May 23, 1930

LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

For what purpose? This is not a tariff on goods made in Canada; it is a tariff on goods coming into Canada.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
PRO

John Evans

Progressive

Mr. EVANS:

I would like to know how it is interpreted.

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

It can only be interpreted as applying to goods coming into the country; it has nothing to do with goods made here, as far as the levying of the rate of duty is concerned.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
PRO

John Evans

Progressive

Mr. EVANS:

hen do you consider that

goods are made in Canada? Must they be wholly made here, or simply assembled?

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

That is a matter of

customs administration. I am sorry the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Euler) is not present. That enters into customs administration with respect to the applications for drawback of duty on parts or materials used in the manufacture of any article.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Alexander McKay Edwards

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. EDWARDS (Waterloo):

I wish to

refer to machinery not made in Canada, which was spoken of a moment ago. I would suggest that the item should be worded " not procurable in Canada," but that otherwise the tariff item should remain the same. I cannot understand how there could be any difficulty in administration under this item. I wish to draw particular attention to special iron tools which are not made in Canada at the present time. All the larger machine shops are equipped with draftsmen and pattern makers, and in some of the largest industries fully 25 per cent of their business is in the manufacture of special machinery. In this country there are about 700 branches of American industries, and about 70 branches of English industries. The men in charge of the American branches know that they can procure these special iron tools in the United States from the parent factory, and with that in mind they can bring them into this country at a duty of 20 per cent. All that the machine shops in this country are asking for is an opportunity to tender, and nothing more. They do not want a tilt in the duty, nor do they want greater protection. It seems to me that when the department is dealing with this item it should make a ruling to the effect that these shops which are equipped to make machinery should have the opportunity of tendering.

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

John Gordon Ross

Liberal

Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):

You would have a tariff on them?

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Alexander McKay Edwards

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. EDWARDS (Waterloo):

Yes. In

the manufacture of special tools it may be

Ways and Means-Customs Tariff

that only one tool is made, and then the equipment is destroyed. Such machinery could be described in the tariff item as machinery " not procurable in Canadd."

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

James Dew Chaplin

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHAPLIN:

I wish to confirm the

remarks of the hon. gentleman who has just spoken. He comes from a constituency which boasts probably the largest machinery making industries in Canada. I can illustrate his point from instances which occur in my own shop. We make special articles, and the tools that we use have to be specially manufactured. They are not procurable in the open market, and we have to have them made. In many cases we ourselves own the patterns. Under the present law the Canadian people never have a chance to make these tools because they are duty free from the United States.

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

No.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

James Dew Chaplin

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHAPLIN:

They come in at a very

low rate of duty.

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

Twenty per cent.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

James Dew Chaplin

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHAPLIN:

Some of them are free.

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

There is a 20 per cent tariff under this item.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

James Dew Chaplin

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHAPLIN:

I am speaking of the

whole range of tools.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
?

William Cameron Edwards

Mr. EDWLARDS (Waterloo):

I think the minister can readily understand that there are tools which require special engineering, drafting and patterns. In the machine shop to which the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. Chaplin) referred 25 per cent of the business is of a special nature. That machine shop is as well equipped as any machine shop in America. It may be however that these machines are standard in the United States, and for that reason they are willing to pay the 20 per cent duty.

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

In such case, if goods

are made in Canada-

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

James Dew Chaplin

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHAPLIN:

No, they are not made

here; they are not standard equipment in Canada.

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

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

They are not standard,

but they are made here; my hon. friend has told me that.

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

John Gordon Ross

Liberal

Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):

They can be

made here.

Mr. EDWlARDS (Waterloo): They do

not get an opportunity to tender on this work; all they want is an opportunity. They are not asking for greater protection. We 2419-155i

have been speaking of a big shop with a turnover of about $2,000,000, and nearly 25 per cent of the business of that concern is in connection with pattern work. In this country we have engineers, pattern makers and draftsmen equal to any of their kind in the world.

I do not think that the department should have any difficulty in the administration of the provision referred to by the hon. member. Surely that can be done.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Permalink

May 23, 1930