April 2, 1925

LIB

Hon. Mr. CARDIN: (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)

Liberal

1. Number of entries on which dumping duty was collected: Fiscal year 1922. Information not available; fiscal year 1923, 2,523; fiscal year 1924, 2,365.

2. Amount of dumping duty collected: Fiscal year 1922, $126,285.95; fiscal year 1923, $98,557.98; fiscal year 1924, $131,960.11.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS-ANTI-DUMPING CLAUSES
Permalink

SUPERVISOR OF GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS

CON

Mr. DOUCET:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Is the position of supervisor of government publications, occupied by Mr. Fred Cook, under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission?

2. When was the position created and how was the incumbent appointed?

3. What is the salary range of said position provided by the classification, and by whom was it set?

4. What compensation does Mr. Cook now receive annually ?

5. Have the duties of the position been materially changed since it was created?

6. Is the further sum of $500 for payment to Mr. Cook included in the estimates for the fiscal year 1925-26?

7. If so, will it in future be the policy of the government to recommend to parliament the payment of any additional salary demanded by an employee dissatisfied with the compensation of his position as fixed by the Civil Service Commission?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SUPERVISOR OF GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS
Permalink
LIB

James Murdock (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Hon. Mr. MURDOCK:

As respects the Department of Public Printing and Stationery:

1. Yes.

2. a. February 15, 1924, by order in council No. P.C. 67/271. b. August 17, 1923, by order in council No. P.C. 1631.

3. a. $3,900, $4,200, $4,500 per annum, b. Civil Service Commission.

4. $4,500.

5. No.

6. Yes.

7. The further sum of $500 in the estimates for 1925-26, is compensation to cover duties as secretary to the Government Printing and Stationery committee, which were not included in the classification made by the Civil Service Commission; the future policy of the government is in no way involved.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SUPERVISOR OF GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS
Permalink

SOLDIER SETTLEMENT LANDS


On the Orders of the Day:


PRO

Robert Gardiner

Progressive

Mr. ROBERT GARDINER (Medicine Hat):

May I inquire from the Acting Minister of Finance when the House may expect legislation dealing with revaluation of soldier settlers' lands?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SOLDIER SETTLEMENT LANDS
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Robb (Minister of Immigration and Colonization)

Liberal

Hon. J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance) :

I do not think I have any further information to give than that given a few days ago. The matter is now under consideration.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SOLDIER SETTLEMENT LANDS
Permalink

BLUE SKY LEGISLATION


On the Orders of the Day: Mr. JOS. T. SHAW (West Calgary): In view of the decision about a year ago by the Supreme Court of Canada to the effect that a federally incorporated company is under no obligation to comply with provincial legislation, and particularly with that legislation known as "blue sky" legislation passed by the various provinces, and in view of the fact that many companies are taking advantage of the situation to unload upon the public worthless stock, I should like to know from the 'Secretary of State if he intends to bring down any legislation this session for the purpose of remedying that situation.


LIB

Arthur Bliss Copp (Secretary of State of Canada)

Liberal

Hon. A. B. COPP (Secretary of State):

Information has not come to the department that any great number of companies have been unloading worthless stock upon the people generally throughout Canada. The matter is now being investigated, and if it is found necessaiy to bring down legislation along the line suggested by my hon. friend, it will be brought down this session.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   BLUE SKY LEGISLATION
Permalink
LAB

Joseph Tweed Shaw

Labour

Mr. SHAW:

Does the minister require

any instances where the public have been defrauded?

17S2

The Budget-Mr. Manion

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   BLUE SKY LEGISLATION
Permalink
LIB

Arthur Bliss Copp (Secretary of State of Canada)

Liberal

Mr. COPP:

I will fee very glad if the hon.

member can give us any instances.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   BLUE SKY LEGISLATION
Permalink

THE BUDGET


The House resumed from Wednesday, April 1, consideration of the motion of Hon. J. A. Rohb (Acting 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 Sir Henry Drayton.


CON

Robert James Manion

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. R. J. MANION (Fort William and Rainy River):

I have listened with a great

deal of interest to the discussion which has thus far taken place on the budget, and while I do not intend to review the debate, I should like to take a few moments to deal very briefly with some of the remarks made by speakers who have preceded me.

The hon. member for Lunenburg (.Mr. Duff) made, I thought, a rather severe attack upon the hon. member for Southeast Grey (Miss Macphail), due to the fact that she had gone down to Cape Breton and investigated the conditions there in What I thought was a spirit of humanity. I do not think that the hon. member for Lunenburg did himself quite justice, and I do not think he did quite justice to the hon. member for Southeast Grey, in the rather severe attack which he made upon her last night. It is true of course that in this country, as in every other country there are people who are poor. Two thousand years ago the greatest teacher, the world has ever had said: " The poor ye have always with

you," and unfortunately it is a blot upon our so-called civilization that this condition exists to-day very much to the same extent as it existed two thousand years ago. At the same time, looking at the question down there from the standpoint of the ordinary observer, or the standpoint of the ordinary reader of the newspapers-or, indeed, the ordinary reader of the debates of this House-and without in any way desiring to take part in the controversy, I do believe that conditions are anything but desirable, and I feel that the sympathy of' this House goes out to that section of the country which seems to be labouring under very depressing conditions to say the least. I will go further and say that it would appear to me that it might be wise on the part of this government to make a more thorough investigation than has yet been made of these conditions, with a view to seeing if we should not perhaps give such help to the people in that section of the country in their afflictions

as we might give, under difficult circumstances, to the people of such a country as Japan or perhaps the Fiji Islands, if an earthquake or other disaster had come upon them.

My hon. friend from Lunenburg made a remark in regard to the tariff with which I have no quarrel, in which he praised the government for putting a tariff on slack coal. He said-and he will correct me if I am wrong- that he was a low-tariff man, but he complimented them on the fact that they had raised the tariff on slack coal. My hon. friend from Comox-Albemi (Mr. Neill) in his speech, telling that fish story from British Columbia, which takes at least three hours, has on other occasions taken, I think, very much the same attitude as my hon. friend from Lunenburg. He states that he is also a low-tariff man, but when it comes down to tariff protection on certain products which come from his constituency, he believes in a tariff.

Mr. DUFF; There is no coal in my constituency.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic:   CONTINUANCE OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE ACTING MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
CON

Robert James Manion

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MANION:

There is coal in my hon. friend's province.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic:   CONTINUANCE OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE ACTING MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Duff

Liberal

Mr. DUFF:

Yes, in the province.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic:   CONTINUANCE OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE ACTING MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
CON

Robert James Manion

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MANION:

The .point that I am trying to make is that very often our cries for low tariff are more or less sectional. In other words, those who feel that they require a tariff for their own section of the country believe in a tariff, and I submit what I have already stated on other occasions^ that if wheat remained at the price it has been selling for the last two months, $1.50 or $1.75, as I hope it will, in order to give the people of the prairie provinces a just return for the labour and investment, we would hear very much less tariff discussion in this House and out of it than we have heard in the past, just as in the past few weeks we have heard very little tariff discussion from my hon. friends to my left.

The hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart, Argenteuil) a gentleman for whom we all have the utmost friendship, rose in this House as a defender, perhaps I should also say a pretender, regarding the budget we have been discussing. The hon. minister, with that kindly, honest, frank face, fairly oozes respectability, and I have noticed the more disreputable a case the government has to put forward the more sure they are to call upon my honest-appearing friend to oome forth and defend it. As I listened to him defending so eloquently-which he certainly did in a very able manner-the budget which has been presented, it made me think of an incident which

The Budget-Mr. Manion

occurred in the life of Sir John A. Macdonald. He had in his cabinet the Hon. John Oarling, who had a face almost as honest as that of the Minister of the Interior, and one day, after some particular action of Hon. John Carling, Sir John A. Macdonald studied his face for some little time and said to one of his friends, or I think it was to Hon. John Carling himself, "I have come to the conclusion that the good Lord never made a man as honest as you look." As I listened to my good friend the Minister of the Interior defending this farcical budget the other day,

I felt the House might well come to the same conclusion regarding him.

He also spoke of what he believes on the tariff question. He did not listen to the chimes he rang last year, but he did say that he believed in a lower tariff; in fact he believed in a tariff for revenue only. I think I am not misquoting him when I say that. The expression "tariff for revenue only" is used to my mind in a false sense, because a tariff for revenue only is a free trade tariff. There is no such thing as a "tariff for revenue only" being a protective tariff. England has a tariff for revenue only by which she brings into the coffers of her finance department something like $600,000,000 per annum on commodities which she does not produce in her own domain; in other words, five-sixths of the money brought into the coffers of England by tariff duties are raised upon sugar, tea and tobacco, three substances which England does not produce within her own shores. So that is a tariff for revenue only, and if Canada had a tariff for revenue only she would have free trade, because so long as you put on a tariff which protects at all you are putting on a protective tariff to the extent that it protects.

I wish to touch one other remark of the hon. Minister of the Interior, and then I shall proceed with my discussion of the budget. The hon. minister pointed out-and drew my attention to it at the moment-that Sir Henry Thornton had made a statement that in Northern Ontario a number of new industries had started up recently employing a lot of men. I venture to say that, without knowing the facts, that most of those industries are pulp and paper industries, not affected by the tariff at all. But at any rate I wish to point out particularly to my hon. friend that the day after he made his speech I noticed in the morning papers of this city an article stating that there was a disturbance in Sudbury, due to the many unemployed starting a parade of their own.

Dealing with the budget from the standpoint of the ordinary observer, I submit that this budget, in which there is a complete absence of any remedies for our present discontents, is like a train of fifteen cars carrying one passenger. It is a sort of peculiar political salad, made up of a strange compound of unconscious humour, misstatements of fact, homeopathic doses of both free trade and protection, and an oily dressing of hopes of better times to come. As to misstatements of fact, I need only draw the attention of the House to the statement in regard to the prosperous conditions prevailing in the Dominion, and more particularly and more emphatically to that fable of a surplus-that fable which my hon. friend the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) is talking about ad nauseam, but which should be classed among Aesop's fables.

I intend to deal very briefly with my conception of the so-called surplus which the Acting Minister of Finance has described. My hon. friend from West York (Sir Henry Drayton) has dealt with it from the standpoint of an ex-Minister of Finance, my hon. friend from Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) has dealt with it from the standpoint of a chartered accountant, but I intend to deal with it just from the standpoint of the man in the street reading the budget speech a number of times and trying to figure out where the Acting Minister of Finance gets his surplus. My hon. friend the ex-Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton) has pointed out that in his view instead of hava surplus of 82,000,000 there is actually a deficit of about $100,000,000, and I venture to assert that he is pretty accurate in his analysis. But I intend to deal with this surplus, not on the basis of any figures placed before the House by the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) or any of his colleagues, but simply from the standpoint of the figures given by the Acting Minister of Finance himself. I find that on page 1469 of Hansard he estimated the revenue for the fiscal year, accurately enough for his purpose, at $344,000,000, as against an estimated expenditure of $342,000,000, leaving a surplus of $2,000,000. I am giving round figures. Well, Sir, if you look back at the preceding page you will find that the Acting Minister of Finance gives the accounts for the railways and shows loans by way of cash charged to the net debt of the Dominion at something over $18,000,000, and loans by way of government bond issues of $46,000,000, which added together amount to $64,000,000. This converts his surplus of $2,000,000 into a deficit, according to his own figures, of $62,000,000.

The Budget-Mr. Manion

That we should charge this railway expenditure not only to our debt but to the ordinary accounts is evident to anyone who would treat these accounts fairly. The hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Marler) in his speech before the Canadian Club of Montreal recently, reported in one of the Montreal papers, said:

Our ordinary debt may have decreased in the past few years, but the ordinary debt is not the only one, we have in addition to that the railway debt. Consequently the gross debt of this country is not only the ordinary consolidated debt, but the railway debt, and if one rises then the whole debt is increased, and if one is lessened then the debt can be decreased.

I quote the hon. member because he is a follower of the government and a friend of the Acting Minister of Finance, and yet he agrees that these railway charges should be included in the ordinary debt of the country, and I believe that when we talk of a surplus we have to take into account this railway expenditure.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic:   CONTINUANCE OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE ACTING MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

Would the hon. member include in what affects a surplus or deficit the amounts advanced to the National Railways or borrowed by them on capital account?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic:   CONTINUANCE OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE ACTING MINISTER OF FINANCE
Permalink

April 2, 1925