[Mr. D. M. Kennedy.}
The Budget-Mr. Kennedy (Edmonton)
On raisins and dry currants there is a possibility that the rates will be 3 cents under the British preference, 3 cents under the intermediate, and 3 cents under the general tariff if our treaty with Australia goes through. On tea there has been no
change whatever. On coffee there has been no change. On tomatoes and other vegetables, which are necessities of life, the tariff stands practically to-day as it stood in 1921. Farm implements. These were going on the free list. Item 445 of the tariff reads:
Mowing machines, harvesters, self-binding or without binder, binding attachments, reapers, and complete parts thereof, not including shafting or malleable iron castings, 1921 12| p.c. 121 P-c. 121 P-c.Mowing machines, harvesters, self-binding or without binder, binding attachments, reapers, and complete parts thereof, not including shafting or malleable iron castings, 1925 Free 6 p.c. 0 p.c.Cultivators, 1921 10 p.c. 15 p.c. 15 p.c.Cultivators, 1925 Free 74 p.c. 71 p.c.
Traction ditching machines were free under all tariffs in 1921. To-day they are also free.
1921 ploughs and complete parts thereof 124 p.c. 171 p.c. 171 P-c.1925 ploughs and complete parts thereof 5 p.c. 10 p.c. 10 p.c.Windmills and complete parts thereof, 1921 121 P-c. 174 p.c. 174 P-C.Windmills and complete parts thereof. 1925 124 p.c. 171 P-c. 17j P-c.
I might point out that windmills affect years. In portable engines there has been no particularly the cattle industry. It is one change. The figures are 12| per cent, 171-branch of the agricultural industry that has per cent, 174 per cent, been hit hardest within the last two
' British Preferential Tariff Inter- mediate Tariff General Tariff12| p.c. 5 p.c. 20 p.c. 10 p.c. 20 p.c.10 p.c.
Mine and quarry machinery is free.
5 p.c. 71 p.c. 10 p.c.5 p.c. 74 p.c. 10 p.c.10 p.c. 15 p.c. 20 p.c.
Planks and boards were free under the tariff and dressed on one side only, and so on, were
of 1921 and thej7 are free today. There was, free in 1921 under the three tariffs and they
of course, 7i per cent war tax. Planks, boards are free to-day. and other lumber or wood, sawn, split or cut,
Gasoline under -725 specific gravity at 60 degrees temperature, 1921 Free FreeGasoline under -725 specific gravity at 60 degrees temperature, 1925 Free FreeGasoline -725 specific gravity but not heavier than -750 specific gravity at 60 degrees tenperature, per gallon, 1921 \ cent i cent 1 cent
That is the tariff to-day. There has been natural state. It was free in 1921 and it is no increase there. Crude petroleum in its still free.
Illuminating oils, composed wholly or in part of the products of petroleum, 1921
171 P-c. 20 p.c.
The percentage is the same to-day under all three tariffs.
Lubricating oils, 1921
The Budget-Mr. Kennedy (Edmonton)
The tariff is the same to-day. In the case of oils-petroleum
the rates in 1921 were 4 cent in each case. The same rates appfy to-day, 4 cent per gallon.
I wish to call the attention of the House to the tremendously high duties in connection with clothing, and clothing of course is one of
the necessaries of life especially in this country. I take item No. 563 of the tariff, women's and children's dress goods. This of course was not to be made free according to the Liberal platform, but substantial reductions were promised. This is how the item stood in 4921 and how it stands to-day:
Tariff Items. - British Preferential Tariff. Inter- mediate Tariff. General Tariff.Women's and children's dress goods, 1921 15 p.c. 21| P-C- 25 p.c.Women's and children's dress goods, 1925 15 p.c. 22J P-c. 25 p.c.565 Blankets composed wholly of pure wool 22! p.c. 22! p.c. 30 p.c. 30 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. less 10 p.c.568 567 Undershirts, drawers and knitted goods, n.o.p
Fabrics, manufacturers, wearing apparel and readymade clothing, composed wholly or in part of wool, 22b p.c. 20 p.c. 30 p.c. 30 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c.1921 France, Belgium and Netherlands 30 p.c. 27| p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. 32| p.c. 32! P-c. 32! p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. less 15 p.c.568a 611 Socks and stockings of all kinds
France and Italy
Boots and shoes, pegged or wire fastened, with un- 25 p.c. 25 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. less 10 p.c.stitched soles close edged 17! p.c. 15 p.c. 22! P-c. 22! p.c. 25 p.c. 25 p.c.61 Boots, shoes, slippers and insoles of any material, n.o.p. 1921 France, Belgium and Netherlands 20 p.c. 17| P-c. 274 P-c. 27' p.c. 274 30 p.c. 30 p.c.
Now the other clause states:
That the British preference be increased to fifty per cent of the general tariff.
I am not going into any specific cases because that has not been done, but I want to say that there is not, as far as I can see, any reasonable excuse for not carrying out those specific and definite pledges to the people of Canada, for the simple reason that the gentlemen drawing up this platform had experience previously both in drawing up platforms and in the government of the country, and understood the financial condition of Canada- at the time the platform was drawn up, and if anybody challenges me this morning to provide something constructive I would say that the constructive suggestion I should like to offer to this government or to any other government is that when a government makes definite pledges to the people of Canada they should keep those pledges. There has been ever since 1921 and ever since the campaign a line of argument taken by various members of the government, and members supporting the government to the effect that the Liberal party is the great central party, the moderation party, a party between the two extremes, the high protectionists and the free traders. Well, Mr.
Speaker, that may be, but that point of moderation has been shifting considerably. I remember back in 1921 this position was taken by the Prime Minister in his manifesto to the people of Canada. It was taken by the Prime Minister in his speech on the discussion of the budget in 1922. It was taken also by the hon. member for Chambly and Vercheres (Mr. Archambault) the other night, and taken by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) yesterday; but I wish to say that it is not a justification to say that because the Liberal party stands midway, or claims to stand midway between the high protectionists and the free traders, or the extremely low tariff party, they are necessarily right. They are not right according to the standards set up by themselves, and the definite promises they made to the people of Canada, and there ought at least to be some substantial reason given to the people of Canada as to why these pledges have not been carried out and why the policy has been changed. I wish to say that I believe that the last election should mean something to the government and to the party supporting the government. In this campaign book, the Speaker's Handbook, we have not only the Liberal party ' platform, but we have the Farmers' platform, and a little further on we
The Budget-Mr. Kennedy (Edmonton)
have an article devoted to reasons why the Farmers and the Liberals ought to get together, and having appealed to the people of Canada on the basis of this platform, we have about 117 Liberal members, of course a few of these refused to recognize the platform, but still the vast majority of them stood apparently on the platform, and we have about sixty or sixty-five members in this corner of the House elected on a platform, going not only in the direction of the Liberal platform but a little further, and therefore I claim that there was a mandate given to the government and to the House of Commons to fulfil at least all the pledges of the platform of 1919. I think it would not be unreasonable to say that it should be done in the first session, and it is certainly not unreasonable that after four sessions it ought to be carried out in full. The argument has been advanced that the country needs revenue. Well this statement was met by an argument in this -campaign handbook; both the protectionist and the revenue arguments are treated here. I am not going to take time to read from it at any great length. I find in the Handbook an article headed, "Women and Politics," and at page 4, the following:
There are two ways which the country has of raising the taxes necessary to pay its debts. One is by direct tnxation which means that every man and woman must pay from his or her income a certain sum annually. If an individual's income is over a certain amount, that individual will easily understand how much he will have to pay by way of income tax. Among working people this income may not be sufficient in amount to be directly taxed, and therefore it may appear to such individuals (who make up, after all, the bulk of the nation) that they are not paying taxes at all. This is a mistaken idea- Every man and every woman pays taxes in some form.
Now regarding the tariff this book says:
Let us suppose therefore that in the United States there is a manufacturer of shoes who can make ordinary wearing boots for $3 a pair. Suppose the cost of selling and transportation of these boots from the United States factory to the consumer in Canada amounts to $2 a pair,' a duty on these goods coming into the country is, say 50 cents per pair, they canbe sold in Canada for $5.50 in all. The 50 cents
duty goes into the government treasury for the payment of the country's obligations. It is collected at the boundary as a customs dutj\ The real duty is much higher.
If, in Canada, there is a manufacturer of shoes who can also make the same kind of wearing boots at $3 a pair and if the selling and transportation from the Canadian factory to the Canadian buyer costs also,say, $2 a pair, making in all a cost of $5, yet,
nevertheless, he sells the boots in Canada for the same price as does the American producer. He gets $5.50 for the boots, but the difference of 50 cents he puts in his own pocket. This difference is the amount of protection that the home manufacturer gets behind the tariff wall, which shelters him against American competition.