INCREASED PREFERENCES.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18408, 15 June 1925, Page 11

INCREASED PREFERENCES.

—4 TOBACCO, FRUITS, WINE. LABOUR RANKS DIVIDED. (bt cable—pskss association— corraionr.) (ricter's teleorajisJ LONDON", Juno 12. Clauses dealing with increased Imperial preference on tobacco, dried and preserved fruits, and wino carao up for consideration in the Houso of Commons, when Professor 11. B. Lees Smith (Labour) moved a crippling amendment, to postpone tho oporatioa of preferences until January Ist next. Professor Smith argued that vested interests in tho Dominions and colonics would grow up behind the preference duties. It simply meant subsidising certain colonial produce and constituting a payment to tho interosts of the Dominions, who had a standard of prosperity higher and taxation lower thau Great Britain. Tho preferences would givo the most advantago to Australia, very little to South Africa, not a shilling to Canada or Now Zealand, and not a shilling reduction in prices to tho pooplo of Great Britain. Tho Hon. W. E. Guinness (Financial Secretary to tho Treasury), defonding the proposals, said tho preferences would dovolop alternative sources of supply, and any tomporary outlay would ultimately benefit United Kingdom consumers once Empire production became tho dominant factor. , "We do not imagine," he said, "that thoro will bo an immodiato roduction in the price of most commodities apart from tobacco." Developing the .Empire. Kef erring to Professor Lees Smith's argumonts, ho contended that tho aim should bo to get capital embarked on tho development of tho waste lands or"' tho Empire, for food and raw materials, whifh would eventually lead to tho reduction of prices. Largo producors of manufactured tobacco had assured them that, although the limited scope of tho preferences would not decrease the cpst of mixed tobacco, they intended to give the full benefit on pure Imperial tobacco to those who smoked it in the pure form, and as a result therefrom Great Britain should have a class of tobacco on tho market cheaper than any hitherto available. Mr Guinness said the proposals were meant as far as possible to meot the Dominions' dosires as expressed at the Economic Conference. Tho Government believed that the provision was long ovorduo because for many years Great Britain had enjoyed preferences which were freely given long before countervailing advantages were offered, and these proposals bad done much to develop inter-Imperial trade. "The Dominions gave preferences during the development period," said Mr Guinness, "and now they have become a powerful factor in the world's trade we should do everything possible with tho free-trade system to givo corresponding benefits. The Dominions do not lack foreign suitors commercially. We have a free gift from the Dominions far more valuablo in. proportion per capita of population than we are offering in return." ' .■!<.■■■ ■■■ Olydeside Leader's Support.' Mr E. A,! Harney, K.C. (Liberal), expressed the opinion that preference was economically futilo and politically un r wise. Ho declared ' that unless Great Britain gavo Australia, New Zealand and Canada advantages on the primary products,! wool, meat and wheat, .preferr once would be useless and this would lead to the substitution of an-irritating system of bargaining for a system based on affection. A division of Opinion was revealed in the ranks of Labourites, sovetal oi whom warmly eupported preference* notably Mr D. Kirkwobd, on behalf of tho Clydesiders. Mr Klrkwood said ho wanted to go further, and sell the Dominions' produce in Great Britain at cost price, hut they in nowise favoured free-trade and sweating. They infinitely preferred fruit from Australia and Ncy? Zealand, where it was produced for fair, wages and in hygienic conditions,, to that from the Nqar, East, whero the conditions were appalling. Moreover, they were all for cementing the Empire, which was the best way of accomplishing universal peace. N . ."' Mr Winston Churehill, replying, welcomed the extraordinary manifestation from the Labour benches, which he knew was the outcome of serious private discussions. It waß a sign that the dej velopment of Imperial trade, apart from ! taxation on food, waa passing from the realm of party politics. The preferences, ho added, woujd not reach the consumer, notably in sugar, but they would stimulate Empire production, and tho smoker would reap the benefit of the tobacco reduction immediately, The amendment; was defeated by 277 votes to 93. NEW EMPIRE SPIRIT. • r ~* (AUSTRALIAN AKD S.Z. CABLZ ASSOCIATION.) (Received June 14th, 11.5 p.m.) LONDON, June 14. The "Observer" commends {he Colonial Office changes and tho votes of tho Labour members for preference as indicating the awakening of a new spirit of Empire. Ifc suggests that if Unionists and tho rising forces of Labour are in agreement that Imperial policy is a national question we may hope to over- j take tho arrears of organisation and development which stand between Britain and economic recovery. HOW LABOUR VOTED. PREFERENCE GAININUIN PARTY. (Received June 14th, 5.5 pjn.) LONDON, June IS. In the preference division in the House of Commons 20 Labour members voted for preference, compared with five last year. (Continued at fobifc of nest column.)

The National Union of Manufacturers is taking up'the preference campaign. with its slogan, "Buy British goods," under whieh heading Dominions* food* stuffs is given prominence. ' Labour Commoners supporting preferences included the frontbenchers, Messrs J. H. Thomas, V. Hartshorn awl T. Kennedy. Other, frontbenchers, ia« eluding Mr Barusay MaeDonald, were against it. Most of the Glydeaiders were absent, but they intimated that taey would have voted with the Government. Mr G. Lansbury wired, asking to'bo paired in favour of preference. At a recent meeting of the ladout Party 32 members were anti-preference and 27 in favour of it. The last-sa»ed group increased by five in. three days. The "Daily Herald" lobbyist "aays; The indications aro that there is a ' steadily grpwing minority, in. theXabour Party in favour of a modified fcria of preference, provided that it doe* sot involve increased cost of foodstuffs aad that goods to which preference is given are produced under fair labour conditions., CHANCELLOR'S SPEECH. NO DANGER OF FOOD v TAX. ("Aaocs.") (Received June 14th, 5.5 pjn.) LONDON, June 12. In the House of Commons, Sir Churchill, in the course of the preference debate, said there was bo danger that preference would lead to a tax on basic food necessaries which might lead to a collision between kith and kin in Britain and in the Dominions. For ten years the Conservatives had repudiated any intention of taxing bade foods. Not one Liberal had challenged the preference resolution passed at the 1917 Imperial Conference. The more they could keep this controversy and party-splitting issues out of the resin of Imperial development the more they would build up a great consensus of unity on basic freedom and goodwill. .