TRADE WITH BRITAIN

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 804, 3 July 1933, Page 7

TRADE WITH BRITAIN

Importer* Want Reduction in Dutie*. CASE PUT TO COMMISSION. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, July 3. The necessity for increasing New Zealand's purchases from the United Kingdom, on which the Dominion is so dependent for the sale of her primary products, was the keynote of the general case presented to the Tariff Commission on behalf of the United Kingdom Manufacturers’ and New Zealand Representatives’ Association (Inc.) by Messrs G. O. Sutton and N. IT. Russell. It was contended that to attain this certain reductions of existing duties were of paramount importance in order to reduce the present excessively high landed costs, said Mr Sutton. They particularly requested a reduction in those duties protecting non-economic industries. An industry which, except perhaps in its early stages, could not exist with the natural protection of freight and allied charges, was economically unsound and if excessively protected it was at the expense of the community generally. At the same time it was admitted that there were industries which, if the above was correct, were economically unsound, but which were entitled to some protection by way of duties and the association did not object to this, always provided such extra protection was not so excessive as to preclude the importations of similar lines manufactured elsewhere. Not Abolition. They wished to emphasise and provide proof that, generally speaking, they were not asking for duties to be abolished but reduced. Also it was submitted that protection was justified in certain cases of unfair competition, namely, against countries with a lower standard of living They desired to emphasise that while New Zealand relied upon the United Kingdom market for nearly 90 per cent of her exports, and the failure of that market would bring certain disaster to us, how little the failure of New Zealand would affect the United Kingdom might be. gleaned from the fact that of the total United Kingdom imports New Zealand supplied only 3.66, while of the United Kingdom total exports New Zealand took only 2.93 per cent. In view of the above it was felt that there was no necessity to stress the absolute importance of strengthening the New Zealand market by helping in every possible way those L T nited Kingdom manufacturers who desired to export to New Zealand. It was also desired to mention the question of oneway freights and to stress the point that if ships came out in ballast then exports must necessarily, to some extent, pay freights both ways. They contended that the lowering of duties would not necessarily mean a reduction of revenue or an increase in unemployment because: (1) They were of the opinion that increased imports would result, in most cases, inasmuch if not more revenue being collected; and (2) that the cheapening of goods to the consumer would stimulate employment in other avenues of industry. Fair Competition. They were definitely favourable to reasonable tariffs, but did ask that United Kingdom manufacturers should be enabled to compete fairly on this market in the spirit of the Ottawa Agreement. The possibilities which might follow if this agreement were not carried out could quite conceivably mean disaster to New Zealand. An emphatic denial that sweated labour was being used in the United Kingdom was made, in support of which a letter from the Trade Commissioner (Mr L. A. Paish) was quoted and the menace of Japanese competition was referred to. It was contended that ad valorem duties were useless in preventing the increasing importations from Japan and it was hoped that the Commission would give particular attention to the suggestion that duties should be levied on a specific basis of so much on the article or so much a yard.