Higher Duties on Wearing Apparel

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 173, 12 October 1927, Page 8

Higher Duties on Wearing Apparel

URGED BY LABOUR PROPOSAL DEFEATED (THE SUN’S Parliamentary Reporter.J WELLINGTON, Tuesday. TT is felt by a considerable section of the House of Representatives that the proposed duty upon apparel, ready-made clothing, and hosiery,, is insufficient to protect * the New Zealand manufacturer. A motion by Mr. M. J. Savage, Auckland West, this afternoon, during further discussion In committee on the Customs Amendment Bill, that this item should be postponed with a view to an increase in the duty, was supported by three members of the Reform Party as well as by the Labour, Liberal, and Nationalist Parties. In reply to Mr. J. McCombs, Lyttelton, who urged increased protection, the Minister of Customs, the Hon. W. Downie Stewart, said that statistics showed that in recent years Australia, with a higher duty, had a higher importation a head of these articles than had New Zealand. On apparel, the average rate of duty in Australia was 38.2 per cent., as against 25.7 per cent, in New Zealand, yet there wan an increase of importations in Australia in 1926-27 of 9 per cent., while at the same time in New Zealand there ws.s a decrease of 9 per cent. Mr. Savage: We are told that the higher the duty is, the higher the imports will be. I wonder whether members are going to swallow that? Would the Minister suggest that if the tariff were wiped out altogether, imports would cease? It would be a great mistake to increase the duty any further, because it would only be a tax on the people, said Mr. J. S. Dickson, Parnell. BRITISH COMPETITION The Leader of the Opposition. Mr. H. E. Holland, said that employees in the ready-made clothing trade were very much concerned about having higher duties put on imported articles, as many of them were now working short time. Last year the value of imports was £2,260,000, and of New Zealand manufactures, £2,340,000. Of the Im-

ports, goods to the value of only £117,645 came from: foreign countries, and £2.141,767 came from Great Britain, so that it was :he British product that to-day was cutting under the New Zealand manufacturers. There were about 212 ready-mace clothing factories in New Zealand employing about 7,000 workers, with, a wages bill of £750,000. Mr. Holland had been told that between 1922 and 1925 the number of workers was reduced by 500, but the employers said that if they were g’iven ample protection they could practically double the number of their employees. It was admitted that some of the material could not be manufactured in New Zealand, but the raw material should be allowed in free. Mr. H. L. Tapley, member for Dunedin North, considered that if 75 per cent; of the ready-made clothing used in the Dominion was being imported it was conclusive evidence that the local manufactures were not receiving the protection to which they were entitled. He advocated at least 5 per cent, over and above that proposed in the schedule. Mr. T. M. Wilford’s outlook on tariff generally—and on ready-made clothing incidentally—was in the direction of Empire preference first and secondly, “Keep the money in tie family.” The Minister quoted figures which showed the growth of the hosiery manufacturing industry in New Zealand, the output having increased from £178,000 in 1921-22 to £297,000 last Year, and the employees from 276 in 1921-22 to 498 last year. Importations of this commodity during the same period decreased from £704,000 to £506,000.

Mr. J. Horn, Wakatipu, advance! the view that New Zealand manufacturers wanted protection against the cheap classes of Imported goods rather than against the better articles. Mr. Savage suggested that the Minister should postpone fixation of the duty upon apparel and ready-made clothing and hosiery, so that further consideration could be given to it. IS PROTECTION WANTED? The Minister said that he could not agree to the suggestion. The industries had indicated that they did not want higher duties. Savage: They have not told me they didn t want it, and I represent some of them in this House. I would like to see the British preferential tariff cent. eaße<i £rom 25 per ce nt. to 39 per f„m r ;»^ Sai V h « U was m »st un. f®- i f l , that Zealand people should build up such a huge trade with Great Britain as had been done with cod postal orders. r? T J^ e^ hai f ITian of the Committee, Mr. F * Hockly, ruled t!iat the point did

not come under tariff, and mu* discuss€td. aljoiit Mr. Horn persisted in mail orders, until Mr. Hock him to resume his seat. Jtn upon respect of his ruling. ~ * I Mr. Horn: AH right. all have said enough ior the understand what I mean. _ eD ds>« : Mr. Savage moved as an am that the item be postponed. -rid* h sideration by the Government view to increasing the au'x- t fl On a division the a ™ e ' rhree re*, defeated by 38 votes to --• » bere of the Reform Part ~'i»borß«.*E L. Tapley, W. D. Lysnar, * J. McC. Dickson. Chaim* *0 Liberal and Nationalist * Mr. H. Atinore, Independeß voted with the Labour F m