May 16, 1923

PRO

William Samuel Reed

Progressive

Mr. W. S. PEED (Frontenac):

I need hardly say, Mr. Speaker, that this is the first occasion on which I shah, have spoken in this House, and before I say anything else I want to contribute a word of commendation to what has been raid regarding the hon. Minister of finance (Mr. Fielding), with whom I would couple the name of the hon. Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham). These two hon. gentlemen, practically throughout their business careers, have been more or less all the time before the public of Canada, and in my opin on they have certainly rendered this country a great service.

I would refer first of all to the rural mail system, not particularly by way of complaint, because I think it is generally recognized that existing conditions in Canada to-day will not permit of that complete service which the people would no doubt desire. There are a few connecting links in the county that sent me here which we should like to see completed as soon as financial conditions will permit. I want it to be understood, however, that I am not pleading for the county of Frontenac alone: the same privilege which I ask for that county I should be pleased to see extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific wherever it is needed.

I do not think I need dwell further on this subject, but I might say a word or two on the question of immigration, principally for the purpose of bringing to the attention of the House the state of things as they prevail near my home. I do not know the conditions as they are in the cities, but I can say that in the rural part of my riding there is not one man to every hundred acres, and with such a condition we cannot very well carry on the business of the country. I am glad therefore to hear the Acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) inform the House

of his intention to do something to improve this condition.

So far as public works are concerned, we know, of course that a gre?:t deal of money has to be spent in this department, and I think I speak for all hon. members when I say that we have called upon that department from every co mer for assistance in regard to the works that have to be carried on in connection with harbours, wharves and so forth. But I think we have a minister who is capable of di-,charging the duties that are before him.

I want now to refer for a moment or two to the railway situation, but I shall not deal with that subject at any gieat length; it is needless for me tc go over the ground that has been covered by the last speaker (Mr. Church). I believe that, with the present minister, and with the board as it is constituted to-day, this department of the public service will make good, and I think it is the duty of every Canadian to do what he can towards this end.

During the course of this debate we have heard a great deal about tie national debt, and I think that those of us who have been following the trend of events know what is responsible for our obligations. I may be wrong, and if I am I ara ready to be corrected; but I thought I heard it stated across the floor of the House that the interest alone was $140,000,000

Now, from east to west there are many problems with which the Canadian people must grapple. We have heard a great deal about the wonderful natural resources of British Columbia, its great timber, its fish, and so forth; but I must confess that never having been either in the East or in the West, I am really ignorant of western conditions In the course of the debates of this sessior we have noticed that the members from British Columbia, irrespective of their partv affiliations, are all agreed on the gravity of the oriental question and the proper way to deal with it.

Now I come to Alberta. I am sorry that, we do not hear any very good reports from the members representing that province regarding conditions in the rural sections. Some day I intend to take a trip to the West, but I do not care to go where conditions are so difficult. I hope they will improve. Nor are the conditions what we would expect them to be in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. When we recall the illimitable coal measures, the vast wheat fields, the great cattle ranches and the rich, natural resources of these western provinces, it is apparent that something must

The Budget-Mr. Fortier

be wrong when their economic condition is so unsatisfactory. We hope to hear better things of the West as a whole in the near future.

In the great provinces of Ontario and Quebec we find some of our most important urban centres and our principal industrial development. Consequently there is not the same dependence on agriculture as we find in the western provinces, and therefore the depressed condition of our basic industry has not reacted so severely on the people generally. Lastly, we have the Maritime provinces. Their distance from the central and western portions of the Dominion places them at a decided disadvantage commercially, and naturally we want to assist them in every possible way

In all we are a family of nine provinces, each with its advantages and also corresponding disadvantages, and it should be the purpose of our administrative authorities to so legislate as to give an equal chance to all of us. Wise legislation will accomplish this purpose. But whatever may be done for our social and economic advancement, our paramount duty is to see that our rising generation are afforded such educational opportunities in our schools and colleges that they may take their place and in due time assist in the development of this great Dominion.

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

Hyacinthe-Adélard Fortier

Liberal

Mr. H. A. FORTIER (Labelle) (Translation) :

Mr. Speaker, those years of the Great War were the cause of a deep disturbance both in the economic and national life of our country. As we gradually emerge from the gloom of this never to be forgotten period of our history, we more vividly realize the extent of the spontaneous sacrifices made, resulting from the participation of this young country in the greatest world war of all times.

The Liberal party became heir, in December 1921, to a rather burdensome estate. Called upon to take charge of the administration of affairs in this country, the present government found itself facing an enormous public debt which the years following the war had but increased through considerable yearly loans so as to meet the ever increasing deficits. Moreover, our predecessors had further added to our obligations, the burden of state management of the National Railways which yearly showed large deficits. Ail the taxes that a country may be burdened with, our predecessors had imposed.

Yet, all the sources of revenue and all the heaviest levies bearing upon the Canadian subject, henceforth, taxed to the utmost limit,

could not balance our budget. Briefly, this was the situation of our finances when the present government took hold of power in December, 1921.

Two things were absolutely necessary to the good administration of affairs in this country: a strict economy and moderation, that is to say a gradual return to pre-war conditions. I think the present government has practised economy and this accounts for the success of this administration which has already begun to greatly improve our financial situation by solving the problem by which we shall soon see the end of our deficits. We now fully hope, in the near future, to see the return of those prosperous years of the Laurier government.

The late government, during the years that followed armistice, up to the end of their term in office, had borrowed nearly $1,000,000,000. The interest alone of these war loans amounted to about $50,000,000. We cannot take into account the fiscal year of 1921-1922, as being the first fiscal year of the Liberal administration for the greater part of it was under the administration of our predecessors. The first fiscal term which could be attributed to the present government would therefore be that of 1922-1923. It is true that during that period the Minister of Finance admitted that he had been constrained to borrow the sum of $49,000,000, however, we have grounds to console ourselves to some extent, in the fact that this loan was not any greater, for it only makes up the amount required to pay off the interest on the loans made by our predecessors, from armistice day up to the time they were driven out of power. The present estimates attest a considerable decrease in expenditures and the management of our railways which are on the mend, allows us to hope that the patriotic efforts of those at the helm of the country will succeed in restoring our financial equilibrium. I have faith in the comforting forecasts of the Minister of Finance and I again state it is only through these principles of economy and cautiousness that the government may overcome the financial difficulties which have, up to date, seemed to us insurmountable Guided by these wise principles, the government has already made an effort to reduce the irksome burden of taxation. True to its programme, it has already brought on tariff changes in a downward revision of duties. I especially rejoice in seeing that, at this stage of the session, offers are made by the Liberal government to the United States toward a resumption of the negotiations for a trade convention such as we were intent on

The Budget-Mr. Fortier

securing in 1911. I think that had we not rejected the offer of our powerful neighbours, in 1911; had we ratified this advantageous trade convention for the exchange of agricultural products with the United States; Canada would certainly be more prosperous and would even be more united than it is, to-day. This exchange of agricultural products with our neighbours would be to the advantage of both countries. Had we carried out this trade convention of 1911, I again state that we would now be better off than we are at present, however, since the Minister of Finance, in the eloquent speech he made the other day, declared that the wish of Canada was to carry out this trade convention with the United States, we do hope that our neighbours will not lend a deaf ear to our offer. If we, to-day, read the newspapers which reach us from across the 45th parallel, if we listen to those in authority in the United States who have expressed their views, we can say that the appeal made by the Minister of Finance will not be a vain one, and that to-morrow perhaps, we may, for the exchange of certain products, carry out this trade convention which will certainly be to the advantage of both countries, but especially to that of Canada, the pre-eminently agricultural country, which feels the want, in consequence of the development of its great natural resources, of engrossing the friendship of our neighbours and bringing about a trade treaty with them.

Canada has not its equal so far as its natural resources are concerned. Its farms, mines, forests, fisheries and industrial products forever increasing, place her henceforth in a position to seek advantageously trade relations with American countries, Europe and all the dominions of Great Britain. It is to the Liberal party's credit to have granted this British preference which increases the exchange of our products with those of the Mother Country, and which has been a great aelp in maintaining and developing, especially in our old provinces, one of our important agricultural industries: the dairy industry, destined to bring wealth to our farms in this part of Canada. It is again to our party's credit to have further increased this British preference and thus anticipated the wishes of the Canadian people. It is with the object of furthering our trade and industries, so necessary to the work of reconstruction, that our government is negotiating a trade convention with Australia. This government, moreover, has happily negotiated a new trade convention with both France and Italy. France of late years has been looking to our country; we are

continuously present in her mind, and as the ancestor, she comes to us with the tender feeling evoked by long separation. Should not we, her descendants, united to her people by the ties of kinship, respond to such overtures from the old Motherland, and proclaim that we have sought her in the course of our national existence, with the sincerity which springs from true hearts and inspired by our historical motto "Je me souviens." France came to us in those never-to-be-forgotten days of June, 1921, when the Fayolle mission, composed of the most illustrious Frenchmen, landed on our soil to officially present to the government of Canada the venerated statue of France, by Rodin. This statue now rests here, in the capital of Canada, under the roof of this parliamentary building, and one may say that the image of the old Motherland shines brightly from the promontory of Ottawa, on all the horizons of the Dominion of Canada. Has she not since made, to the Canadian nation, the highly apreciated gift of 250 acres of land on Vimy ridge? This patch of French soil, made illustrious through the heroism of the sons of Canada during the Great War, now encloses the glorious remains of those who have fallen on the battlefields. The government will erect there a monument commemorative of the great deeds of its children. In the centuries to come, this sacred spot across the seas will for ever remind the sons of New France grown old of the grateful feelings of the older Motherland. After this event the souvenir of which is very dear to us, France still remembered us and we remembered her through this trade convention which Parliament has just ratified. This treaty would give new life to business and would help us to bear up with fortitude through this period of after-war by relieving the financial situation and helping us to carry over the enormous deficits of our National Railways.

One of the most important tasks to which the present members of the government must give their entire attention, is certainly the management of our National Railways. A gigantic enterprise which, last year, showed a deficit of $67,000,000, a deficit borne by the tax-payers of this country. However, by devoting their energies to the great task of managing a railway system which is the largest in the world, the government must rely on the public's good-will, their united effort and on the sympathy of all the citizens of this country. [DOT]

I congratulate the Government for having appointed very able men to fill the important posts of directors of the National Railway Board. I especially congratulate them for

The Budget-Mr. Fortier

having placed at the head of the board, Sir Henry Thornton, a man of wide experience, an able man, one who possesses to a high degree the genius of administration, and who, I feel confident, will make a success of the important work in connection with the National Railways. With such men, backed by a public-spirited administration-which should give us the assurance of a fair trial being given to public ownership,-I am certain that our railways will become one of the most important items in the assets of the State and will constitute one of the most reliable means of contributing to the development of our country.

In a young country like Canada, with an unlimited stretch of land, natural resources of incomparable wealth, it is necessary that the railway should closely accompany and sometimes precede the important work of colonization. Take for example the prairie provinces. The immense plains of La Verendrye remained unsettled as long as the railway had not encircled with its steel ribbon the matchless wheat fields. From the valleys of the Red liver and the Assiniboine, the settler found his way to those rich lands that now grace the prosperous cities of Portage-la-Prairie, Regina, Saskatoon, Prince Albert, Calgary and Edmonton. Saskatchewan and Alberta rose in the middle West as if by enchantment, two provinces which sprang up some fifteen years ago, the happy result of agricultural settlement made possible by the railway. Further away, on the shores of the Pacific ocean, there exists a province, famous for the incomparable beauty of its scenery and the mildness of its climate, rich through its unrivalled national resources. "Splendor sine occasu" appears on its blazon. She finds this splendor in the development of agriculture through the colonization of her fertile valleys. The three transcontinental railways which cross the Rocky mountains are admirably adapted to the opening up of settlements and to the building of towns. Already wheat is begining to flow from Alberta to the port of Vancouver. In the East as in the West the transportation facilities are always the most powerful means of developing the economic resources of our country. In the eastern provinces, in our old province of Quebec, it is through the railways and the work accomplished by Laurier, namely the construction of his transcontinental that we have been able to witness the opening up of this beautiful and immense region of Abitibi. That territory would still be covered with virgin forests if we had not built this railway which was the means of spreading French civilization beyond the Laurentian mountains. It

180J *

may be said in certain quarters that this is very unwise expenditure. I, however, think that it is absolutely necessary for a young country, and we, the political heirs of those who accomplished this so important task of the construction of the transcontinental, which permitted the rapid development of the Abitibi region, one of the best of the province of Quebec, we should the more appreciate the National Railways. Indeed, is it not the work of railways which has contributed the most to the extension of settlements? Is it not the railways which have contributed the most in settling and enlarging the magnificent county of Labelle? We may, perhaps, have more deficits for a few years, but we should not weaken in the task. So far as I am concerned, deficits do not frighten me, because I am convinced that later on we shall be proud of the great achievement accomplished by the railways. Thanks to them, Canada made progress and I again state, I do not fear the deficits, providing that our railways contribute to the expansion and prospertity of our country.

I therefore state that all the provinces of the Dominion must lend their most generous co-operation and most effective help to the government so that this important work of the management of our railways may become a financial success and at the same time a powerful lever to the development of the country through colonization. One cannot broach the subject of colonization without awakening in our mind the problem of the day, the recruiting of settlers, or in other words, immigration. Let me, Mr. Speaker, dwell for a few moments on two other necessary elements of colonization, namely, the lands fit for colonization and the assistance to be extended to the settler. The immigration problem comprises three distinct features. The first is to find land fit for cultivation; the second is to provide for the settler; and, the third is to find that settler who will make his home on such lands and will later become a good Canadian citizen. As regards settlers' lands, they are almost inexhaustible in this country, from ocean to ocean, and through all the nine provinces of the Dominion, one can find, for settling purposes, unlimited areas. ,

Speaking before the Canadian Club, at Winnipeg, on the importance of immigration in this country, Lord Shaw, last summer said: "Your incommensurable prairie provinces contain 200 million acres of arable land and up to the* present time you have but one-tenth under cultivation." Could we not say as much for our eastern provinces? In the

The Budget-Mr. Fortier

old province of Quebec we are not lacking in arable lands since at present in all the valleys, right into the heart of the Laurentide mountains, we have any extent of lands fit for cultivation. At present, in our province, the area of arable land being farmed is but 3J per cent. There are, according to statistics supplied to me, over 400,000 farms of 100 acres each surveyed and reported upon which await the pioneer. I do not intend to show by means of statistics the acreage of land fit for cultivation in the nine provinces. These two distinct divisions of our national soil, the East and West, are sufficient to bear out my contention.

The provincial governments come generously to the rescue of the settler when it is a question of land grants in the old eastern provinces, where the settler's hardihood is put to test by the difficulties encountered at the outset. He must cut an opening in the virgin forests and build his shanty. Nothing equals the self-willed tenacity of the pioneer, toiling heroically to extend civilization in the far-off territories where everything breathes of the forest. However, in the midst of his toils he may depend upon the good services of a government which makes of colonization its main work. The surveying of districts, the building of roads and bridges, the help given to school and agricultural matters, are the many sides of protection shown by a government friendly to the settler.

The Quebec government in granting large subsidies, have shown themselves to be the true patron of the settler. The work of the Dominion government is still being performed on a large scale to facilitate the settlement of the immigrant on their lands.

The recruiting of the settler which is the third feature in question, is certainly one of the most important parts of the problem and the one which offers the most difficulties. The various opinions expressed on the subject since the beginning of the session only tend to show that there is a considerable exodus of settlers in the West and especially in Alberta, which is continuously on the increase. To what can this emigration be attributed? To the economic crisis of the country, a crisis accentuated by two poor consecutive crops? To the readiness with which the settler hailing from the United States at the first setback encountered, returns to his native land? To the too extensive immigration of the first decade of this century? Whatever be the causes, the consequences are but transient and everything seems to point to a return to normal conditions, especially after the abundant crop of last year. If we are to place

fMr Fortier.]

faith in the words of experienced western men, conditions have much improved and the farmer, to-day, may look with confidence to the future.

In Quebec our national increase, each year, exceeds the number of deaths by 45,000. Yet men well informed have contended that for the Last eighty years, emigration has carried away yearly from 15,000 to 20,000 people The buoyant spirit of our young men and the narrow circumstances of a portion of the people both make for the desertion which has been bleeding the country for nearly a century.

How should the recruiting be carried out? Shall it be by an appeal to the European nations so that they may cast on our shores the surplus of their population, thrust in our midst at the expense of the Canadian government? Are we to erect at the entrance of the ports of St. John, Halifax and Quebec, another statue of Liberty holding out a large mantle to receive in its folds all the wandering children of the earth? I do not think so. Let us first keep those who are with us, let us make our own people happy; we shall have but to select those who come from the outside.

One of the unquestionable advantages of the government's immigration policy is the settlement of immigrants in all the provinces of Canada. We were, up to the present time, in the habit of thinking that the prairie provinces were the only ones entitled to receive immigrants and settle them on western wheat lands. Now, the immigrant arriving among us through his initiative and that of the government, slatall be able to settle in any part of Canada. Each province has its own advantages and disadvantages. A settler who comes to reside in Canada may have a certain temperament, special aptitudes, certain peculiarities which fit him for one province rather than for another. For instance, one coming from Belgium, France or Scandinavia might, perhaps, prefer to settle in some eastern province rather than the West, while others coming from western United States would naturally settle in the prairies. Nevertheless, all would become Canadian citizens and, hence, they would be equally entitled to the help and protection of the Immigration department. The Immigration Act, which affords an equal measure of protection to the immigrant in whatever province he settles, is fair and equitable. However, since in Quebec, the true evil is to be found not in the small number of settlers coming in, but rather in a regrettable exodus of our citizens across the 45th

The Budr/et-Mr. Steedsman

parallel, I wish to say a few words in regard to the enactment relative to repatriation agencies which are helpful to the province of Quebec, and I would ask the government to make the repatriation regulations more effective, first of all for the purpose of retaining our people who have not yet become the prey of family troubles, and secondly, with a view to bringing back those who have already emigrated. I should like to see the government take all the steps necessary so that our peasant, this courageous and abstemious farmer, should feel himself sufficiently backed up by pecuniary help to hope not only to maintain himself in comfort, but become even more prosperous. Indeed, we must not lose sight of the fact that the large families which constitute a truly national wealth, demand of the head of the family greater resources. The establishment of repatriation agencies in regard to immigration is therefore another good feature of the government's new policy. Our people who at one time went across the 45th parallel never forgot their native country; many of them are awaiting a favourable opportunity to return to live and die among us. Let them know that their brothers in Canada are desirous of seeing them again and extending a warm welcome. The old province awaits them and has paved the way for their reestablishment. The government agents should be among them to let them know on our part that there is room for them in the old eastern provinces, as well as those in the West, and that everywhere their old fellow-citizens await them with open arms.

Mr. Speaker, the session is drawing to a close; I have followed the debates with attention mingled with some anxiety. My country, I had a glimpse of it, thanks to ail those beautiful speeches of eminent men but of very contradictory opinions. As I saw it, it was going through a crisis wherein its future was at stake. The glorious hour has struck for us; we who form the party in power, if we know how to respond to the hopes of the people, the propitious moment to ensure the permanent welfare of this country of ours. It is in a period of such great upheavals that a nation, filled with apprehensions for the future, needs great men, wise statesmen who find the means of ensuring the safety of the nation's future. I feel confident that Providence who guides nations and has entrusted into our hands the government of the country, in this hour of national anxiety, will bestow on our leaders that wisdom which distinguishes great statesmen. I have faith, consequently, that this perilous hour for our country will, in our annals, redound to the

honour of our party, and command the admiration of posterity.

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

James Steedsman

Progressive

Mr. JAMES STEEDSMAN (Souris):

Mr. Speaker, while I desire to join heartily in the congratulations extended to the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) upon the presentation of his seventeenth budget, I regret to say that I am unable to extend my congratulations to the members of my constituency and to the residents of the province from which I come, not only because the budget affords us little or no relief from the protective tariff and fails to keep pace with the feeble efforts of last year to take a step in the right direction, but because the government have now decided that efforts in that direction shall cease and we may look for little more reduction from them. Stability, and the assurance to the protected interests that they have nothing to fear in the future with regard to the tariff, will bring rejoicing in some quarters, but, Mr. Speaker, it will bring disappointment and discontent in other sections, especially in the West, where farming conditions are such as to demand immediate relief if we are not to lose many of the valuable settlers we have at the present time. We have been told to have faith, and faith is a fine thing; but it will not pay the taxes; it will not pay the interest on the mortgage, neither will it feed or clothe the children. To be told now by a government representing a party that has always declared in favour of lower tariff that nothing further in that direction need be expected is discouraging, to say the least.

Now, Sir, in regard to the serious condition of agriculture in Canada to-day, we know that the chief cause lies in the fact that the cost of living and the cost of production have not come down in proportion to the decrease in the prices of farm products. Of course that is not the only reason, but it is the only one I shall refer to in the discussion of this budget. That being so, it will be evident to all that the farmers are producing at a loss to-day, consequently they are going behind; their debts and their difficulties are increasing every day. What is more natural, therefore, than that we should look for a remedy or for a means of balancing our budget? In reviewing the situation we realize that the main cause of low prices for what we have to sell is the lack of purchasing power on the part of the nation to whom we sell our surplus, and as the export price usually controls the local market price the only remedy in that direction is to lower the cost of transportation, the cost of handling and distributing, to the lowest possible point consistent with

The Budget-Mr. Steedsman

efficiency, and to eliminate all unfair profittaking in the performance of those operations. In this respect I am free to admit that the government have already done something; the reinstatement of the Crowsnest pass rates and the passing of the wheat board legislation of last year at the urgent request of the people of western Canada was a step in the right direction. But much more remains to be done, and we will watch with great interest.

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

William F. Carroll

Liberal

Mr. CARROLL:

What does the hon. member think of the attitude of the legislature of Manitoba on that particular question? It is opposed to the Progressive attitude, I understand.

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

James Steedsman

Progressive

Mr. STEEDSMAN:

I would like to point out to my hon. friend that if the farmers of Manitoba at the present time are in such a condition that they think they cannot wait for the operation of a wheat board, it is all the more reason why they should get relief in some other direction. That I understand is why the wheat board legislation did not pass the House in Manitoba. I say that we will watch with interest the outcome of the royal commission and of the special committee that has been appointed to inquire into lake transportation rates, the grain trade, and agricultural conditions generally.

We believe, too, that this government should come to the assistance of the provinces that they may be enabled to extend their rural credit and farm loan policy to the end that the farmers may be able to secure long term credit with cheaper interest rates, with which to pay off their mortgage indebtedness.

Then too, the prairie provinces should be given their natural resources. That has long been a matter of contention, and we think that now would be a very opportune time for the natural resources to be handed over to the provinces that they may get the benefit of such revenue as may be derived therefrom. That would mean that the municipalities in those provinces might be relieved to a very great extent from the tremendous burden of taxation under which they are labouring at the present time, that our school districts might be able to keep open the schools, many of which are closed at the present time, that we might be able to educate our children.

Now what about the cost of production? In looking over means of bringing down costs, what is more natural than that we should compare prices with those paid by our neighbours to the south of us? I do not intend to detain the House at the present time by making comparisons of prices. My hon. friend from Selkirk (Mr. Bancroft) the *

other evening quoted sufficient figures to convince this House that prices are considerably lower on the other side of the line. Living as I do within a few miles of the boundary line of North Dakota I am in a position to know that the prices he quoted are absolutely correct, and I could give many more instances as well. I know, too, that our neighbours over the line have always been able to buy the necessaries of life, the implements of production, lumber, building material and everything that goes into building up their homes much more cheaply than we could, and moreover they have always or, at all events, have usually been able to command a better price for the products that they had to sell, and their products are the same as ours. Our products have to compete with theirs in the open markets of the world. Is it any wonder that we come to parliament and ask that the duty be removed in order that we may get the benefit of lower prices and get our raw material as cheaply as our neighbours to the south?

It has been suggested by one hon. member, I think it was the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Manion), that an educational campaign might be carried on among the manufacturers and industrial workers of eastern Canada to induce them to bring down their prices. Well, Mr. Speaker, we think that a more effective way would be to remove the tariff on these articles altogether, and then competition would take care of the prices. It is not particularly that we want to purchase American machinery, because I am sure that the average Canadian would prefer to buy Canadian machinery provided he could get equal quality for the same or very nearly the same price. But we believe that the Canadian manufacturer should be able to compete successfully with the American manufacturer in the home market when he can do it so successfully in the foreign market, especially those companies that have been organized for a great many years and have enjoyed the protection of the tariff during all the years of their existence. When we say, Mr. Speaker, that the principle of protection as a basis for fiscal policy in Canada is unsound, when we say that the condition of the primary industries is such as to demand immediate relief, we believe that there are many members sitting upon the government side of the House who will agree with us in that contention, but we are immediately faced with the problem of how to make up the loss in revenue. In that regard I would just like to say that the people of Canada could afford to pay twice the amount collected in customs revenue under almost any system of direct

The Budget-Mr. Anderson

taxation that the government might see fit to adopt and then be money in pocket. What with the duty, and the profits on duty pyramiding every time the goods are turned over, and the increased cost of goods of the home manufacturer, we believe that it would be quite possible for the people to bear that burden in the form of direct taxation.

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

William F. Carroll

Liberal

Mr. CARROLL:

Would the hon. member suggest what form the taxation should take?

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

James Steedsman

Progressive

Mr. STEEDSMAN:

If my hon. friend

will look at the amendment suggested by my hon. leader he will notice what form we suggest it should take. I say that almost any form of direct taxation would be better.

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

William F. Carroll

Liberal

Mr. CARROLL:

But if the hon. member

wishes to be constructive in his suggestions I think he should inform the House the particular form of direct taxation he would suggest.

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

James Steedsman

Progressive

Mr. STEEDSMAN:

An inheritance tax, for instance, a properly graduated income tax, for after all, Mr. Speaker, have not practically all taxes to be paid out of income? Where else can they come from? I hope my hon. friend is satisfied.

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

William F. Carroll

Liberal

Mr. CARROLL:

I would like the hon.

member to be a little more specific. We have a graduated form of income tax now. How would he graduate it so as to fill up the void that would be left after the customs tax was taken off?

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

James Steedsman

Progressive

Mr. STEEDSMAN:

I can only suggest to my hon. friend that he study the platform of the Progressive party-

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

William F. Carroll

Liberal

Mr. CARROLL:

That is a cure.

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

James Steedsman

Progressive

Mr. STEEDSMAN:

-and study carefully the amendment which has been proposed by my hon. leader. In conclusion, I desire to say that I intend to vote for that amendment

On motion of Mr. Kyte the debate was adjourned.

On motion of Mr. Graham the House adjourned at 10.23 p.m.

Thursday, May 17, 1923

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

May 16, 1923