CUSTOMS CHANGES

Wairarapa Age, 23 August 1934, Page 5

CUSTOMS CHANGES

DEBATE ON AMENDING BILL

PREFERENCE TO GREAT BRITAIN Abu REVEN UE NEEDS.

MR. DOWNIE STEWART ON HIGH EXCHANGE.

(By Telegraphy—“ The Age” Special.) WELLINGTON, August 22. Moving the second reading of the Customs Amendment Bill, the Minister of Customs (the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates) said it had been stated in the House that New Zealand should allow in free all goods from the United Kingdom which it was not possible to produce in New Zealand, but in no instance had any members suggested how the revenue should be built up. New Zealand's tariffs, the Minister added, were lower than those of any other country in the Empire, lower than those of Dempark, and probably lower than those of the Netherlands. Air. Coates then explained the various clauses of the Bill.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. J. Savage) said the Government appeared to have no definite plan that •Would be helpful in the future development of the industrial life of New Zealand. Whether they liked it or not, the lesson that they had to learn was that ithe time .had come for definite control of trade in line tvith the requirements of the people and in keeping with international trade agreements. “The problem facing us cannot be solved by tariffs,” said Mr. Savage. “That method is out of date.” Mr. C. A. Wilkinson (Egmont) hotly attacked the maintenance of protection to wheat growers, contending that the tegular importation of flour showed (the inefficiency of the industry. One million bushels of surplus New Zealand wheat was exported last year at a net sterling price of 2s per bushel, when (New Zealand millers were obliged to pay 4s 9d. W ’ suggested that it the present sliding scale of wheat cuties were altered and the present cuties on flour removed, it meant definitely placing New Zealand’s wheat industry at the mercy of speculative operators. If the Government’s policy meant that for all time the New Zealand wheat industry was to retain a Special and privileged position, that would be entirely wrong. The solution ct the question was to extend the guarantee which the wheat producer re--17 wrw- aU classes producers, but Mr Wilkinson was on the wrong track , trying to throw the wheat industry rt. old path, leading to chaos Bad stagnation. rv7. 9 _f tie O . f the ’“tgotiators of the Ottawa Agreement, the Hon. W »ownie Stewart (Dunedin West) made ■ n lm P°r t « nt contribution to the debate. The atmosphere of Ottawa, he Baid, was that the world was most reV 7 ‘°® 6ther free the annels of trade and restore prosperity, so the best thing the British Empire representatives could do was to meet “mong themselves and see what , dd ° restore prosperity and L bolndL “ n . e “Ptoy™.ent within the rounds of the Empire. Mr. Stewart *--^ rit| ci’ed the Tariff Commission for defcand” g into account -the serious fcandmap to the British manufacturer rL« n Z 7n : " S depreciated currency. Had allowance been made for ft 1 ’ “ T ‘r®’ U woald have protbnTa etter effect in Britain »mn 3 per cent, reductions here and lO ° k -“ the f rB ® the We “ ad ! " wiiwd t 0 SPmt , ° f the °tta«-a 80 redu<:ed the ‘“riff 5 Per eent here and there, but put on 25 Per cent, in exchange. He felt that we must reconcile ourselves to the changed ?f n we b Polk * Therefore, i 6 * thrown bacfc mwe u p°“ our internal economy, there was all t?ie« In X.T7 >n ? O J 3ee that our inda "- tiom, no? 7- nded ° n solid fo'lDdations, not relying on the high artificial Protection now prevailing. The debate was adjourned.