March 1, 1927

LIB

Malcolm McLean

Liberal

Mr. McLEAN:

The Budget-Mr. McLean (Melfort)

vestment for anyone to take much stock in locating or developing these aluminum clays of Saskatchewan, and I take it that the same reasoning applies to Alberta.

We were told a lot about exports, in regard to which there was an attempt to show an equally startling situation. A certain group of exports from 1918 to 1922 amounted to 81,185,000,000, and the same group of exports, shown under the same headings by government officials, and very properly so, from 1923 to 1927 amounted to only $1,125,000,000, and this was used as an argument against the fiscal policy of this government. I would have you note, Sir, that not until the last day of this month does the fiscal year of this government end, and it will be some time after that before complete figures are available. The five years that the hon. member for Vancouver Centre took included two years that were almost entirely war years, a third that was practically a war year, and the fourth was very much affected by war and war conditions, with wealth being shipped from Canada in the form of loans. He took those years with their inflated prices as against the years from 1923 to 1927, when prices, part of the time, were very low and crops not very large, and he found that there was a reduction in our exports during those years of $60,000,000. I think that a fairer way than that could be found in which to discuss this question. The same argument was used in connection with iron and steel, but as the hour is late, I shall not use the figures I have before me in that connection.

We were also told that we are selling $7,000,000 worth of asbestos to the United States, to be converted there into $70,000,000 worth of finished products. It is lamentable if we are doing that, if any of that money could be kept at home under any fair fiscal policy. If our raw product worth $7,000,000 is finished in the United States into products worth $70,000,000, that means an increase of one thousand per icent in value. But a minute later we were told that this material, worth something like $7 per ton, was being turned into material in the United States worth $100 to $200 a ton. One minute it was $7,000,000 worth of raw material being converted into $70,c00,000, an increase of 1,000 per cent, and a moment later it was an increase of 1,400 to 2,800 per cent.

In view of these mistakes that I have pointed out, I think that the House will agree with me that the statements made by the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) and by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) with respect to the proposed export of power to

the United States from Carillon falls are more likely to be reliable than the statements of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre.

There are one or two matters that I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister of Finance.

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

An hon. MEMBER:

Write him a letter.

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

Malcolm McLean

Liberal

Mr. McLEAN (Melfort):

When I wish to

deal with the Minister of Finance I generally talk with him, and I want to talk to the House as well on this occasion. I noted that something was said about research, and somehow I got the idea-doubtless the hon. member did not intend it at all-that research was something to look down upon. I wish to say that the money that the government has spent in the extension of research and the results achieved are highly valued in western Canada. If it had not been for men like Doctor Saunders and other scientists, western Canada would not be in the position in which it finds itself to-day. I have in my hand an editorial from the Saskatoon Daily Star, a paper representing farmers, townspeople and all classes dealing with the need for further research. It says in part that some of the duties of the Research-Council are:

To promote the utilization of Canada's natural resources; to undertake researches with the object of improving the technical processes and methods used in Canadian industry; to investigate and determine standards and methods of measurement: to undertake the standardization and certification of scientific and technical apparatus; to investigate and standardize, at the request of industry, the materials or products of that industry.

It concludes by saying:

Some inquiries under the Council's auspices have already been completed and with great profit to industry. A McGill professor discovered a way to prevent the spoilage of lobsters in cans, and thus saved the lobster packing industry of Canada $700,000 a year.

This paper points out that the Research, Council does not get nearly a sufficiently large grant to carry on, and points out that the United States is spending $200,000,000 annually on applied science research, and an additional $10,000,000 on pure science research. In addition to that, a number of large American industries are spending their own money and time in research work. In comparison with what the United States is doing-of course, in view of its wealth it is very much better able to deal liberally with this question than we are-the $150,000 spent on the Research Council in Canada looks pretty small. This paper goes on to say:

The Canadian Research Council's $150,000 a year looks pretty meagre when compared to

The Budget-Mr. McLean (Meljort)

sums like these. It is not, of course, the total amount being spent on industrial research in the Dominion. But it is the federal government's contribution, and as such it is a joke or a disgrace, or both.

Anyone who has read To-day and Tomorrow, that great book of Henry Ford's- I admit that many of my hon. friends opposite do not think much of Henry Ford as a political economist, but they surely respect him as a money-making machine par excellence-will have noticed how much of the Ford estate and his prosperity and the quality and cheapness of his car are due to research work, by studying the best methods to get the best results from the material at his disposal, and to eliminate waste.

I have in my hand a press despatch telling of a new process by which a ton of straw may be burned to extract $250 worth of useful products from the smoke. This chemist has obtained 1,600 pounds of products from each ton of wheat or oat straw, the products including a new germicide favourably reported on by -the Mayo Brothers of Rochester, a roofing and damp-proofing paint, and a fly spray. This scientist happened to be a Canadian who left this country and is now in New York carrying on research work. I am sure that for any money we spend in research work we shall be repaid manyfold.

Before taking my seat, I should like to refer for a moment or two to a sentiment I have heard expressed on one or two occasions in this House. I heard it during the past session also, and I have heard it throughout the country. It is the- sentiment that hon. members from the province of Quebec are opposed to hon. members from other provinces sitting on this side of the House in matters of fiscal policy. I wish to say to any bon. member who has not been long in this House-I have not been long he-re myself and am not going to put on any -airs-but I heard one hon. member on the other side of the House suggest that some of us to y-out right do not agree very well with the members from the province of Quebec in fiscal matters. I heard a new member on the other side of the House speak of Quebec. Because one hon. member here had given voice Ito a protec-t-itonist sentiment he took it that that was -the opinion of the whole province of Quebec. Speaking of the members from that province I have been able to assure the constituents who elected me, and other audiences in western Canada, that they have been most fair, most reasonable, and generous to us, and all that we members could ask for. The position they took-and I think it was natural they 32649-51

should take that position-was that they were Canadians first, last and all the time, that they and their ancestors had made a living and had prospered to some extent in this great country for some three hundred years, and at a time when it was harder to make money than it is at present. In common with all Canadians they like to make money, yet making money through a high protective tariff was going to interfere with the amity and unity of Canada, .and they were going to sacrifice some of that prospective money and do as their forefathers bad done, namely, make a good square living and work for the interests of the Dominion.

In closing, I would say that the province of Saskatchewan is not desirous of injuring any legitimate industry in any other part of this Dominion, but is willing to co-operate with all other provinces which are willing to meet us half way and co-operate with us. The Dominion -of Canada was referred to the other day as being one of great length and little width. I think the leader of the opposition in his splendid speech to-day referred to it in these terms. Canada to-day is widening and developing from south to north. We do not now hear the cry, " Go west and grow up with the country." The saying in Saskatchewan, and I assume in other provinces, is " Go north and grow up with the country." We are getting further' away from the American line and from the influences of our friends over there. We are carrying civilization further, making Canada a wider, broader and deeper country, and Saskatchewan wants to do her part in development for the future.

I picked u,p a magazine and read in it the statement that an old philosopher said, " The thing that I feared most came upon me," In listening to some of the pessimistic remarks last year I thought of this saying. I do not think I should give the advice to anyone, but draw this to the attention of some hon. members in the hope -that they will avoid fearing anything in this Dominion that is not likely -to come upon them.

With the soil of Canada as fertile as it is, with a favourable climate and extensive natural resources, with those two great races side by side which have carried civilization forward, the French and the Celtic-Saxon races augmented by the Teutonic, the Slavonic and the Scandinavian; with the laws and the security of Canada what they are, there is no reason why we should be pessimistic; rather we should take the advice of the Right Hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and step out with greater faith and more assured

802 COMMONS

The Budget-Division (Amendment)

confidence than we ever had before. I am satisfied that the people of Canada are at peace to-night regarding affairs of state, knowing that the budget of the hon. Minister of Finance reflects a sound state of affairs throughout the country, indicating as it does the tremendous improvement that has taken place in a period of five years. *

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

Edmond George Odette

Liberal

Mr. ODETTE:

Perley

(Sir George),

Perras,

Pettit,

Preston,

Prevost,

Quinn,

Ralston,

Raymond,

Rheaume,

Rinfret,

Robb,

Roberge,

Robitailie,

Ross _

(Kingston City), Ross

(Moose Jaw), Rutherford,

Ryckman,

Ryerson,

St-Pere.

Sanderson,

Seguin,

Senn,

Short,

Simpson.

Sinclair (Queens),

Sinclair

(Wellington North),. Smith

(Cumberland),

Smith

(Stormont),

Smoke,

Spence

(Parkdale),

Spence

(Maple Creek), Steedsman,

Stevens,

Stewart .

(Edmonton West), Stewart (Leeds),

Stinson,

Stirling,

Sylvestre,

Taylor,

Telford,

Thorson,

Tolmie,

Totzke.

Tummon,

Vallance,

Veniot,

Vervil'le,

Ward,

White

(Mount Royal), Wilson

(Wentworth),

Wilson

(Vaudreuil-Soulanges),

Young

(Saskatoon),

Young (Toronto Northeast),

Young

(Weyburn).-182.

I was paired with the hon.

member for West Essex (Mr. Robinson). Had I voted I would have voted against the amendment.

The Budget-Division (Main Motion)

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

Beniah Bowman

United Farmers of Ontario

Mr. BOWMAN:

I was paired with the

hon. member for East Middlesex (Mr. Hod-gins). 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

Frederick William Gershaw

Liberal

Mr. GERSHAW:

I was paired with the

hon. member for London (Mr. White). 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

Alfred Edgar MacLean

Liberal

Mr. MacLEAN (Prince):

I was paired with the hon. member for Westmorland (Mr. Price). 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. Shall I say carried on the same division?

Perras,

Prevost,

Ralston.

Raymond,

Rinfret,

Robb,

Roberge,

Robitaille,

Ross (Moose Jaw), Rutherford,

St-Pere,

Sanderson,

Seguin,

Sinclair (Queens), Smith (Stormont), Spence (Maple Cree Steedsman,

Stewart

(Edmonton West), Sylvestre,

Taylor,

Telford,

Thorson,

Totzke,

Yallance, .

V eniot,

Verville,

Ward,

Wilson (Vaudreuil-Soulanges),

Young (Saskatoon), Young

, (Weyburn).-111.

NAYS:

Messrs:

Some non. MEMBERS: No.

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

Robert Gardiner

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. GARDINER:

I understand that in the first vote Mr. Speaker announced twenty members as having voted for the amendment. I want to call the attention of the House to the fact that that is a mistake. There were twenty-one who voted for the amendment.

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

An hon. MEMBER:

You are right.

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

Paul Mercier

Liberal

Mr. MERCIER (St. Henri):

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

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

Joseph-Théodule Rhéaume

Liberal

Mr. RHEAUME (Translation):

I was

paired with the hon. member for South Essex (Mr. Gott). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

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

Richard Bedford Bennett

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

I was paired with the

Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe). 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
CON

William Earl Rowe

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROWE:

I was paired with the hon.

member for Beauce (Mr. Lacroix). Had I voted I wrould have voted against the motion.

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

Robert Knowlton Smith

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SMITH (Cumberland):

I was paired with the hon. member for Antigonish-Guys-borough (Mr. Duff). 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

Edmond George Odette

Liberal

Mr. ODETTE:

I was paired with the hon. member for West Essex (Mr. Robinson). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

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

William Daum Euler (Minister of Customs and Excise)

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

I was paired with the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Manion). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

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

Frederick William Gershaw

Liberal

Mr. GERSHAW:

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

[Mr. Speaker.)

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

Georges Parent

Liberal

Mr. PARENT:

I was paired with the hon. member for North Simcoe (Mr. Boys). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

' Mr. BOWMAN: I was paired with the hon. member for East Middlesex (Mr. Hodgins). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

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

Alfred Edgar MacLean

Liberal

Mr. MacLEAN (Prince) :

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

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

March 1, 1927