CHILDREN’S SHOES

Wairarapa Times-Age, 29 April 1938, Page 5

CHILDREN’S SHOES

THE TARIFF AND LOCAL PRICES COMMENTS BY THE BUREAU OF IMPORTERS By Telegraph.—Press Association. AUCKLAND, April 28. Critical comment was made by the Bureau of Importers upon a recent statement by the Minister of Industries and Commerce, the Hon D. G. Sullivan, that wholesale prices of New Zealandmade footwear would be reduced 12 to 20 per cent on last year’s prices as a result of the new tariff. “If it is correct that the local manufacturer is in a position to reduce his prices by 12 to 20 per cent,” the bureau states, “we ask why was the tariff increased? If Britain is to rank as a domestic competitor under Article VIII of the Ottawa Agreement, surely it would have been more logical to have reduced the tariff. When representations were made to the Government by footwear manufacturers for increased protection, emphasis was placed on the burden imposed by the increased production costs. Now Mr Sullivan informs us that the manufacturer is, for some unknown reason, in a position to reduce prices. The manufacturers, in the words of Mr M. R. O’Shea, had the first instalment when the increased tariffs were imposed. Maybe the second instalment will come the way of the importer in the form of tariff reduction.”

Discussing the same matter from the retailers’ point of veiw, Mr E. E. Kitchener said Mr O'Shea, on behalf of the Manufacturers’ Federation, had given an assurance that prices would not be increased but that in some cases they would even be reduced. His explanation was that increased output meant lower manufacturing costs. Footwear manufacturers increased their prices by something like 20 per cent in the 18 months or so before the new tariff came into force, continued Mr Kitchener, and presumably by this means they covered their increased costs.

“If those higher prices are to be taken as a standard and the reductions mentioned by the Minister’ are to be made, it is natural to ask why it was necessary to make such heavy increases in tariff on cheaper lines of imported footwear. Mr O'Shea has stated that the public has been badly misled if it believes that it will be necessary to pay heavy increases in prices for children’s shoes and sandals. Manufacturers, of course, must be allowed a little time to make good their undertaking but it will be interesting to see whether they can produce the cheaper grades of children’s footwear at anything like prices at which they were imported under the old tariff. That is the real test so far as the public is concerned. WELLINGTON RETAILERS CONTENTIONS REPEATED AND EMPHASISED The Wellington Drapers, Clothiers, Mercers’ and Footwear Retailers’ Association has issued the following statement regarding the prices of children’s shoes: — “We repeat that the prices of child-

ren’s shoes from size 91 upward imported since recent tariff increases, must be increased by at least 3s a pair. We repeat also that fully 70 per cent, of the children's shoes sold in New Zealand are over size 9. We regret that by the accidental omission of the qualifying words ’over size 9,’ the second part of our statement was made to read that the impost applied to all imported children's shoes instead of only to the 70 per cent or more represented by sizes 91 and upward. However, far from being a deliberate misrepresentation, that point was so fully discussed in the first part of our statement that the accidental error could not fail to be noted by the average reader. “The Minister opened his reply with the declaration that our statement was proved to be founded on incorrect premises because some reductions in prices have been quoted by one New Zealand manufacturer. ' We would point out that the original of our article was headed 'Children's imported Shoes,’ and was in reply to his original statement dealing with the effect of the tariff on imported shoes, which article that statement by being headed Children's Shoes— No Increased Duty’ was definitely misleading, and thereby called for a statement by the retailers’ association in the interests of New Zealand retailers. "The question at issue here, that is,

the effect of tariff increases on the retail prices of imported children’s shoes from size 9| does not call for a discussion of the relative merits of imported and locally-manufactured shoes.”