February 11, 1925

REPORTS AND PAPERS


Report of the Department of National Defence for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1924; Militia Service and Air Service.-Hon. Mr. Macdonald. Report of the Department of National Defence for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1924; Naval Service.-Hon. Mr. Macdonald. Copies of General Orders, Promotions and Retirements, Canadian Militia.-Hon. Mr. Macdonald. Annual Report of the Department of the Secretary of State for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1924.-Hon. Mr. Copp.


COPYRIGHT ACT AMENDMENT


Mr. E. R. E. CHEVRIER (Ottawa) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 2, to amend and make operative certain provisions of the Copyright Act, 1921.


CON
LIB

Edgar-Rodolphe-Eugène Chevrier

Liberal

Mr. CHEVRIER:

This is substantially the same bill as I introduced last year to amend the Copyright Act. There are very slight modifications, but substantially it is the same. The bill was not reached last year because time would not allow of it.

Topic:   COPYRIGHT ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
IND
LIB

Edgar-Rodolphe-Eugène Chevrier

Liberal

Mr. CHEVRIER:

The object of the bill is to afford sanctions for certain dispositions which were not contained in the original bill. It is to repeal certain sections of the bill. I do not need to go into it at any length because, as was pointed out last year, the modifications are completely set out m the marginal notes, and in order to give the whole effect of the bill one would have to read all the amendments.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Topic:   COPYRIGHT ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink

HOME BANK DEPOSITORS


On the Orders of the Day: Mr. E. C. ST-PERE (Hochelaga): May I ask the right hon. Prime Minister if the government has any announcement to make with respect to the Home bank depositors?


LIB

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

Liberal

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

,1 expect to be in a

The Address-Mr. Anderson

position to make a statement to the House in respect to that matter in a very short time, shortly after the conclusion of the present debate.

Topic:   HOME BANK DEPOSITORS
Permalink

THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY


The House resumed from Tuesday, February 10. consideration of the motion of Sir Eugene Fiset for an Address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his Speech at the opening of the session.


CON

Robert King Anderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. K. ANDERSON (Halton):

Mr. Speaker, I had no intention of interfering with the government's evident desire to bring this debate to a close when I moved the adjournment of the debate last evening. I wish to thank the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Graham) for his courtesj' in allowing the motion to pass. I was somewhat interested to note that the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) objected to the motion on the ground I think, that the time of parliament was being wasted. I would like to say that possibly no member takes up more of the time of parliament than the hon. member himself.

Topic:   THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PRO
CON

Robert King Anderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ANDERSON:

He oooupies more pages of Hansard than many of th-e ministers of the crown, not excepting the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) himself, nor the Minister of Customs (Mr. Bureau), nor the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Cardin), nor even the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell), who can ramble over the political sceneTy about as nimbly as any person I know.

Topic:   THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PRO

Thomas Wakem Caldwell

Progressive

Mr. CALDWELL:

If the hon. member will permit me, I was not objecting to him speaking; I was objecting because he would not speak.

Topic:   THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Robert King Anderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ANDERSON:

The Address-Mr. Anderson

1921 to use their influence in the interests of all classes and all sections of Canada. How did they succeed in giving effect to those policies? One of their first claims was for the creation of a wheat board. The necessary legislation, as a result of the efforts of the beat minds in both parties, was passed but it proved a complete fiasco. The act was such a poor one that not a man of outstanding ability in the Dominion, even at a salary of $50,000 per year, could be found to assume responsibility of the measure. The consequence was that hon. gentlemen at my left were compelled to fall back upon the suggestion made by the right hon.. leader of the opposition, of a wheat pool, which, I am pleased to know, has (been a real success.

Another question which they brought prominently before the people was reciprocity with the United States. That pioposition, like many of the others, has gone into the waste paper basket, and seemingly nothing can be done in that direction.

They also requested the government to complete the Hudson Bay railway, but after two or three years have been spent in negotiations nothing has been effected along this line. That, too, remains to be dealt with in the dim and distant future.

They have often given utterance to their free trade proclivities on the floor of this House. A few efforts have been made in that direction by the government. There has been some reduction in customs duties, but the changes have not proved to be in the national interest.

Furthermore, a request was made that the freight rates on the Great Lakes should be controlled. Legislation for this purpose was passed, through the co-operation of both parties, but the act became as great a fiasco as the wheat board statute. The result was practically to make conditions worse than they were before. Consequently, the measure had virtually to be nullified until parliament could either amend it or put it out of existence.

Although the Progressives form a very strong party in this House they have not been able to enforce their views upon the government to any extent, notwithstanding that the ministry regards them with favour. There is a moral which I draw from all this and it is very clear that a class makes a serious blunder when they segregate themselves from other classes and come out as a distinct political entity.

The progress of disintegration is pretty we'll advanced amongst our Progressive friends. Three distinct groups have emerged as a result of a cleavage of opinions and policies

which are as divergent as the individual members themselves, and the real Progressive party is revealed as farmer bloc from the prairie provinces. This group is distinctly a class group wedded to sectionalism. The fourteenth parliament is nearing its end and it has not accomplished anything in the interest of agriculture. Whether because of the blundering of the government or of the impossible nature of the demands. I cannot say, but the fact remains that nothing has been accomplished that could not have been better attained if these gentlemen to my left had retained their old time party allegiance.

A great deal has been heard in this country about blue ruin. On the other hand, the Prime Minister, in particular, has stated that Canada is more prosperous than the United States. That is something the average citizen of Canada finds it very difficult to credit when he realizes that six hundred thousand of his fellow citizens have left this country within the last three years and are now engaged in occupations in the United States. This fact alone constitutes a very strong argument against the claim of the Prime Minister.

I visited the province of Prince Edward Island last summer, and a banker in a small town where I stayed informed me that he had never seen so much American money coming into the place as he had that year. When asked how he accounted for this he replied, " Because so many of our citizens have gone to the United States and located there. Now they are sending this money back to help to support the remainder of their families who are still in Canada." A gentleman said to me the other day and the remark made me smile, that the Prime Minister was a very clever politician. His reason for saying this was that the Prime Minister had brought the Canadian dollar back to par. Well, if the Prime Minister was able to bring back our dollar, why cannot he bring back to this country the six hundred thousand Canadians who have gone to the United States in search of that dollar? Why cannot he biing back the 162,000 Canadian soldiers who have gone there in search of employment? If the process of bringing the Canadian dollar back to par involved losing one of our greatest assets to the United States then it is a very expensive operation.

In spite of all these adverse conditions I must admit that I am a consistent optimist so far as Canada's future is concerned. This country is bound to go ahead and' nothing can stop it. The government by its retrograde policies, may delay the wheels of progress for a time, but Canada will over-

The Address-Mr. Anderson

come every obstacle and will march forward to the great destiny which the future has iu store for her. But to facilitate its progress certain things are necessary. We have large natural resources which must be conserved and developed in the best interests of our citizens. I believe the raw material from those resources should' be manufactured into finished products in this Dominion, and that we should devote all our energies to bringing that result about. Those resources belong to the people of this country. They are so multifarious that they lend themeslves to every kind of human effort, and they should be developed as a whole, the one assisting the other. We want to attract to Canada not only money but men who will come here and develop our resources, bring out the wealth that lies hidden here and make it available for our people. Those who have the best right to that wealth are Canadians who pay the taxes and keep the country solvent. It is upon Canadians that we must rely for the payment of our taxation. Our huge debt of two and a half billions of dollars must be paid. The annual interest is large and must be met. In ad'dition a large amount must be raised in order to provide for the national services. There is only one class of people to whom we can appeal to meet this taxation and that is our own citizens. It is the duty of the government to make every effort possible to reduce the burden of taxation. In order to accomplish that desirable result the strictest economy must be practised in every direction. While doing that, the government should see to it that our people are not und'uly burdened in paying their fair share of necessary taxation. In the payment of taxation there are comparatively few shirkers; the majority are willing to do their share if they can only earn the money. If they cannot do that they must emigrate to other countries, or become a burden upon the state and a menace to society. The cnly way to make Canada prosperous is to protect our industries and our agriculturists to such an extent that a profitable home market can be maintained. They must be protected from cheap labour and the depreciated currencies of foreign countries. Our basic ind'ustry is agriculture, and it should be developed to its highest perfection, but we should not forget that a prosperous agricultural community depends upon the growth of large industrial centres. Our industries also are dependent upon the prosperity of agriculture. The two should go together, each is dependent upon the other, and' both should be developed to a just and equitable degree. The people of the towns buy the

product of the farms; the people in the rural sections purchase the articles produced in the towns. By an interchange of this character both industries benefit, and greater wealth is produced and remains in the country. If we want to make Canada prosperous that is the only way to go about it.

There is little need to detail the advantages of the home market. Everyone knows, and few will deny, its superiority over the foreign market. It is easy of access, the returns are quicker, transportation costs are less, the prices offer the greater profit and tire demand is steady. Not only that, but the growth of cities and towns increases the value of farm property in their vicinity and improve the living conditions in the country in many ways.

There should be the most friendly relations between rural and urban people since they are dependent upon each other. The farmer buys the product of the industries in our cities and towns and the people of the towns and cities buy the product of his farm; each buying from the other and both growing richer from the interchange since what they sell is the product of labour and is created wealth which remains in the country. This would make us a prosperous and contented people, and the only way to bring it about is to protect our manufacturers and agriculturists by means of the national policy of Sir John A. Macdonald which has already laid the foundation so well that the ultimate objective is almost within our grasp. The foundation so well laid has been undermined by the unwise and ill-considered tariff reductions of the present government to such an extent that the whole fabric of our national structure is threatened with disaster.

We have our fruit growing section in Canada dotted here and there across the continent. They are to be found in the Maritimes, in Ontario and British Columbia, and the fruit produced is the best of its kind to be found in the world. The industry is therefore of national importance and any policy designed to benefit it can be said to be for the benefit of Canada. It is a live industry in which many millions are invested and in which many thousands of our population are engaged and they are heavy tax payers. Fruit is a necessary article of diet for our people and they must have it to keep physically fit to meet the extreme changes in our climate. When the returning sun melts away the snow and frost of winter and warms up our atmosphere to sixty and seventy degrees, a person's being clamours for a more cooling diet than ham and eggs or bully beef. Nature tells us our needs by this craving, and to ignore the voice is

The Address-Mr. Anderson

to pay the penalty in disease. This craving must be satisfied and our citizens are willing to pay the price, and do pay it to the Americans, for the fruit that first appears on the market. Nature is wise and provides the fruit at the psychological moment it is needed. Our strawberries come on the market at the proper time for our climatic conditions. Our American cousins need this fruit sooner than we and their climate produces it for them and thus enables them to anticipate our demand by putting their early fruit on our market fully three weeks before our own early fruit is ripe, thus creating an artificial desire in our people. By this means the Americans skim the cream of our prices and cheat the Canadian fruit grower out of his birthright. This should not be and it should be remedied by an increased protection on fruit. The duty should be ad valorem and not specific as now, to meet the situation adequately. I would advocate an ad valorem duty of at least 25 per cent so that the early American fruit would pay a duty in proportion to its price, which is usually about 40 cents per quart, and produce more revenue if the fruit must come in. Just as soon as our native fruit is ripe, competition or supply and demand, regulates the price and does so all the more promptly because the product is perishable. For this industry the home market is essential as the Canadian cannot compete in the American market on account of the increased cost of production due to the following causes:-

(1) The American fruit is two or three weeks earlier and the cream of the prices is gone before our fruit is ready for. sale.

(2) The cost of production in Canada is greater on account of climatic conditions. More labour is necessary to protect the plants from the frosts of winter and spring. The grower must provide himself with frame-yard room, sash, and fertilizer, to grow his seeding plants. This is not necessary or as expensive in a wanner climate.

(3) Top dressing with straw, involving time

and labour is absolutely essential in this country and not necessary in the United States. The Canadian producer must employ his help longer in the year on account of these extra precautions which add materially to the cost compared with North Carolina and South Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee and New York. This applies to the production of fruit all over Canada and furnishes the reason why our fruit industry requires adequate protection. The same policy for the whole country and not for one section of it to the detriment of other sections. .

The canning industry is intimately bound up with the fruit and vegetable industry and a fiscal policy that injures the one, hurts the other. The canners buy the raw material from the producers in their vicinity, give employment to many hands and put the perishable product of the gardener on the market many months after it is picked. But for this industry the gardener would be compelled to produce less or allow his product to rot in the field. There were forty-two canning factories in Canada in 1921 with an output of 816,000,000 annually, and employing 3,000 people and buying the product of 5,000 farmers.

In order to give the discussion somewhat of a home touch, I am going to tell you something about the county I represent, Halton. Agriculture and industry are represented in that county in the same proportion as in the Dominion at large. It is a district fairly representative of the needs of the whole country, and anything that injures Halton will injure the rest of Canada. Mixed farming is carried on to a considerable degree in all parts of the county-fruit growing, cattle raising, dairy products, and so forth. The home market in this country is estimated to consume from eighty to eighty-five per cent of the produce of our farms. It is absolutely essential that these farmers should have their home market.

Topic:   THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PRO

Thomas Alexander Crerar

Progressive

Mr. CRERAR:

In that is included what

the farmers themselves and their families consume, of course?

Topic:   THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Robert King Anderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ANDERSON:

I think the farmers

must live, and they consume their product.

Topic:   THE GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink

February 11, 1925