MR. NASH OUTLINES TARIFF CONCESSIONS IN GENEVA AGREEMENT

Wanganui Chronicle, 25 May 1948, Page 5

MR. NASH OUTLINES TARIFF CONCESSIONS IN GENEVA AGREEMENT

(P.A.) Wellington, May 24 In a speech to the Lower Hutt Chamber of Commerce tonight, the Minister of Finance and Customs, Mr. Nash, made reference to the general agreement on tariffs and trade drawn up at Geneva over the period from' April to October, 1947. The agreement, which embodies schedules of tariff concessions to be accorded (subject to ratification by the respective legislatures) between the nations who participated in the Geneva negotiations and the text setting out the general commercial policy to be followed by the parties to the agreement, will be presented to Parliament for consideration or ratification shortly after the House assembles next month.

Twenty-three nations, including Great Britain and the Dominions, signed the final act of the second session of the United Nations conference on trade and employment at Geneva, where the tariff negotiations were conducted, stated Mr. Nash. Thi§ final act did not bind the signatories but was merely authentication of the text, in other words, an acknowledgment between the signatories that, the text of the agreement as finally drawn up was a true representation of the outcome of negotiations and discussions which led up to it. New Zealand is not committed to agreement, therefore, until it is ratified by Parliament. Subject to amendments which were made at Havana the agreement does not come into force until 30 days following the day on which the instruments of acceptance have been deposited with the Secre-tary-General of the United Nations on behalf of the Governments signatory to the final act, parties of which account for 85 per cent, of the total external trade of all signatories to the final act. Mr. Nash went on to describe the protocol of the provisional application signed by eight countries, Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and. the United States, under which the signatories agreed provisionally to apply between themselves, as from January 1, 1948, parts of the agreement which relate to tariffs and general enforcement of the agreement. They also agreed to carry out the portion relating to the general commercial policy to the fullest extent not inconsistent with ’ their existing legislation. The signatories are free to withdraw at any time. As from January 1,1948, therefore, tariff concessions accorded by ’ these eight countries at Geneva have [ been in force among themselves. During the Havana conference representatives of Cuba and Czechoslovakia signified the adherence of their Governments to the protocol of provisional application up to June 30 next. Other countries represented at Geneva have full rights to sign the protocol and apply Its provisions. The text relating to commercial policy, tor ex? • ample Customs regulations and procedures of import restrictions and subsidies, has been taken from the Geneva draft charter in the main with appropriate alterations. Its purpose is to ensure that tariff conce&« sions given shall not be frustrated by trade action on the part of any ot the contracting parties tas the paities to the agreement are known/. However, the text of the Geneva 1 draft charter was further amended at 1 the Havana international trade con- ’ ference, and there is therefore pro I vision in the general agreement on ■ tariffs and trade for appropriate I parts of the text of agreement to be I suspended and superseded by the cor* ■ responding provisions of the Havana ' charter. Any contracting party han. i the right, up to May 23, 1948, to on- , ject to the provisions of the agree- . ment. being suspended in this way. “The most important part of th* . general agreement, on tariffs and . trade,” said the Minister, “Is containr ed in the text and schedules relating [to tariffs Article 1 cf the text pro vides that in the imposition of all Customs duties and in the execution of regulations in connection with external trade, each contracting party shall grant to every other contracting party ‘any advantage, favour, privilege or Immunity’ granted to • any other country. In other words, subject to available currency and preferential tariffs, no country shall be favoured by one contracting party as against any other contracting parties. A specific exception to this principle, however, is made in the case of certain preferential systems operating between members of the British Commonwealth and those between France and its dependent territories, the United States and its dependent territories, and other systems. Article 1 also provides that margins of preference in force on certain dates in particular countries (April 10, 1947, in New Zealand’s case) are not to be increased above the level then existing. As individual countries were primar- , ily interested in specific commodities, tariff and preference bargaining at , Geneva was carried out bilaterally. However (again subject to the agreed preferences), under the most-favoured nation principle stated above, all contracting parties would be entitled to a tariff or preference concession once it had been given by any one of the contracting parties. In other words, each tariff concession would be multilaterally applicable. The results of the Geneva tariff and preference negotiations were embodied in 20 schedules—one for each of 18 countries and one each for the Benelux and SyriaLebanese Customs Unions. The final agreement, with schedules, runs into four volumes. Each schedule sets out the tariff items on which concessions have been negotiated.” Mr. Nash stated that there were two possible ways in which concessions could be granted at Geneva—by reducing the tariff or margin of preference or by agreeing to maintain the tariff or preference margin at the existing level. “Altogether,” Mr. Nash went on, “the concessions which were negotiated in respect of New Zealand tariffs would affect 267 items—and an even greater number of particular commodi tics would be affected, for a single tariff item could cover a number of imports. Of these 267 items 149 were bound at existing rates. There were 100 reductions in tariffs, of which all but four were also reductions in preference margins- Reductions in margins of preference only without commitment as to rates of duty affect 18 items. “I should like tn s<r-ss,” said Mr Nash, “that the British preference system has been maintained and not undermined by Geneva negotiations Margins of preference have been reduced. but in all cases due regard was had to the advisability of such action in relation to the positions of the pro- : ducers within the Empire? and pre- 1 ferences or reductions in tariffs were i only amended on a mutually advant- . ageou.s basis by a reduction by other ■ countries. In this connection the coun- •: tries of the British Commonwealth ■ were in continuous consultation I] throughout the negotiations. New 1

Zealand’s market in the United Kingdom is not materially affected. There has been no change in existing margins of preference on butter, cheese, or preserved milk products before the war. Meat exports to Britain were given preference in the form of a quota rather than by tariffs. It is as far as is practicable the intention to work towards replacement of the quota by a system of tariff preferences. On the other hand, concessions offered by the United States would cover a wide range of our primary products, such as beef and veal, mutton, lamb, butter (in respect of imports from November 1 to March 31 in each year), grass and clover seeds, ivooi, hides, and flax. In respect of meat and butter products tariffs would be reduced by 50 per cent, in the I United States. Other countries have offered to reduce tariffs on frozen meats, butter, cheese, milk products, apples, and wool “These concessions can he valuable to us in the future.” the Minister concluded. “Though in view of the abnormal post-war conditions, necessitating | control of trade in many countries of! the world, the effect of the new tariff rates will probably not be felt immediately. As it is, however, the general lowering of world tariffs initial-' ed by the general agreement on tariffs and trade will, in companv with the ! provisions of the Havana Charter, be [ a real contribution to the expansion of i world trade end the raising of the livine standards of the peoples of the world” 1