IMPERIAL PREFERENCE.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20488, 5 March 1932, Page 11

IMPERIAL PREFERENCE.

10 THE eDITOtt OP TUB PRSSS Sir, —Your Parliamentary reporter is in error in statirig that "the heavy concessions which New Zealand allows British goods entering this country'' more than offset the advantages that will be given to us by Britain's new tariff. New Zealanders have little reason for patriotic pride in the so-, called preference' extended to goods from the Mother Country. When preference was first mooted, 1. in common wivh many others, hoped that it would take the form of a reduction in the duties levied on English goods, but we reckoned without those interested parties who, taking advantage of the wave of patriotism then sweeping over the Empire, saw merely tho opportunity of obtaining further shelter for their own industries from, overseas competition. So in all the Dominions duties on British goods were left untouched, but those on foreign goods raised. Since that time in most of the Dominons the duties on Britisli as well as foreign goods have been ■ repeatedly raised, in some cases to an almost prohibitory extent. (This applies to New Zealand, I am glad to say, much less than to other parts of tho Empire.) Under such conditions preference is more or less of a mockery.

Britain, on the other hand, instead of discouraging her people from buying Empire goods by levying duties on them, has for several years past spent annually £1,000,000 of her taxpayers money in the encouragement of Empire trade. Except for such articles as wines and tobacco, she levies no duties on goods coming from the Dominions. If the people of England choose to buy goods from New Zealand they have to pav no fine in the way of duty for so dofng. With regard to 46 per cent, of our imports from the Old Country, those of us who have the temerity to buy them are mulcted in heavy penalties for the sake of our own local industry. . Your correspondent falls into an error, common among Protectionist writers, in his remarks relating to the £21,000.000 worth of our goods, that will in future enjoy an advantage in the Home market. He says: _ A 10 per cent., penalty upon this would be £2,100,000, which is the duty New Zealand would have had to pay if the Dominions were not exempted.' , Jlns dutv would not be paid by New Zealand but by the British consumers. Unfortunately for Protectionist • arguments no method has vet been dis-. covered of making foreigners pay duties levied by any particular countrv.—Yours, etc., .T. E. STEVENS. March 4 th, 1932.