PREFERENCE TARIFF.

Hokitika Guardian, 11 December 1924, Page 4

PREFERENCE TARIFF.

nil-: “SKi'K-.vrv* v-iVK j*i:i; ckn'l"’ rioouirkmknt. WELLINGTON December S. Comments on the working of New /■on in nd'.s British preferential tariff, non- made to-day l»y the* Him. W. Dotvnio Stewart, Minister of Customs, who dealt also with the Canadian negotiations for variation of the 77 per ic-nt of Hritish material and workman-

ship which is required under the latest Customs revision before imports obtain British perferential rates of duty. "There appears to he some misunderstanding,’’ .said the .Minister, “with respeet to a decision to admit until April I. 1 !>•_’<;. under the liritish preferential tariff, paper made wholly in Britain and British possessions from foreign pulp, even though To per cent of factory or works cost "is not represented hv British material and labour. It is in effect aliened that this decision means that the new basis has already broken down. Those familiar with the administration of preferential tariff regulations will know that similar questions arose under the 27 per cent basis and that they are hound to arise in greater degree with every im-rcase in tlio percentage. They will also know that the rpioted decision regarding paper is merely a cnntiniiamo of the policy hitherto followed when such questions arose many years ago. Tt was decided that goods made wholly in (Beat Britain or other British possessions from sui-li foreign materials as ingots of gold or of sbne. rough hewn timber or fibres of various kinds, were entitled to preference even if the expenditure in British materials or labour was less than 2d per cent, tt could not have been reasonably argued that this was evidence that the 2d per cent basis wns'too high. Vet today it is claimed that the recent, decision in respect of paper proves that the percentage should he reduced. As already stated, exaetlv similar difficulties will arise whether the percentage is dp or 7-d. A decision as to future policy with respect to paper has been postponed until a later date pending receipt of certain information not obtainable in New Zealand. “A similar point has been raised with respect to bar and other iron made in ("treat Britain from foreign billets and blooms: and without doubt many similar questions will arise in other directions. The (lovernment agreed to give a trial to the 7d polecat proposal in view of the great im-p/mlant-e -d maintai'ning a uniform practice both in Australia and Xt‘\v Zealand, as otherwise oxnorters would be nut to grave inconvenience.

“Recently the flovernment has received rem-esentat ions from Canada with respect to the adoption of a .70 per cent basis in lieu of the 7d basis, and is at present, in communication with the Governments of that country and Australia. II .should. however, lie recognised tint in coming to a decision it is necessary to view- the matter from many angles. Consideration has to lie given among other things to the interests of our own manufacturer*, and of those in other parts of the British Knipire. also to the difficulties which are created for exporters if each 'Dominion adopts an independent system involving dilferent forms of certified invoices with consequent delay and inconvenience caused to importers in New Zealand and elsewhere through documents not being in order when til' 1 goods arrive, *’