The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland. N.Z. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1927. RETRIMMING THE TARIFF

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 167, 5 October 1927, Page 8

The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland. N.Z. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1927. RETRIMMING THE TARIFF

ALMOST in record time the Government has found it necessary, as well as expedient, to alter the new customs tariff which recently provoked throughout the Dominion an eruption of protest. The House of Representatives was given an opportunity last evening to amend the schedule and remove many anomalies and irksome impositions. Though it would have been better for Ministerial prestige if the thing had not been inaugurated in its original form at all, ijie Hon. W. Downie Stewart, as Minister of Customs, whose quick sense of fairness is an outstanding feature of his political creed, is to he commended for the promptitude with which he has agreed to retrim the rough-hewn tariff and make it a better instrument for everybody concerned in its operations. It would be unfair to say that “all the things he vowed he would not do are the things that he has done.” The Minister made it clear at the outset of his amending policy that the changes proposed and so quickly made (as must always be the practice in respect of altering the tariff law) would have to he measured and adjusted in relation to their effect in general experience. It is probable that the Minister himself has been astonished at the rapidity of the national movement for readjustment. That he has responded so quickly and so fairly to it is much to his credit and may not be used as a rod for his back. He has tried to do the right thing well, and has even yielded to the counsel of technical objectors in cases where his own knowledge and judgment still convince him that his original proposals were not wrong. This is most noticeable concerning the Ministerial decision to restore the motor-body duties to what they were before. The alterations in the scale had been made with a view to affording benefit; where benefit seemed needed most, but the clamour of protest against them has. persuaded the Minister against his will to go back to the old rate. But Mr. Stewart is of the same opinion still and told members of the House last evening, and also the motor-body builders in New Zealand, that he believed the objectors had made a mistake and would, in a few years’ time, approach some Minister of Customs to give them something along the lines of what they were now rejecting. If that should come about the Minister will have the last and the best laugh. Meanwhile, the manufacturers chuckle with satisfaction. The most noteworthy alterations include the reversion to the old rates of duty in respect of motor vehicles and cinema films. It has been decided wisely to abandon the increased duty on foreign films and to take steps with more deliberation to develop preference to British films in another way. The idea now is to introduce the quota system, and the necessary legislation will he brought down later in the session. In the meantime, the innumerable patrons of picture shows will not have an extra tax passed on to them. It will he time enough to impose higher duties or foreign films when Great Britain has developed the cinema film industry to the point of deserving preference. As a whole the retrimmed tariff is a vast improvement on the original, but it still falls far short of making the cost of living easier for the taxpayers.

THE POLICE AND THE CHILD

THERE is cause for reflection in the cynical statement of Mr. Jordan, M.P., that the Education Department is not concerned with trying to keep young people from going astray, but is prepared to spend a lot of money to reform them after they have gone astray. The position, of course, is not so had as is implied by the member for Manukau; but it does seem that child welfare work in New Zealand should be a little more preventive and a little less curative in its application. It is the abnormal or subnormal child whose misdirected energies or perverted instincts set aimless feet upon the path of criminality. Pew normal children whose home control is efficient get into mischief which brings them within reach of the law. The obvious thing, then, is to concentrate upon the early supervision of the unfortunate minority who are not normal. In this connection, heed might well be paid the suggestion of the Leader of the Opposition, who asks if it is not x>ossible to extend the scope of child welfare work to include young people who are just beyond the present age limit. Mr. Holland points out, very truly, that many children are not fit subjects for punishment, children who are certainly not normal and who can only properly be dealt with in a special institution controlled by specialists in psychology. Some institution of this kind is certainly required. A question that has vexed the minds of the good people interested in child welfare is whether policemen should appear in uniform in a Court dealing with children. There is a difference of opinion about this, even among magistrates; but one is inclined to side with Mr. T. M. Wilford, M.P., who says his experience leads him to think it would be unwise to take the policeman’s uniform out of the Children’s Court, as it is the only symbol that remains there to remind the child of law and order. The sight of the uniform has sometimes a salutary effect even upon adults. A statement was made in Parliament by Mr. H. G. R. Mason which cannot lightly be passed by. Mr. Mason alleged that the clause in the Act prohibiting the reporting of cases in the Children’s Court, excepting with the eonsent of the magistrate, is not being observed in Auckland. His statement is quite incorrect; no such cases are reported without the consent of the magistrate. Mr. Mason is on surer ground when he urges that child welfare work should be under a separate department, instead of being an appendage of the Education Department, for child welfare work does not come within the scope of ordinary education and should be directed by specialists.