Parliamentary Debates Volume 34 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1906 Excerpt: ...We are going to grant a "preference" to one of the products of the United Kingdom bv practically taxing it off the market What is the object of this increase of duty? It is of no advantage to New Zealand, for New Zealand sends us nothing, and the duty as against her will remain the same--and is in direct opposition to the idea of Imperial preference. Then, again, the duty of 3d. per lb. on soap, perfumed, is to remain unaltered, so far as imports from New Zealand are concerned, but is to be increased to 6d. per lb. in respect of imports from the rest of the world. As a matter of fact, not a bar of soap came from New Zealand last year, but the imports from the rest of the world were of the value of 62,620, those coming from the United Kingdom alone being of the value of 27.931. In other words, it is proposed to shut out annual imports of soap of the value of- 27.931 from the United Kingdom without Riving any benefit to New Zealand manufacturers. Does this indicate a desire to secure Imperial preference? As another instance of the absence of business-like methods in the drawing up of this arrangement, I might refer to the timber duties, but, as I am satisfied from the remarks which have been made during the debate that the Committee has seen the necessity of amending those duties. I shall not wearv honorable members bv dealing with them. I would, in conclusion, remind the Committee that the proposed free list in respect of New Zealand products relates to goods which, for the most part, are not produced in that Colonv. Duties are lowered upon goods which New Zealand has not been exporting to Australia of recent years, whilst they are increased, largely in respect of goods which are coming from the mother country, to which we owe so much. ...