NO REMITTANCE IMPORT SCHEME BEING ABUSED

Wanganui Chronicle, 7 September 1950, Page 5

NO REMITTANCE IMPORT SCHEME BEING ABUSED

WELLINGTON, Last Night (PA).— The Prime Minister (Mr Holland) told the United Kingdom Manufacturers’ and New Zealand Representatives’ Association today that there had been serious abuse of the system of noremittance licences. Some people had been getting their principals- overseas to charge additional prices or commissions so that exchange could be built up. He did not believe members of the association would be guilty of these practices. The Government had to reflect on its recent decision to allow no-remit-tance licences for imports. It could not allow these practices to develop. The Government, had allowed people to import goods when they had their own overseas funds, hut he would point out that the buying or selling of overseas exchange was illegal. “We have done a lot of things to make The conditions of trade easier, but our experience has not been altogether satisfying,” said Mr Holland. “Having decided to grant no-remit-tance licences, we find that some people are wanting to ge't their principals to charge an extra 2i per cent so that they can get a no-remittance licence with the extra money. Others have been asking their principals to charge extra commission and so build up funds. That, I regret to say, is what is being done, and there is an awful lot of it. It is an offence To buy overseas funds, just as it is to sell them.” When Government measures were abused by one or two of the people the Government was trying *to help, the effect would be to reduce the amount of overseas funds available for licences. If the Government were to allow these practices to develop, it would find importers generally saying to those overseas: “Charge us a bit more,” and importers would be having all the say In the expenditure of the country’s overseas funds. He did not consider the association’s proposal for the replacement of import licensing by exchange control practical. The morning after the Government’s announcement of The removal of control from 326 items in the tariff schedule he looked at. the newspapers to see the reaction of traders to this gesture, thinking it would be enthusiastically received, but all he saw was a complaint that the Government had made a mess of the thing because there were no pianos in it. Some importers had complained that the Gov. ernment had taken a retrograde step in reverting to December 31 for the close of the import licensing year. The Government, however, had put the 1951 schedule out earlier than ever—on Auguste I—and had given importers 17 months to organise and get the goods into the country. “Having given you 17 months to the end of December next year, we mean that the date has to stand,” he said. “There must not be any pushing about of the dates.”