could produce 15,000,000 pounds of butter more annually," said Mr. Byrne, "we could sell them, but a difficulty arises in the way of success. Other countries threaten to send their butter here. We ought to hit foreign butter as hard as foreign countries hit our butter. Duties as high as those established by foreign countries ought to be imposed here, and I hope the government will see to it."
I desire to place on record one of the resolutions regarding eggs, to which I have already referred. This resolution was passed at a mass meeting of poultrymen held at New Westminster, British Columbia, on January 12, 1926:
Resolution No. 1:
Whereas, eggs coming into Canada from United States points under a tariff of 3 cents per dozen, are making it unprofitable for British Columbia poultry- . men to send their eggs to the prairie and eastern Canadian markets;
Be it therefore resolved:
(a) That the federal government be requested as an act of justice to Canadian poultrymen to raise the tariff on United States eggs coming into Canada to 8 cents per dozen, which is the tariff imposed on Canadian eggs going into the United States.
(b) That the federal government be requested to make the Eggs Marks Act of British Columbia applicable to the Dominion of Canada as a whole.
And be it further resolved that copies of this resolution be sent to Hon. W. R. Motherwell, Minister of Agriculture at Ottawa, Hon. E. D. Barrow, Minister of Agriculture for British Columbia and to each of the federal members for British Columbia.
Resolution No. 2:
Whereas, under the Australian-Canadian treaty eggs from Australia are allowed to enter Canada free of duty;
And whereas under the Dominion of Canada egg grading regulations it is possible that eggs from Australia, raised under summer conditions, will be able to enter Canada as fresh eggs at a time when winter conditions prevail in Canada;
And whereas this will increase the already serious competition which Canadian poultrymen have to meet from eggs from the United States;
Be it therefore resolved:
That the federal government be requested to add to the present definition of the word "fresh" the
length of time during which eggs intended for sale as "fresh" in Canada may be held when in transit at a temperature of 35 degrees Fahrenheit or less.
And be it further resolved that copies of this resolution-
And so forth.
Resolution No. 3:
Whereas there is reason to believe that an effort will shortly be made by certain produce dealers in the prairie provinces to secure the modification of the present egg grading regulations, which modification amounts practically to the abandonment of egg grading;
Be it resolved:
That the federal government be requested to make no alteration in the present regulations-
You will notice that this resolution does not specifically call for the increase in the 'Canadian duty against Australian eggs to equal the Australian duty, but that is covered by some of the other resolutions. I wish now to read the resolution passed by the British Columbia Dairymen's Association:
I beg to advise you that ait the annual convention of the British Columbia Dairymen's Association, held on January 21 and 22 last at New Westminster, the following resolution was passed:
Resolved that whereas, at the close of its last session the federal parliament rushed through legislation giving to Australia a preferential tariff on cheese and butter;
And whereas this legislation is likely to discourage the production of cream during the winter months in this country, owing to the maintenance of low prices to meet the competition of Australian products moving to our ports by low ocean rates against our high railway rates;
Be it resolved that this convention goes on record by voicing its disapproval of this concession, and that such action be taken as may be deemed necessary for the protection of our dairy industry.
I have here a return tabled on a motion made by myself, showing the importation of eggs from the United States and other places. With the permission of the House I will place these tables on Hansard:
Countries from which Imported Fiscal Year ended March 31, 1924 Fiscal Year ended March 31, 1925 Month of December, 1925 Quantity Value Quantity Value Quantity ValueEggs in the shell- dozen $ dozen $ dozen $United States 6,454,313 1,961,477 2,564,551 917,100 33,133 16,533China 1,150 174 77,908 15,243 116 31Eggs, n.o.p.- pounds 3 pounds $ pounds $United States No statistics prior to 1925 413,383 90,729 800 640China 560,257 89,545 157,616 25,395
All I ask, and all any reasonable person could ask, is that we be placed on a businesslike basis in our relations with the other dominions. Give our farmers a fair chance and they are prepared to compete with the world,
but under present conditions they are at a very great disadvantage.
I would like now, Mr. Speaker, to refer for a moment to the question of immigration. I am not going to discuss at any length the
The Budget-Mr. McQuarrie
question of oriental immigration; I have referred to that on a number of occasions, and any hon. member who is interested may look up Hansard and read my remarks. Other hon. members are prepared to deal with this subject, I believe. I wish to say, however, that the people of British Columbia are not satisfied with what is being done by this government. in the way of effective restriction. The resolution which I moved in 1922 providing for exclusion was defeated, because the government promised effective restriction and the then leader of the Progressive party, Mr. Crerar, stated that he was prepared to give the government a chance. All the hon. members from British Columbia are a unit, I believe, in demanding that there be exclusion, but on that occasion my resolution was defeated, because the government said, "We will give you effective restriction of such a nature that it will practically amount to exclusion, although the word exclusion is not used and therefore will not give offence to Japan."
The people of British Columbia are not satisfied with the way that promise is being carried out. I have a great mass of material which has been sent to me during the present session, particularly from the Oriental Exclusion League of Victoria, covering this question. That league, which is very active, has proposed that, a royal commission be appointed to investigate the whole question of oriental immigration, as well as that of orientals already in Canada, and on that royal commission they believe British Columbia should have the majority representation. That is a matter for consideration. The league also suggests that an effort be made to get orientals already in Canada to go back to their own countries. It is said that thousands of Chinese would go back to China providing they were assisted by the return of a portion of the head tax already paid. In South Africa a policy has been adopted under which bonuses are given East Indians to help them back to India; that policy has not worked out in such a way as to get rid of all the East Indians, but some of them have taken advantage of the opportunity. I am given to understand by the secretary of the Oriental Exclusion League of Victoria that a great many-he says " thousands "-of Chinese would go back to China if some such policy were adopted. They would be glad to go back, because they came to this country under the false impression that they were needed here and would be welcomed. They were brought here more or less under false pretences, for which the trans-14011-178J
portation companies are responsible; they find conditions here not as represented, and they would go back if the government would bonus them to the extent of their steamship fares. If that is so, it might be a good thing to do.
I have referred, Mr. Speaker, to the policy of the Liberal party, announced many, many times on the hustings and in this House and in their platform, that the cost of living would be brought down if they were returned to power. Well, I think that has not turned out to be the case, but rather that the cost of living has gone up, and has been going up practically all the time since thi3 government came into power. In this connection let me refer to the Labour Gazette, a government publication, of February, 1926, where at page 93, I find this:
Retail food prices were again somewhat higher, the cost per week of a list of twenty-nine staple foods for an average family of five, in terms of the average retail prices in some sixty cities was $11.63 at the beginning of January, 1926, as compared with $11.56 for December, 1925; $10.77 for January, 1925; $10.78 for January, 1924; $10.52 for January, 1923; $11.03 for January, 1922; $14.48 for January, 1921; $16.92 for June, 1920 (the peak); $15.30 for January, 1920; $12.42 for January, 1918; and $7.73 for January, 1914.
I am afraid, therefore, that this government has not been successful in carrying out that plank of its platform, and I submit that there must be something wrong. I submit that the government's policy is responsible for this increase, and that the government's policy as announced in the budget this year will be responsible for a still further increase in the cost of living.
Now I come to another matter. This government takes credit for a lot of things. I wonder if it will admit that it is responsible' for the state of affairs to which I am now going to refer, namely that the birth rate in Canada has decreased steadily since October of 1921.