The Times. Published Tuesday and Friday Afternoons. TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1921. EXPLOITING THE CONSUMER

Franklin Times, Volume 9, Issue 661, 23 August 1921, Page 4

The Times. Published Tuesday and Friday Afternoons.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1921. EXPLOITING THE CONSUMER

“We nothing extenuate, nor aught set down in malice.”

For some time past a somewhat acrimonious correspondence upon the value to us of our secondary industries has appeared in the Auckland daily press. One of the original planks in the platform of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union and, in our opinion, the most important one after the declaration for the freehold tenure, is that Customs duties shall foe for revenue producing purposes, and not for protection, and it is around this text that the controversy has raged. It is evident that when we put an import tariff on any article high enough to protect the local manufacturer of that commodity we kill its value as a revenue producer. What it paid by way of customs duty formerly has to* be then made up by the general taxpayer. And. competition being thus eliminated, the consumer has to pay a largely increased price for the article. The effect of a high protective tariff, therefore, means to the genera! public lugher direct taunt job and a higher cost of living. ! Against this ah that can be set is a huge inoee-e m the prohts ot the manufacturer?, and (perhaps) a slightly higher wage for the very limited number cl roar or-ployed inlire trade. The extent to which the pubb'c are thus ex! b } i f x: u - ay be ouowu by refere nee to the mo.nu fact are or cur tnliow r.ml hides into the'finished, artitcle.'- vaf r !arx r ca. For the last twelve months the- price obtainable for tallow has been so k»v that the*

producer scarcely looks upon it as a tangible asset. Yet every housewife has to pay famine prices for her soap and candles. It would be difficult to estimate to what extent the consumer is robbed by protection of these particular manufactures, but it must run into some millions yearly,. And, so far ait least as candles are concerned, the country people suffer while the townsmen escape. With regard to the hides the position is even worse. For a year hides have been only fetching about onefifth of their previous prices, yet the fall in the price of boots has been insignificant. For a long period the Government exploited the growers of hides by placing an embargo upon their export. Wc presume the intention was to give the people reasonably cheap boots, but the result was not attained. New Zealand, where hides could be bought cheaper than in any place in the world, had to pay more for boots than any country in the world. Australian manufacturers, paying at least twice as much for their raw material as New Zealand makers, and payingfreight and our high protective tariff in addition, were able to place boots here at a profit because the prices of the locally made ones were so high. This week news comes that the price of Australian boots has fallen by 25 per cent., so we may expect some slight measure of relief here. To foster secondary industries by high protection in a thinly populated country that has not men enough to till one-tenth of its cultivable country is as absurd as it would be for a farmer with 500 acres "to cultivate only a quarter of it and spend half his time making- his own boots and candles. We have said before, and repeat it, that if the high protective tariff were taken off boots and a moderate revenue-producing duty put on, the people of New Zealand would save at least two millions annually, ant! would be relieved of taxation to the extent of a couple of hundred thousand annually.