FOOD DUTIES.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8356, 17 February 1913, Page 11

FOOD DUTIES.

LORD SELBORNE’S VIEWS IMPERIAL PREFERENCE IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT ADJUSTMENT. DISSENSION GROWING AMONG UNIONISTS. By Telegraph—Press Association— Copyright (Received February 16, 5.5 p.m-) LONDON, February 16. Lord Sclborno, speaking at Liverpool, said that while he accepted All jlomtr Law’s decision on food duties, ho regretted it. . _ They would bo unable, he sard, to complete imperial preference without an adjustment of the food taxes. It the Dominions did not receive reciprocity the day would come when they would make reciprocal bargains with Germany or some other country. In his Albert Hall speech, in November last. Air fionar l*iw said;,’ . • • ■ At this moment throughout' the whole world there is not a single Government and—what is stranger—(hero is not a single Opposition wnich proposes to return to the (Freotrade) system which is still good enough for the United Kingdom. They have all abandoned it, and it is tlio working classes who are responsible tor its abandonment, becaus they have realised the obvious truth that you cannot raise the standard of living, that you cannot protect labour, without also protecting the products of labour. Now, there is one other general observation ■ I should like to mako. X am,, and i have been for many years, a I arm Reformer. But lam a Conservative, not only as a party name, but conservative by nature and by instinct. And I can assure you of this —that any change for which we are responsible will not bo a revolutionary change, and will cause the smallest po&sCble dislocation of the ordinary business arrangements .compatible with making this necessary change. As Lord Lansuowne has pointed out, our object is to give to our own people a preference in the oversea markets ot the British Empire, This is as necessary for them tram a pure trade point of view as security on the Homo market. Its value is admitted. At the Colonial Conference the present Prime Minister and the present Chancellor ot the Exchequer both said that this preference was of enormous value to_ the trade of this country. Well, if it is of any value, enormous or not, is it not worth keeping? -and was not the next step, the inevitable step, to find out what the value was, to consider what the advantage of it was, and to weigh against that any possible disadvantage. They never dreamt of doing that. Why? Because they realised, and they were right, that the dear loaf was a good party cry. They seized it. it .has served them well. ... As Lord Lansdown© ■ has told you, we shall not treat any revenue derived from so-called tood taxes, whatever they are, which may be imposed for preference, as ordinary revenue. We shall use it to diminish the burdens which in other ways are falling upon the poorer classes of this country. It will not be an addition to taxation; it will be a readjustment of taxation. And owing to this revenue, and owing to the expansion which 1 am certain will come with this change of system, I say that instead of adding to the cost of living the adjustment which we shall make will mako the burden smaller and not larger that tails upon the working classes. ' Mr Bonar Law, speaking at Ashton-under-Lyne on December 17th, declared that the greatest problem statesepa were faced with was how to obtain fairer method of distributing industrial wealth. He. believed that the remedy was co-operation, assisted by a fair fiscal system. If tho Unionists were entrusted with power they did not intend to impose food taxes without first convening a colonial conference to consider f the whole question of preferential trade. The question of food duties would only arise after deliberation at the conference. That was why he objected to submit the proposals to a referendum. In dealing with food duties an essential condition would die that the burdens of the poorer classes would not be increased. The ideal policy was ' free trade within the Empire. It was impossible to get it now with the colonies, though a system ot preference would tend ultimately to end in that direction. They could have freetrade with India to-morrow. .India feared not tho competition of Britain but of Japan. The whole experience of the civilised world was hostile to the British fiscal system. Our colonies, had abandoned it, and no serious politician in any country proposes to return thereto. The Unionists did not intend to adopt a protective policy to foster unnatural industries. They would impose duties lower than any, industrial country, and would not encourage the upbuilding of, monopolies. They merely intended to give their own workmen preference in their own market to enable them to compete with trade rivals, and also to secure the largest preference possible in the overseas markets. It was promised clearly that the Unionists would define tho duties before the general ©lection. He hoped it would bo unnecessary to'impose more than a duty on wheat, and if, after the conference with the colonies, the duties wero regarded as unnecessary* they would never be imposed. .... _ . Speaking at a Unionist dinner on i'ribruary 9 th. Mr Bonar Law said that the moment the Unionists were entrusted with power they would be able, without food duties, to-give the Dominions precisely what they asked for in the imperial conferences, namely, preference on existing duties. If it was found impossible, said Mr Law, to have a -preferential system which would help in consolidating the Empire without tood duties, then they would endeavour to carry the latter, but only after submitting the issue to the people and convincing them that the duties would be an advantage both to the Empire and to the United Kingdom. .... . Speaking on the following day, the Eight Hon. Henry Chaplin, Unionist member for 'Wimbledon division of Surrey, refused to acquiesce in tho Unionists’ decision as regards the postponement of the food duties question till after a second election. He regards such postnement as likely to jeopardise or innitely postpone preference, and declared that the panicky abandonment of food taxes is not calculated to appeal to the electors.