changes that were agreed to. BLOCKAGE OF TRADE. “I believe that a far greater menace to all industries arises from the general blockage of trade, in which tariffs play a part, and the Ottawa Conference .represented a welcome move toward’the removal or lowering of the obstructions to trade. That is my general reason for insisting that the. Ottawa agreement marked a. forward move, and for my looking with some impatience on. the petty objections that were raised against its ratification. . ? . “We agreed at Ottawa that New Zealand’s protective tariff . against United Kingdom goods should be confined to - those industries which ware reasonably assured of sound opportunities for success, and United Kingdom producers are to be given an opportunity of reasonable competition ’on a basis relative to the cost of economical. and efficient production? These are the words used in the agreement. Li my view.it-is in dur own interests that' such a test should be applied, and that we should avoid drifting into the position of having sufih ridiculous, burdensome tariffs as those which some Dominions and many countries in the world have built up. “Here in New Zealand and elsewhere there is the clearest evidence that wholesale prices have fallen, to a much greater extent than retail prices. A move toward closing that abnormal gap is necessary, if we are to adjust ourselves to the changed conditions. “I have always held that manufactux- . ( ing within .pur.own country should bp.' encouraged, but in the interests' of . producers and consumers alike this should be on a sound economic basis. Efficiently conducted industries and businesses have nothing to fear from the Ottawa agreement, or from any action that might be 'taken to.implement it.” / ' «•> Mr. Goates said he appreciated the part which local mills took in utilising the New Zealand wool production: and the importance of strengthening this to the utmost At the : same time the figures showed that only 2£ pfer centi 'of ’ New Zealand’s wool production found a local market, and for ..the disposal' of the great bulk of the clip the Dominion ’■* depended on sales to the United King- / dom.