TRADE AGREEMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 27 October 1933, Page 5

TRADE AGREEMENT

N.Z. & AUSTRALIA DEBATE IN N.Z. HOUSE OF REPS. (Per Press Association—Copyright.) WELLINGTON, October 26. In ' the House of Representatives urgency was accorded the passage ml' the customs resolutions and the first reading of the Aus-valia-New Zealand Trade Agreement Bill. Ak H. T. Armstrong (Lab., Christchurch East), said he was sorry the Government was not affording more protection to New Zealand footwear industry. Ah- A. Harris (Govt.," Waitemata) sr.ic! as far as he could s ee , ‘he agreement appeared to be satisfactory from both countries’ .points of view. The removal of the primage duty on Now Zealand goods entering Australia, was a concession which would be appreciated by exporters. Air H. Atmore , (Ind., Nelson) expressed disappointment that nothing had been done to encourage the sale of New Zealand hops in Australia. The 7 present tariff was prohibitive. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Lab., Avon) .said he did nob think that New Zealand ■had gained any advantages that would help to .adjust the present unfavourable trade balance, He Was.’sorry the Government had'not endoavourhid to protect and develop New 'Zealand’s secondary industries to a greater extent. Mr H. S. S. Kyle (Govt,, Riocarton), said that on the whole, the Governrrrnt wn.s to be congratulated on the

agreement. Replying to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr -Savage), Air Coates sa'd the second reading of the Bill would not he 'taken until about the end cf the week, because the budget would be introduced in the meantime. Mr Coates said the balance of trade had always been in favour of Australia aryl he- did not consider, any 'agreement which might be made with the Commonwealth would enable.trade to be balanced because . New Zealand was hlmest wholly dependent upon primary' products for exports whereas Australia had developed its second ?i’y_ industries to on extent not possible in A country having the population of New Zealand. It was expected, however. that the. -new -agreement .would result in a more even bn’mee. . At times, producers ‘ and tnanu'fr.ie'tiTr-e-.s in New Zealand complained that ow-rg to the higher rates of duty generally levied in Australia than in New ,Zeal-nd on the same classes of goods, Australian traders were able +0 send their products to this fornGy. and com-, pete in the New ..'Zealand , markets. wh'e"pa s New Zealand merchart* were in effect shut quit of the Arstv-l’ian in nrlcet. " The' agreement ': provided a' method of .ovm’cmnitig rnuch difficult.?,. After three months’ notice the AHsß’a* Urn Government nwst reduce the •dutv on such New Zealand goods enter"2 the Oommo'Twealth to the lower 'duty in -force in this Dominion on Am'.traßsn goods. If this course, was rot. followed -the New Zealand Govern meet had the right to immense the rate on the \ nstr-.lia-* goods to that in force T> the Commonwealth . 0 n our goods. The provision was reeku'oe-J.

This provision with relating to the '•{ rUred r ,'-p-b’.’p,V'; p,r>d Tn.anuf'ietrrmv in both countries op an oven pornrct’ijve ibas's. W’th reseed to po'vJs ipaTtia’lv mann.f'' r, tui"erl nr TvTew Zejl..«t!, Ar-HraH?. hither'-o granted preferene? provided, that 75 nor cent, of tbo. f'.v’tory o” v-ovV s .postf, was, ic-proso-t-ed hv in v eur r ’<"- land, material and for Irbour. In similar cinmmstiarces,' New Zealand granted a-' : tariff .rirofpv/pjoe op Australian goods provided Mie expenditu-’e in materia] •and'/or labour within the 'Empire was not If'S3 than 50 ppr rent of the fac-tc-’v 00 pit of g"ods. Under the agreement, the Ivdis of preference will be practically the sane in both countries, and V. is prov d- 1 that goo-ds partially manufactured in Avstrpd’a r r New Zoafar d shall not he .roirarded os .prodwe ov wan "fact ore c-f the Ccnrnopwealth or Dominion, unless the expenditure in material produced in either country and blnur performed w'tbit!. either eonntw wot bb than, one half of the factory mr -works cost of the goods in their finished Mate. ■Tt wns provided that neither rcuntrv .should, exeeot hv mutual arrangement, or not}! iafte-f sir calend."r mer-thd notice, lineren°e duties on the goods rpeo'ioued in the schedule.

The right was reserved for either ■MVMitrv to impose new duties upon any gecds f"r the protcrMon of n;ew i-.luc-trmo ost'blished «r p-oposed to be established or to collect pj> impose (!•,- |cs 0,. .-no In gnus special duties In meet abnormal trading condildnuc. Tt also .provided that no ftpomal rebate or bounty should he granted by cither country in respect to sti gar contained in -any goods evromod to'the o-h n r. if the result of such rrbat-o or bounty wps to reduce the pnee of refined -sugar belo'v tbp import p'rity of similar types °f sugar. Provision was made for ad«'is r ’' , io free of (Infs' into Australia or New Zealand of publicity films produced by ov for the Government of either country.