Mr Massey on the Tariff.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12144, 23 September 1907, Page 5

Mr Massey on the Tariff.

ENCOURAGEMENT OF LOCAL IN-

DUSTRIES,

In the necessarily condensed report of Mr. Massey's speech on the tariff cUsbate on Tuesday night which was given by the Press Association, his arguments on certain matters were not made quite clear. The following extract from the Hansard report of hie speech deals with one or two of : the more important points referred to :— Sir, —I do not know upon what principle the Minister has gone in connection with the preparation of his tariff. It is not a free trade tariff, and it .;s not in the proper sense of the word a protectionist tariff. The hon. gentleman seems to hare gone in the direction in which the most influence Was brought to bear. My idea of a tariff i is this: First of all, I think that aJI j raw materials required in connection with our industries should be free. Then I think that all tools, machinery, ond appliances in connection with, jur industries, especially our primary industries, should be free also. We should place on the free list as many of the neoessaries. of life as possible without injuring any of our industries. That is what is most urgenly required by the people of the colony. Take the case of raw cotton. The Minister has been controlled by influence, probably political influence. When first the tariff was brought, down raw cotton was subject to a duty of Is j?er lb. That did not suit. . Influence was brought to bear, and raw cotton was set back again on; the free list. That did iiot suit, and influence was brought to bear again, and now raw cotton stands at :i duty of 4d per lb. It seems to me that the tariff oi the Minister is something like the policy of the Government—a thing of shreds and patches,, without any uniformity or any definite principle. The Hon. J. A. Millar: You have not changed it much. , . Mr. Massey: It is very considerably changed since the first proposals were laid before-Parliament. The hon. gentleman did not wait for Parliament to make the changes. He made them to suit the views put forward by the deputations. I was one of those who voted for the duty upon flour, and I cay I was right in doing co. At the same time I want to say that I do not believe that the removal of the duty would make such a difference to the industries concerned as many hon. mem- J bers and a great number of the public imagine. Nor do I thing it would make much difference to the price of the article. We have only to look at,what has been occurring in Australia in the last four or five years. For most of that time wheat and flour have been dearer than in this country, consequently it would not have been possible for Australia to export any quantity of flour or wheat to New Zealand except in the case of small quantities required by bakers for mixing purposes, and for which they were content to pay a higher price. Just at the present moment wheat is dearer in this colony than in Australia, but the price of flour to-day in each country is as nearly as possible the same. Tho point I am about to make here is that the flourmillers are not making a reasonable profit, and, as a matter of fact, the margin of profit is narrower in this colony than in Australia, but it seems to me, when I hear the suggestion that the Government should purchase .'.ll the flourmills in this colony and nationalise them, to be the height of absurdity from whatever point-of view; you choose to lookat#;> Take lit from the point of view of othip men who,grow the wheat. ■If'you^have onlyione buyer, consequently no' cdmpetitibri, and that buyer the State, how manyj-are: going to grow wheat? Very tew indeed. I think they would find it more satisfactory under such circumstances to go in for producing something else, and how would the price be fixed? It seems to me that this influen<?e I have been talking about for the last few minutes would come in, and we should have the price of wheat fixed by political influence. The constituents of a member of the House who had steadily supported the Government would expect to get a higher price for their, wheat tljah the constituents of another member who' perhaps voted against some proposal of the Government, says, to put a duty on the mining industry. Sir, a parallel has been suggested between State coal mines and State flourmills. I say no parallel can be Brawn between the two, because the State mine produces its own, coal, practically in the one quality and at the same price; but in the case of wheat there would be a thousand producers, and I do not think I am exaggerating when I say in all probability there would be a thousand different qualities. It would be. absolutely impossible to give satisfaction under such circumstances, and as far as the State growing its own wheat is concerned, I venture to 6ay it could not be done at double the price per bushel which has been paid to farmers of this colony during the last ten years. The position I take up in such matters is this, that the State should never come into competition with private individuals, unless the public are being exploited by monopolists, and there should be absolute and perfect proof of such monopoly and expioition before the State is justified in taking action, and before the State undertakes to ' D39 probably a very large sum to the taxpayers of this colony. '