February 4, 1938

LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

Do I understand the hon.

member to say that in view of this spread in prices he would close up the automobile plants at Windsor and Oshawa?

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

I did not say that. I

say that if plants in Windsor cannot manufacture motor cars to sell for the same price as they are sold at in Detroit, then let them close up shop. Remember I am in favour of a tariff to protect the motor car manufacturers in Windsor, but I would like the government to go to these companies and say, "Unless you sell your cars for the same price as they are sold at in the United States, we are going to wipe out the duty." If that is done, then we shall get somewhere.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. MEMBER:

Page your leader.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

I am happy to disagree with you.

The Address-Mr. Hyndman

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

I am not referring to my leader. That is what happened when he was in power.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

What happened?

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Leslie Alexander Mutch

Liberal

Mr. MUTCH:

We did not get cars at the same price when my hon. friend's party was in power.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

There was no increase in price.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette

Liberal

Mr. BRADETTE:

They were selling at a higher price then than they are now.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

They were lower then

than they are now.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette

Liberal

Mr. BRADETTE:

They were higher then than they are now.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

They were lower in

price then than they are now. Let me remind hon. members that when my leader was in power he raised the tariff.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

Hold on over there. He raised the tariff all right, but he told the manufacturers that if they increased their prices to the consumers, the tariff would go down again; and they did not increase their prices. When the tariff was high when my leader was in power, one could buy farm implements cheaper than one can do to-day under the so-called low tariffs. One thing I should like to see lowered to-day is the tariff on farm implements, because I think one could say about farm implements the same thing that I have just said about motor cars.

I should also like to see a cessation of the exportation of certain of our natural resources, because we all know where the products of our mines, for example, are going. That was pointed out clearly the other evening by the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) and the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth), and I concur in what they said about the exportation of our raw materials to be used for war munitions.

Now I wish to say a word or two on radio. This country permitted the federal government to take over radio broadcasting for certain objectives, and under certain well-understood restrictions. Those objectives were as follows: First, Canada was to be sheltered from United States propaganda and from undersirable United States programs, from the dilution of our British citizenship through the aggressive and often fascinating United States spirit. This promise has been broken completely to pieces. We still get most of

our programs, at least the programs that we listen to, from the United States. So if we hoped that we were going to secure immunity from that influence, we have been tricked.

Second, our broadcasting was to move towards the British ideal as exemplified in the British Broadcasting Corporation. Has it? So far from being supported by the fees levied, it has to draw more and more of its support from United States commercial programs. The Canadian programs have not been bettered at more than a fraction of the rate at which we have increased United States programs, and the new increase in fees is accompanied by a large increase in United States programs. Apparently what our broadcasting corporation is trying to do is to get more broadcasting stations with which to broadcast United States programs. That is precisely the opposite of the objective which was presented to us to make us swallow the licence fee at all, and it really means another venture by Canada in government ownership -as if the Canadian National were not enough. Of course, we can have government regulation and censorship without government operation. To compare our licence fee with those of other countries is wholly beside the point because conditions are not at all similar in Canada and Great Britain and other European countries. Our proper comparison is with the United States. The people there pay no fees at all, and yet they get a large proportion of the most attractive programs to which we listen, as well as a number of others which we do not have. If the present policy of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is continued we shall eventually get most of the United States programs with their United States ideas and booming of United States products, but we shall have to pay $2.50 a year for that while the people of the United States pay nothing. If the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation cannot do better than that it might as well fold up. If it was fewer United States programs we wanted, we are getting more; if it was less booming of United States products through United States programs, we are getting more; if our object was to cut down on this United States invasion, the new policy, with its accompanying increase in the licence fee, is bringing us still more and more of the United States influence. If it was a gradual approach to the British system that we wanted, we are moving further and further away from it. If it was the development of a self-sufficient Canadian system that we hoped for, any intelligent radio fan now knows that is impossible. Our people are too United States program conscious.

The Address-Mr. Hyndman

Let me just mention the usual radio program listened to in a Canadian home on a Sunday evening. I venture to say that every member of the house on a Sunday evening listens to the following programs coming over the Ottawa station, CBO. At six o'clock we tune in on Joe Penner, the United States entertainer. At seven we follow that up with Jack Benny; at seven-thirty, with Phil Baker; at eight we have the dummy, Charlie McCarthy, coming on; at nine o'clock Manhattan Merry-go-round; at nine-thirty Walter Winchell, giving the news of Hollywood, and at ten we have the Good Will hour.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

If my friend listens to CBO on Sunday evening he will not hear more than two of those programs. If he does hear all those programs, he must be doing what a great many people do, spinning his dial over the United States stations. CBO has only two of those programs.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

James Earl Lawson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LAWSON:

Because they spin over to the United States stations we charge them more for radio licences.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette

Liberal

Mr. BRADETTE:

You charged more for sugar a few years ago.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

I am giving the house the kind of programs the Canadian public are listening to.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

I just want to make clear why I interrupted. I understood my hon. friend to say that he heard these programs over CBO.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Alonzo Bowen Hyndman

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HYNDMAN:

I get Jack Benny and certainly Charlie McCarthy over CBO.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink

February 4, 1938