CANADA’S TARIFF

Hokitika Guardian, 30 July 1931, Page 6

CANADA’S TARIFF

j BUTTER CAUSES POLITTCAIi STORM. VANCOUVER, June 12. During tlte past. month butter lias become in increasing volume, a major issue in Canadian polities, and 'is, at the moment, embarrassing the Bennett Government. Things have not turned ; out as Mr Bennett anticipated when he directed his election campaign against i the New Zealand treaty and the I volume of butter import it brought in ! its train. When the treaty was ahroj gated, an arrangement was made with i Australia by which butter might he ! imported on condition it was not sold under Is 6d per lb. Half a million pounds came in during the winter, and, when the price toppled, Australia was released from her contract and the butter was liberated on the market, j Then the storm burst on tbe Prairies. ! The same epithets that were hurled by I the Canadian Dairy Association at i New Zealand butter into the sympathetic ears of Mr Bennett were rei created l and hurled at Australian lmtI ter. The demand for a dumping duty I reached its peak when finality on the pending rejuvenated reciprocity treaty ! with Australia seemeef likely to fie reached. Liberals whose Budget of 1930 increased the duty from one to four cents on New Zealand butter (when no Australian was on the market), demanding some adequate protection for Canadian industry, from which so much was expected after the Prime Minister's lavish election promises. History was repeating itself as the noise and turmoil of the debate rose to a pitch rarely experienced in the House of Commons at Ottawa. Three months after the Australian treaty was signed in 1925, so much Australian butter came in that a storm of protest wa,s raised by Conservatives. Then Australian butter was checked. Meantime tbe provisions of the treaty were j extended to New Zealand by Order-in- . Council and New Zealand entered the Canadian market with the greatest volume of butter ever landed in a single year. The Liberal Government planned to check the movement. The elections intervened and the Conservatives gave it. the coup de-grace. Now the treaty jis up for revision. Will Australian butter again Hood the market, to make wav in turn for New Zealand butter? A HARMFUL IMPOST. The Liberals are harping on Australia taking the place of New Zealand as a source of butter imports. The GovI eminent retorts that- the import movement is far less now than when so much New Zealand butter came in that, it was sold as Canadian jn. Canadian wrappers. The Government is at pains to justify the marketing of the half million pounds that were in storage, and is coming under heavy criticism i for lifting the embargo against Australian butter. One memlrer contended that the eight cent duty placed on New Zealand butter is too high—more than the dairy-farmer expected—and is really harmful in its effect on prices. Altogether a situation is developing which may he described as piquant, if not -Gilbertian. j The position was not made any more i comfortable for the Government during j the two days’ storm, but the announce- j meat from one of the Prairie members [ that two butter firms contemplated securing a monopoly of handling all the butter produced or imported in Canada. The Minister replied >.W be was unaware of the existence:-;of the threaten- i ed combine, but believed there was sufficient protection in the law for the producer against such a prospect. Under continued pressure from members of his own Party, w'm find slipp'd into Parliament on New Zealand buttT | at the last election, tbe Minister announced gravely that tfi • Government - policy regarding the Uni'"" - j prehendecl the fullest results of tli's ; r>- 1 dustry going to the farmer, no matter j what the importer, fhe wholesaler, nrddleinan, or retailer got from it. He aimed at a double-beaded ideal ; products of such quality that they could compete favourably with any country j at lowest possible cost, and the afore- j said protection for the dairy-fanner, I vjhich had-the ring-of a preamole to the) old-time Socialist platiqrm. )