[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR, —Mr. Edgar Barnes-Austin, in
quoting figures of the cost of production of cane and beet sugars, ignores the very important comment of Mr. Cyril Lloyd, in his Minority Report, on this matter. In fairness, I would ask you to allow me to quote it : " The same witness emphasized that the quantity of sugar which could be produced at those figures was strictly limited ; that many factories in Cuba cannot produce, under reasonable conditions, at less than £10 per ton and his evidence agreed with that of other witnesses in showing that the British West Indies could not reasonably deliver sugar to the United Kingdom at a price much below £12 per ton. . . . It was emphasized before us that the low costs in some countries were mainly due to grossly inferior labour conditions."
(Cmd. 4871, p. 104.) The suggestion that British shipping has suffered a loss through the subsidy is hardly borne out by the facts given on pp. 5-6 of the Greene Report. The following figures may be quoted : AVERAGE Gnoss EXPORTS AND
IMPORTS OF SUGAR RE-EXPORTS PER ANNUM. OF REFINED SUGAR.
1920-24 .. 32,480,000 cwts. 1923 .. 52,300 tons 192930 .. 41,070,000 cwts. 1933 .. 339,300 tons
It can hardly be claimed that British shipping has lost any revenue from the sugar trade since the introduction of the subsidy in 1924. One might, of course, add the 35,000,000 tons of traffic which have been carried by the internal transport industry as a result of the establishment of the Beet Sugar
Previous page
