DUTIES ON IMPORTS

Hokitika Guardian, 17 January 1933, Page 3

DUTIES ON IMPORTS

GOODS FROM BRITAIN. ■ REPLY TO MR GOODFKLLOW. AUCKLAND, January 14. 'Air G'Oodtelknv is, reported to have irgetl- in a recent speech at Whangara> •he immediate .reduction of duties on mportations of British goods,” said Mr A. Takle ) president of the Auckland Manufacturers’ Ar«ociation, yesterday. ‘Tins lie claimed, ""as. necessary for the ma'ntc. ounce of our pres e nt facilities to market our dairy produce in Jvngland. “It is an interesting fact that Australia, with her superior development of secondary industries, conceded much less to Britain at Ottawa. thin New Zealand: did. New .Zealand conceded actual in duties ,to Britain, while Australia only increased duties igainst foreigners. .We have already removed the •surtax, thus bringing considerable concessions into operation. “Th e Ottawa Conference , knew that the immediate scaling down of tariff in the Dominions would create impossible revenue and employment difficulties and consequently left the matter to be dealt with as soon as po. : 6ibl e • by the Governments concerned. . 'Air Good fellow R n.ot reported as saying how he proposed to employ the city population, who would lose them Vobs through his Vmb-ta'.'.ti"! reduction in duties policy,’ nor did he s ay wind taxes he proposed to substitute for the duties lost on importation. “Seeing that all farm requirement imported from Britain come in fre e of duty, and from official figures thf amount of duty paid in ‘farm cost' altogether is only about 2s per £IOO and that farm wages are at a minimum, it m evidently not running costs but overhead that is the burden on thf farmer. Further impoverishment of the towns will only reduce the local demand for farm products and make the primary producer's position ‘worse than at present.”