June 2, 1922

AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION

STANDARDIZATION OF PARTS OF AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY

LIB

William Frederic Kay

Liberal

Mr. W. F. KAY (Missisquoi) moved:

That the proceedings of the Select Standing Committee on Agriculture and Colonization had last session on the question of "Standardization of parts of Agricultural Machinery" be referred to the Select Standing Committee on Agriculture and Colonization.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION
Subtopic:   STANDARDIZATION OF PARTS OF AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY
Permalink

Motion agreed to. Mr. KAY with the consent of the House, moved, that the House return to the Order of Motions.


CON

Arthur Meighen (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MEIGHEN:

The hon. member should state the object he has in view in returning to the Order of Motions.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION
Subtopic:   STANDARDIZATION OF PARTS OF AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY
Permalink
LIB

William Frederic Kay

Liberal

Mr. KAY:

I desire to move a resolution, and I think that if I read it the object will be clearly apparent. I move, seconded by Mr. Sinclair:

That a message be sent to the Senate requesting that their honours will give leave to the Hon. Archibald B. McCoig, one of their members, to attend and give evidence before the Select Standing Committee on Agriculture and Colonization.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION
Subtopic:   STANDARDIZATION OF PARTS OF AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


COAL FROM JAPAN

CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE ON THE PACIFIC


On the Orders of the Day:


LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) :

Mr. Speaker, may I take advantage of this moment to correct a false impression that seems to exist in regard to the use of Japanese coal by the Canadian Government Merchant Marine on the Pacific. The impression seems to have got abroad, that the Government Merchant Marine intend to use Japanese coal, or are bringing Japanese coal to this country. The matter came up some time ago in connection with a question asked by an hon. member, and a reply was given at the time that the coal that came from Japan was merely in the nature of ballast; it was cheaper to the company at the time to purchase coal for that purpose than to purchase ballast in some other form. I understand that recently the matter has come up again, and some fear is expressed on the part of certain hon. members from the West that the Government Merchant Marine intend to adopt as a policy the bringing of coal from Japan to Canada. Hon. members know that the Merchant Marine is under the Board of Directors of the National Railways. The Government has not to do with the control of its affairs, or the operation of its steamers; but in answering the question that was asked some little time ago the following statement was made:

As far as they can possibly do so the steamers of the -Government Merchant Marine will hereafter use onily British Columbia coal on the Pacific ocean.

That statement was given to the Government by the Board of Directors of the National Railways and, as I understand it,

The Budget-Mr. Bristol

indicates its policy then and its policy at '-he present time.

Topic:   COAL FROM JAPAN
Subtopic:   CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE ON THE PACIFIC
Permalink
CON

William Garland McQuarrie

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. W. G. McQUARRIE (New Westminster) :

May I he permitted to ask the Prime Minister if he is aware that the ships of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine are purchasing their coal from mines at Cumberland which employ orientals underground?-and that these mines are the only mines in Canada where orientals are so employed?-and if the Government will take action to see that this condition is remedied?

Topic:   COAL FROM JAPAN
Subtopic:   CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE ON THE PACIFIC
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

The complaint I had was that the board was purchasing coal from Japan instead of British Columbia, but I will take occasion to inquire into what my hon. friend has just represented.

Topic:   COAL FROM JAPAN
Subtopic:   CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE ON THE PACIFIC
Permalink

THE BUDGET

CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE


The House resumed from Thursday, June, 1, the debate on the motion of Hon. W. S. Fielding (Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair for the House to go into Committee of Ways and Means, and the proposed amendment thereto of Hon. Sir Henry Drayton.


CON

Edmund James Bristol

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. EDMUND BRISTOL (Centre Toronto) :

Mr. Speaker, I join with

other members of the House in congratulating the Minister of Finance upon the manner in which he delivered this-his sixteenth budget speech. I do not believe that there is any man in Canada better equipped, by long experience and by ability, to present that speech; and I do not suppose that the Finance Minister, well informed as he is, was ever confronted by a more difficult situation, because he has to satisfy everybody on his own side of the House, from the free trader in the person of my hon. friend from Brome (Mr. McMaster) to the ultra-protectionist, my hon. friend from Brantford (Mr. Raymond). Anybody who can do that is certainly something of a magician as well as an able finance minister. Now my hon. friend had a great many difficulties to encounter, and I have no doubt that if those difficulties were not so numerous he would have presented a budget more on the lines of his budget of 1907 rather than the class of budget which he brought down recently. But the criticism that I would offer in respect to the budget as a budget is, that substantially it does nothing for the stimulation or promotion of Canadian trade or Canadian agriculture. It is" what you might call a " safety first " or " stand pat " budget. Whatever reductions or changes have been made are for the benefit of our business competitors the United States, Great Britain, and particularly Germany. Now, everybody in this House knows that, since the war, every civilized country has been doing everything it possibly could to protect, preserve and maintain the home market of that country for its own people and to protect and maintain its own home industries. I suppose the two most conspicuous examples with which we are familiar are Great Britain and the United States of America, and I would have thought that under those circumstances, a Finance Minister of the wide experience and great ability of the present occupant of that office would have taken into account the necessity in this country of not merely preserving matters in statu quo, but of doing what he reasonably could, so far as the tariff will do it, to promote, advance and protect the industries already existing in this country, to bring in other industries, and to give the people who have money to invest in industries a confidence that, so far as Canada is concerned, the policy which has been in force practically from 1879 to the present time is to be maintained unimpaired, and that the small modicum of protection given to our industries is not to be whittled away for the benefit of our American, English and German competitors.

I am going, first of all, to take up the case of Germany, because that is the most flagrant case, and I am rather inclined to think, from the way the minister spoke, that his mind is open to conviction, and if I can help him in any way to come to a conviction which will protect Canadian labour against the cheap and efficient labour of Germany, I think something of advantage will be done. What is the position in Germany as regards the wages paid to labour? It is well known-and the Finance Minister (Mr. Fielding) stated- that the value of a German mark to-day is a third of a cent. The latest information I can get from Germany is that skilled labour is paid 60 cents a day, and ordinary unskilled labour is paid 30 cents a day. But we will take sources perhaps more authentic, or, at least, more to be relied upon. I take Industrial and Labour Information, Volume II, No. 6, of 12th May, 1922, published at Geneva, by the Inter-

The Budget-Mr. Bristol

national Labour Office, and I find the following item:

It appears that the highest wages were paid in Hagen, dyers, 639 marks ($2.13) per week; belt makers, 650 marks ($2.17) per week; ribbon makers 654 marks ($2.18) per week, Essen and Hamburg, and the lowest in Bautzen (353 to 508 marks ($1,18 to $1.69) and Munich (409 to 624 marks ($1.37 to $175)).

The memorandum states that in most cases the weekly wages were lower than the minimum cost of living of a family of two adults and two children. In Berlin, for instance, the weekly minimum cost of living in December 1921, amounted to 557 marks ($1.86) per week, while in the same month the average wages in certain occupations were as follows: Printers (married), 553 marks per week ($1.84), railway mechanics, 418 marks ($1.40) ; railway labourers, 379 marks ($1.27) ; bricklayers, 552 marks ($1.84) ; building labourers, 522 marks ($1.74) ; navvies, 381 marks ($1.27). In Hamburg, the wage of bricklayers, 620 marks ($2.07), building labourers, 594 marks ($1.98), and navvies, 589 marks ($1.97) were in excess of the minimum cost of living, while those of joiners, 561 marks ($1.87).

I am not suggesting these figures for Government employees in Canada, but I find in the Frankfurter Zeitung, of 28th March, 1922, that they paid their Government officials the munificent salary of 11,000 marks per annum, or $36.67 for the lowest group, and for the highest group, No. 12, a salary of 40,000 marks, equal in Canadian funds to $133.34 per annum. It is not necessary for me to tell this House that the German mechanic is as well equipped for his work as any mechanic in the world, and they are not working six or eight hours a day; they are working all they can-ten hours a day, and an extra two hours for the Fatherland. The present tariff brought in by the hon. Minister of Finance takes for the valuation of German goods their fair market value in the country of production-Germany. You can figure

what this value in Germany would be. Labour is 50 per cent of the cost of producing an article and then we have the raw material. I have shown you the labour cost, which is a prevailing cost. It practically means that the Germans can produce everything that is produced by factories in this country for about one tenth of our cost, and the freight rates from Germany to Canada are cheap. That is the real situation. Let me show you what Germany exported to Canada and the kind and character of the merchandise sold by that country to Canada in 1913. The total value of these imports was about $10,000,000. Some of the importations were as follows: ,

Breadstuffs (grains and products of). $ 63,055

Peas n.o.p 60,647

Buttons of all kinds n.o.p 65,197

Cars, railway and parts of 84,854

Clocks, time recorders, etc 119,555

Cocoa paste or liquor etc., Chocolate

mfrs 73,512

Combs 81,507

Cotton fabrics, dyed or coloured.. .. 63,770

Clothing n.o.p 71,268

Lace, white and cream coloured .. . . 226,904

Socks and stockings 441.898

All other drugs, dyes and chemicals,

n.o.p 77,807

Tableware or china porcelain 300,586

Electric Apparatus n.o.p 79,799

Just referring to electrical apparatus, Germany to-day is the first country in the world in manufacturing along electrical and radio lines, and it will practically mean that great companies in Canada, like the General Electric and the Westinghouse and the other large company at St. Catharines, an English company, will be put out of business by Germany, or very seriously injured, when the Germans got started under the proposed tariff. Other articles imported were:

Boxes, fancy, ornamental cases.. .. $ 63,280

Braids, cords, fringes, etc 141,124

Artificial feathers, flowers, etc.. .. 127,684

Lace, n.o.p 198,238

Toys and dolls of all kinds 534,010

Furs, skins, wholly or partly dressed

n.o.p 377,135

Caps, etc. of fur 63,988

Glass, carboys or demijohns 66,248

Glass balls and cut pressed crystal

glass 64,766

Gloves and mits of all kinds 380,057

Rubber cement and all manufacture of

rubber n.o.p 59,744

Hops 56,674

Machinery, composed of iron or steel

n.o.p 240,616

Tubing, wrought iron and steel.. .. 65,069

-on which the tariff has lately been reduced and is particularly reduced in the present tariff.

Knives and forks of steel $ 67,759

Cutlery n.o.p 302,015

Tools, hand, all kinds, hoes, rakes,

forks etc 52,039

Manufactured articles of iron and steel

n.o.p 142,903

Jewellery n.o.p 175,296

Lamps, lanterns and chandeliers.. .. 177,687

Other musical instruments, n.o.p 135,207

Optical instruments 52,256

Zinc, white 109,283

Paper, manufacture of n.o.p 130,050

It is well known that the Germans have been shipping paper into New York for some time back, in competition with the Canadian paper manufacturers.

Pocket books, port-folios, leather goods $ 78,692

Ribbons of all kinds and materials.. 17,776

Seed, clover and timothy 37,185

Silk Fabrics for neckties 52,724

The Budget-Mr. Bristol

Silk socks and stockings 80,602

Sugar n.o.p 300,914

Knitted goods, including knitted underwear n.o.p 104,159

Woollen fabrics, n.o.p 214,415

Clothing, women's, children's outside

garments, cloaks, suits and costumes 148,048 Clothing, readymade, (wool) men's.. 246,454

I thought it proper to read this list of articles to the House to show that, as far as competition with Germany is concerned, our mechanics have not only no protection, but there is practically nothing that is manufactured in this country, or that can be manufactured under reasonable competitive conditions, that Germany cannot today put on the Canadian market under the present tariff and easily undersell its Canadian competitors. It would be interesting to see, in this regard, what Great Britain has done to protect her industries-England, that free trade country that was once the proud boast of my hon. friends on the left. The British people are pretty level headed, when the question becomes one of real competition. They have passed what they call the Safeguarding of Industries Act. It reads, in part, as follows:

1. If, on complaint being made to the board to that effect, it appears to the board that goods of any class or description (other than articles of food or drink) manufactured in a country outside the United Kingdom are being sold or offered for saile in the United Kingdom-

(b) At prices which by reason of depreciation in the value in relation to sterling of the currency of the country in which the goods are manufactured are below the prices at which similar goods can be profitably manufactured in the United Kingdom; and that by reason thereof employment in any industry in the United Kingdom is being or is likely to be seriously affected, the board may refer the matter for inquiry to a committee constituted for the purpose of this part of this act.

2. If the committee report that as respects goods of any class or description manufactured in any country the conditions aforesaid are fulfilled the board may by order apply this part of this Act to goods of that class or description if manufactured in that country:

They go on -to state that where this is found, the customs duty, in addition to the ordinary duty,-shall be a customs duty equal to one-third of the value of the goods -in England, not in Germany. If England has to do this, what about poor Canada? Let us go on and see what the United States have done. They have not completed their legislation in this regard.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

Charles Murphy (Postmaster General)

Liberal

Mr. MURPHY:

Before the hon. gentleman deals with the United States, will he state to the House the effect, as to volume and amount, upon the trade of the United

Kingdom and Germany, of the legislation to which he has just referred?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
CON

Edmund James Bristol

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BRISTOL:

I can give my hon.

friend only the information I have. I am not going to vouch for this; but I am told by responsible people that British merchants are merchants first, and they are importing German goods, adding a little work and a made in England label and thus taking advantage of German cheap labour.

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
PRO

Thomas William Bird

Progressive

Mr. BIRD:

Is the hon. gentleman aware that the cotton spinners of Lancashire and the dye industry of England are agitating for the repeal of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, and that on May 16 a motion which was introduced in the House of Lords for the repeal of that act, was lost by only two votes? Is he aware that the Liberal federation which met at Blackpool last month also adopted that as a plank in their platform?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF THE DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink

June 2, 1922