OTTAWA PACTS BROKEN.

Waikato Times, Volume 117, Issue 19545, 6 April 1935, Page 9

OTTAWA PACTS BROKEN.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —Many .people in New Zealand wonder why Great Britain Is considering quotas or import duties on New Zealand’s primary products, and are very resentful at such a suggestion. These people fail to realise that Great Britain has waited two and a half years for New Zealand to live up to her part of the Ottawa agreement, and that her patience is now quite justifiably wearing out. The exchange of 25 per cent. Is In itself sufficient penalty against English manufactured goods, and,should toe sufficient protection for any economically sound local industry. However, Great Britain has waited in vain for New Zealand to remove tariff harriers against her manufactured goods. Instead of-this, New Zealand has Imposed tariffs where previously they did not exist. Such an example Is disclosed in the annual report of a New Zealand company, as published In the Christchurch Sun. I would particularly draw attention to the following statement which appears in the report: “The company was successful in obtaining a protective tariff of 15 per oent. against the imported British' dry cells, and 40 per cent, against the foreign article —a measure of ■ protection which, though modest, would undoubtedly be of great help in the further development of the industry."

Although the Tariff Commission recommended that no alteration be made to the existing tariff, which admitted the cells free if of British manufacture, an announcement was made to the effect that the Government proposed placing a duty of 15 per cent, on British and 40 per cent-, plus 9-40, on foreign. A deputation, including His Majesty’s Trade Commissioner, who had received Instructions from London, therefore waited on the Minister of 'Customs and requested that the duty on British be removed. This was ignored and the tariff came into operation. British manufacturers who were doing business with New Zealand felt very keenly ‘the action of the New Zealand Government in imposing the duty on the British article.

1 would like to draw attention to some salient features in the matter, i.e.— (i) The tariff was put into operation in direct violation of the Ottawa agreement; (2) although British manufacturers appealed through His .Majesty’s Trade Commissioner and their representatives in New Zealand against the duly, the appeal was ignored; (3) the industry for whose protection the tariff was imposed is obviously an uneconomic one. I think publicity -should he given to this matter, as the blame in connection with quotas and import duties on our primary products lies at our own ■door, and not at Lite* door of Great Britain, who has obviously been very patient in wailing so long before considering sucli action. —1 am, etc.,

, INTERESTED Auckland. April 4, 1935.