May 18, 1926

?

An hon. MEMBER:

Fifty thousand dollars.

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

Lawrence Alexander Wilson

Liberal

Mr. WILSON (Vaudreuil):

I would ask

my hon. friend to be discreet, and not give the price away. We have in Mr. Beatty a lovable man, trained under one of the greatest men who ever lived in this country and one of my oldest friends, Sir Thomas Shaughnessy. I pause to-night to pay a tribute to his memory. Under the tuition of Sir Thomas Shaughnessy Mr. Beatty learned the railway business and there are few better on this continent. Now, I believe in competition between these two systems. Allow them to be operated separately. If there is not competition between them you will not receive the attention or the satisfaction you are getting at the present time. This country is big enough to support two railway systems. Even though there should be a little deficit of twenty-five millions what does it amount to? The Canadian National Railways employ one hundred thousand people. One of the shops of the system is located in my own county and I know what an amount of good that railway is accomplishing. I know that the town of Coteau is dependent on the workshops of the Canadian National railway. If we consider that the one hundred thousand employees of the system have, on the average, families of three or four it means that half a million persons are dependent on the Canadian National railways for their bread and butter. Destroy that system, root it up, and it would cost you many millions more to support these people if you ever make an amalgamation with the Canadian Pacific. My advice is: Let Mr. Beatty and Sir Henry Thornton remain friendly enemies.

May I draw the attention of the House to the fact that in 1908 I sent a Christmas

The Budget-Mr. McKUlop

card to my friends, bearing the following poetic greeting:

Men should be judged not by their tint or skin,

The gods they serve, the vintage that they drink,

Nor by the way they fight or love or sin,

But by the quality of thought they think.

I happened to send one of those cards to a friend-the friend of both sides of this House -the then Prime Minister of Canada. The right hon. gentleman in question replied to me as follows:

Prime Minister's Office, Canada,

Ottawa, Dec. 20, 1908.

My dear Larry,

I received this morning your Christmas greeting and I will not lose one moment before sending you my thanks.

The ranks are getting thinner and thinner of the old friends who, in the early years of my career, urged me on, helped me and assisted me. You are one of them. To them and to you especially my heart goes with ever growing gratitude.

May the new year be to you a year of prosperity and happiness.

This is the wish of your old friend,

Wilfrid Laurier.

This shows the sentiment and the heart of a man we all respected and revered. Let us follow his example and harmony will reign forever in our beloved Canada.

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

Hugh Cummings McKillop

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. H. C. McKILLOP (West Elgin):

Mr. Speaker, in the first place I wish to congratulate the last speaker on the very entertaining and humorous address with which he has entertained the House.

I realize that the hour is getting late and for that reason I shall curtail my remarks; I promise not to detain the House for any length of time. There are, however, one or two problems to which I wish to draw the attention of the government and more especially of the Finance minister (Mr. Robb). The budget as brought down has dealt with only one industry in Canada. But there are a great many other industries that are hoping against hope that the government will provide a little more protection for their needs. I am afraid they are going to be disappointed, nevertheless I hope that before the budget is finally disposed of the Minister of Finance will give due consider-3 a m. ation to the industries whose

situation I am going to bring to his attention, and will see that they are given a little more protection.

There is a class of citizen of our countrywho want and need protection very badly.I refer to the truck farmer or the market

gardener, of whom there are a great many throughout Canada. Now these farmers, owing to our geographical situation, are labouring

under a heavy handicap, as the southern states produce each year so much earlier and flood our markets with their produce for which they obtain the highest prices; then when our farmers' produce is ready for market they frequently find the market filled up, or at least filled to such an extent that they have to take a very low price for what they have to sell and in a good many instances take a good part of their load back home with them. This, Mr. Speaker, is not as it should be. These farmers are up early and work late to produce these goods and it is certainly not very encouraging to see the cream of this business going to the producers in the south.

For instance last year the following fruits and vegetables were imported:

Apples Quantity .. 150,840 bbls. $ Value 800,059Blackberries') Gooseberries}*.. .. .. 38,360 lbs. 6,227Raspberries J Peaches .. 14,898^566 lbs. 643,001Pears .. 20,905,150 lbs. 926,398Plums .. 190,756 bus. 495,035Strawberries .. 3,168.975 lbs. 607,345Cabbage 221,134Onions 423,546Potatoes .. 26,129,680 lbs. 481,933Tomatoes .. 329,781 lbs. 1,110,587Making a total of .. $5,715,265 This amount. Mr. Speaker, has gone to enrich the coffers of some other nation, and I

am satisfied that if more protection were put on the various articles I have mentioned it would not be long before all the fruit and vegetables needed would be produced in this country and the money kept circulating at home, to the benefit of both producers and consumers alike.

For the last four years I have at every session raised my voice in protest against the low duty on beans coming into this country to the detriment of our own bean producers. For the benefit of those members who. came for the first time to this House after the last election, I would just say that the duty on -beans coming into this country is now and has been for a good many years just twenty-five cents per bushel, while on beans going into the United States the duty is SI.05 per bushel. In other words, if a bean dealer in the United States wants to send a bushel of beans, or for that matter a carload, into this country he has to pay 25 cents per bushel duty, while on the other hand if a dealer of this country wants to send beans into the republic to the south of us, he has to pay $1.05 per bushel. Now just to show how this is worked out to the detriment of the bean producer of this country, I want to

The Budget-Mr. McKillop

go back to the years from 1891 to 1901. For that period of ten years the average annual amount of beans produced in this country was

875.000 bushels, but in the year 1901 there were imported into this country 11,000 bushel of beans. From that time on the production of beans in this country steadily grew smaller while the importations increased by leaps and bounds, until we find that in the year 1920 there were produced in this country only

388.000 'bushels of beans, while in the same year 444,000 bushels were imported. In other words, for the year 1920 there were 56,000 bushels more imported than there were produced in Canada. I think that all hon. members will agree with me that that is a big change in this one industry in twenty years, all owing to the low duty of 25 cents per bushel on beans coming into our country. And further importations were as follows for

* five years from 1921 to 1925:

Year . Bushels Value1921 203,725 $637.6321922 148,157 376,7921923 329,974 777,2141924 29S647 754,0901925 150,524 350,369Total 1,131,027 2,746,097

In other words, nearly 13,000,000 has gone from Canada to enrich the producers of this commodity in some other country, while here at home many of our producers are still holding their last year's stock. For the months of January and February, and March of this year beans to the extent of 68,167 bushels, valued at 8146,907 have come in under this low duty.

. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not think that this is fair or equitable to the bean producers of this country, and I sincerely hope that this duty on beans will be raised as high as the duty imposed by the nation to the south of us on the same product. I want to say that as long as I am a member of this House I will continue to fight for an increase of this duty, because in doing so I contend that I am only trying to get justice for our bean producers.

There are a great many industries in this Country that need more protection than they have at present, such as our woollen mills, our knitting plants, our coal fields, our pulp wood industry, and many others I could mention. It Is my humble opinion that if, instead of spending so much money trying to get immigrants into this country, the government would increase protection all round and get the wheels of industry turning, there would be no need to spend money trying to get people to come here; because as soon as it is known abroad that there is plenty of work in Canada, people will flock here by the thousands and in this

way our great Dominion will be built up and will soon become one of the greatest nations in the world.

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

Felix Patrick Quinn

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. F. P. QUINN (Halifax):

I would not

trespass on the valuable time of the House at this late hour, and indeed it had not been my intention until a very short time ago to say anything at all, but for the fact that after listening to the splendid address of the hon. member for Shel'bume-Yarmouth (Mr. Hatfield) last night, and having read some of it to-day in Hansard, I thought I would reply, however briefly, to some of the criticisms he levelled at some of the Maritime representatives in this parliament on the grounds upon which they conducted their campaign and upon which they were elected. As the hour is so late I will not discuss the point at any length, but I should like to quote just a sentence of what the hon. member had to say. For instance:

If my hon. friend will permit me to say so, this government has done the only thing done by any government to help Nova Scotia.

He went on to point out that the government had appointed a royal commission to investigate Maritime rights. Now the reason why there are so many representatives from the Maritime provinces on this side of the House is the fact that nothing has been done either by this or any previous government to assist either Nova Scotia or the other Maritime provinces. I make this statement in no partisan spirit, for the fact is that every parliament, Liberal and Conservative alike, has ignored the rights of the Maritime provinces. We feel that we have not received justice at the hands of confederation. On a former occasion on which I addressed the House I referred at some length to this question, and indicated why we Maritime righters, as we have been called, were elected. We were elected to press the claims which Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island justly have against the Dominion and which have been consistently ignored.

Just a word or two now with regard to the budget. I do not feel justified in supporting the budget. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb), in presenting his statement, referred to it as a poor man's budget. I may be lacking in intelligence but I must confess that I cannot see in what respect this budget will be of any advantage to the poor man. Take for instance the reduction in automobile duties. Will that affect the poor man in any way? And when I speak of the poor man I am referring to wage earners whose income seldom exceeds $2,000. Are they interested in the purchase of automobiles? Take again the increased exemptions in income

The Budget-Mr. Quinn

tax: is that a matter of interest to the poor man? And the reduction in postage: to what extent does that affect the poor man's purse? The average workingman writes two letters a week. That is a matter of $1 spread over a period of twelve months.

I do not know that there is anything else the government can boatt about, apart from the slight reduction of 2J per cent in the sales tax on canned fish. This will mean very little to the average wage earner. Had the Minister of Finance been sincere the first thing he would have done would have been to eliminate altogether the 5 per cent sales tax which this government imposed upon the people; for that would have been of direct advantage to every man, woman and child in Canada. I leave that suggestion for his consideration.

Just before the budget was brought down I happened to read an editorial from the Labour Gazette from which I took the following quotation:

The tariff changes will lead to restriction of opportunities of employment without providing any commensurate benefit to the wage earner generally.

There is the opinion of the Labour Gazette. Further on, referring to the tariff board

and I call this particularly to the attention of the Labour representatives-the Gazette has this to say:

In the creation of the tariff board organized labour has been given no consideration, for there is no group in Canada whose interests are more vitally affected by the tariff reductions.

I am not going to say more, but I want to read to the House something which were it possible under the rules to do so, I would move by way of amendment to the budget. I know it is not in order to propose a second amendment, but if I could submit one it would be to the following effect:

That conditions in the Maritime provinces, especially with regard to employment and markets for basic products, such as coal and steel are at this very time alarming.

That as a consequence people are leaving for other lands in numbers unnaturally large.

That remedial measures have been already too long delayed.

That such conditions are due in no small degree to tariff reductions made in recent years, especially in respect of steel, which discriminate against the Maritime provinces.

And the House regrets that the budget of the minister of Finance contains not the slightest promise of relief.

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

Joseph Henry Harris

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. J. H. HARRIS (Toronto-Scarborough):

In the space of just two minutes I want to say what in my opinion the policy of this government means to this Dominion. To my mind it is a tragedy that in this day and generation we should find in Canada a government, which is supposed to comprise the brightest minds in the country, utterly unable so to deal with our fiscal problem as to inspire the ordinary wage earners with confidence not only in themselves but in the country. Our people are leaving Canada for foreign shores to seek the employment which they are unable to find at home. It is most unfortunate that representatives of the Canadian government and representatives of our leading manufacturing industries, particularly of Ontario, including the producers of motor cars, should not find it possible to come together and decide upon a policy in the interests of the country.

I might mention again what I dealt with in some detail in the debate on the Address. The longer the Liberal party stays in power the more are we getting out of balance with regard to the number of our people engaged in the production of raw material as compared with those employed in the production of manufactured goods. Whereas in the United States every year more and more men are engaged in the various processes of manufacturing and a diminishing number are employed on rough labour, in this country the conditions are reversed. What is the reason? The United States consistently adheres to a protective policy, while under this government Canada is handicapped by an unstable tariff policy.

And the government has gone a step further. Under this budget the imposition of double income tax will discourage the investment of money in Canadian industries. This is another example of how the industrial life of the Dominion is being crippled by the ineptitude of this government.

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

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

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I was paired

with the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen). Had I voted I would have voted against the amendment.

Mr. O'NEILL: Mr. Speaker, I was paired with the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Cahill). Had I voted I would have voted in favour of the amendment.

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

Hermas Deslauriers

Liberal

Mr. DESLAURIERS:

Mr. Speaker, I was paired with the hon. member for Port Arthur (Mr. Langworthy). Had I voted, I would have voted against the amendment.

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

John Power Howden

Liberal

Mr. HOWDEN:

I was paired with the

hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Mullins). Had I voted I would have voted against the amendment.

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

Hewitt Bostock (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

The question is now on

the main motion.

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

Henry Lumley Drayton

Conservative (1867-1942)

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

The same

division.

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

Hewitt Bostock (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Shall I say carried on the same division?

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

Some hon. MEMBERS:

No, no.

The Budget-Division

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

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

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I was paired with the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

Mr. O'NEILL: I was paired with the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Cahill). Had I . voted I would have voted against the motion.

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

John Power Howden

Liberal

Mr. HOWDEN:

I was paired with the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Mullins). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

Questions

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

Hermas Deslauriers

Liberal

Mr. DESLAURIERS:

Mr. Speaker, I was paired with the hon. member for Port Arthur (Mr. Langworthy). Had I voted I would have voted in favour of the motion.

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

WAYS AND MEANS

CUSTOMS TARIFF, 1907, AMENDMENT


The House in committee of Ways and Means, Mr. Duff in the chair.


LIB

William Duff (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The CHAIRMAN:

I will read the resolution:

1. Resolved, That the Customs Tariff, 1907, he amended by repealing subsection 1 of section 3 and substituting therefor the following-

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF, 1907, AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Robb (Minister of Trade and Commerce; Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ROBB:

I move that the committee rise and report progress.

Progress reported.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF, 1907, AMENDMENT
Permalink

May 18, 1926