March 10, 1944

NAT

Howard Charles Green

National Government

Mr. GREEN:

It would be a great tragedy if this bank were to be handled in a political fashion, or if it were to be dragged into politics. One effect would be that immediately the Bank of Canada, an organization which thus far has been kept clear of that, would be dragged into the political arena. The effect of having this new bank mixed up in politics might very well seriously under-

mine our democratic system of government. I hope therefore that it will never become a political instrument.

The next thought is that the bank should work very closely with the people in the different provinces and localities in Canada. I do not believe it would do that, as at present constituted.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Vien (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

May I ask the hon. member to resume his seat while I deal with the amendment? I have listened to the argument of the Minister of Pensions and National Health respecting the decision given on March 10, 1933, by the Hon. Mr. Black, now the member for Yukon. The amendment then moved was dealing with the second reading of the bill, but it also referred to the provisions of the bill, and amendments thereto. That is not competent on second reading. In other words, it is not Competent to deal with the provisions of a bill on second reading.

The amendment at that time was:

That all the words after "that" to the end of the question be left out in order to insert the following instead thereof: "the second reading of this bill be postponed until this house have declared that nothing therein shall be taken to authorize any amalgamation of the Canadian National Railways with the Canadian Pacific Company; or to divest parliament of its lights; or to take from the house of commons its primary duty to control expenditures of public moneys and the taxes required to meet the same; and that the provisions of said bill shall be read in the light of this declaration, and be construed so as to conform therewith, and that in so far as any of its provisions may be inconsistent therewith they shall be amended accordingly."

That was dealing with the provisions of the bill, and that is not competent on second reading.

I have here an amendment moved on June 18, 1917, which shows that the second reading of a bill may be postponed until a certain event takes place, and in connection therewith I find at page 361 of the Journals of the House of Commons for that year:

Sir Robert Borden moved, seconded by Sir George Foster, that the bill, No. 75, respecting military service, be now read the second time.

Sir Wilfrid Laurier moved in amendment thereto, seconded by Mr. Oliver, that all the words after "that" in the said motion be struck out and the following substituted therefor:

"the further consideration of this bill be deferred until the principle thereof has, by means of a referendum, been submitted to and approved of by the electors of Canada."

And a debate arising thereupon, the said debate was. on motion of Mr. Morrison, seconded by Mr. Barnard, adjourned.

No exception was taken to the amendment. The amendment now before us is:

Industrial Development Bank

That this bill No. 7 be not now read a second time, but that the second reading be postponed until after the Bank Act shall have been reviewed and by this parliament revised.

I am of opinion that that is on all fours with the amendment moved by Sir Wilfrid Laurier for the postponement of the bill before the house in 1917.

Then, at page 228 of Beauchesne's Third Edition we find this, in paragraph 657:

It is also competent to a member who desires to place on record any special reasons for not agreeing to the second reading of a bill, to move as an amendment to the question, a resolution declaratory of some principle adverse to, or differing from, the principles, policy, or provisions of the bill, or expressing opinions as to any circumstances connected with its introduction, or prosecution; or otherwise opposed to its progress; or seeking further information in relation to the bill by committees, commissioners, the production of papers or other evidence or the opinion of judges.

In my judgment this amendment could be covered by the words, "or otherwise opposed to its progress," meaning that there will be a delay until such time as mentioned in the amendment, namely, after the Bank Act shall have been reviewed and by this parliament revised.

I am of opinion therefore that the amendment is in order, and that the debate may now take place and will be confined solely to the amendment. In consequence I may have restricted the hon. gentleman in his remarks. He was speaking at the moment to the motion and I have now held that the amendment is in order. The debate must therefore be addressed solely to the amendment. If the hon. member wishes to speak to the amendment he may do so, but if he prefers to make his remarks on the motion he can wait until the amendment is disposed of.

Mr. GREEN; If the amendment is voted down, Mr. Speaker, am I free to continue my remarks on the motion?

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Vien (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Quite. There is of course a principle involved. The hon. member having spoken, there was an interruption in the proceedings of the house. But when I point out that I interrupted him for the purpose of dealing with the amendment, the house will, I take it, recognize his right to speak on the motion. Is the house ready for the question?

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

I have no desire at this time to inject myself into the debate, but I would point out that the effect of the amendment, if it were carried, would be to delay the bill or to prevent its disposition at all this session. Changes may have to be made

in the bill, but we in this party feel that at least it should be sent to the banking and commerce committee, as the parliamentary assistant has suggested. This, of course, would not be possible if the amendment were agreed to. Our view is that after the bill has come out of that committee, and before its third reading, there may be reasons why it should be considered in conjunction with the revision of the Bank Act, but at present we are of the opinion that it would perhaps be tantamount to delaying the progress of the bill and preventing the endorsement of its principle. For that reason we shall vote against the amendment.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
NAT

Howard Charles Green

National Government

Mr. GREEN:

When Your Honour stopped

me in my remarks to make a ruling on the amendment that had been moved by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Queleh), I had just begun to place before the ministry and the members of the house my second thought with regard to the industrial development bank bill. In order that this bank may do its best work, in order that it may be effective, it is vital that it should work closely with the people in the various provinces and localities in Canada. That I believe it cannot do under the present provisions. The bill provides for branch offices, but I take it there will be comparatively few of those offices in Canada, and they will be in the larger cities only. The bill provides also that the members shall all be directors of the Bank of Canada. In other words, it is to be an entirely Bank-of-Canada-run organization.

I think it is of the greatest importance not only that the bank should have local contacts with the people out in the communities, but also that it should have their advice and the support and enthusiasm of the Canadian people from coast to coast; therefore I suggest that provision should be made for an advisory board in each province. There should certainly be an advisory board set up in each province, and in the more thickly populated provinces it might be necessary to have more than one. I suggest that these boards should include representatives, if possible, of all the parties. They should not be restricted to men who support the government that may be in office for the time being. In British Columbia we have what is known as a rehabilitation council, which was set up by the provincial government. It is made up of members of all parties in the local legislature. They have gone around the province between sessions

asking for representations from the citizens in the different centres with regard to the problem of rehabilitation, asking what industries could best be established in the different towns, thereby creating interest in the postwar period and in ways of building up the different communities. I believe that provision should be made for advice of that kind to be available to the industrial development bank.

Then it is of the greatest importance that there should be representatives of labour on such advisory boards. After all, with labour this question of small enterprises and the building up of new industries is a matter of bread and butter, and I think they will be far more vitally interested in the bill than any other group of people in Canada. So that if the government sees fit to provide for advisory boards or some similar organizations I suggest that representatives of labour should be included. I also believe that the bank should adopt a deliberate policy of dispersing industry into the towns of Canada, of spreading industry out and not letting it become any more concentrated than is absolutely necessary. That is the second thought.

My third thought is this. The bill refers to the building of ships as an industrial enterprise. We all know that during the war shipbuilding has become a huge industry in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and that around the shipbuilding industry, or really as part of it, dozens of small, satellite industries have grown up, small shops which provide parts and equipment for ships, and so on. I know in Vancouver there are dozens of these small industries which would come under the provisions of the bill, and the industrial development bank should be of great help to them. But they are entirely dependent on shipbuilding itself; they are dependent entirely on whether or not shipbuilding is to be continued in Canada after the war. The shipbuilding industry will require more than a loan, and I do not believe that this bank by itself will be able to maintain that industry in operation. Some further steps will have to be taken by the government. Personally I believe that if we are to continue to build ships in Canada after the war direct help will have to be given by the government, perhaps by way of subsidies or by way of orders for ships.

At the present time there is the greatest uncertainty as to what Canada's policy is to be in regard to shipbuilding after the war, and in regard to the question of a merchant marine. Is Canada to continue to build ships? Is she

Industrial Development Bank

to have a merchant marine, or is she not? These questions remain to be settled, and the government should make an early announcement of policy. Such an announcement would be of great help. Mind you, I hope that the announcement will be to the effect that the government considers shipbuilding and a merchant marine necessary to Canada, but we have had two diverse opinions expressed by ministers of the crown. For example, I have here press clippings dated Toronto, December 13, 1943, in which the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) is quoted as saying that he-

. . . called on Canadians to-day to avoid postwar planning based on public works and the dole and set forth as his alternatives nine objectives aimed at making this nation of twelve million persons "the happiest people on God's green earth "

Then the minister set out those objectives, and number four was:

Provide a merchant marine worthy of the dominion's export position.

Just two weeks later, however, his colleague the Minister of Transport (Mr. Michaud), who really is the man who would have to do with the merchant marine after the war, had something different to say here in Ottawa; apparently there was a failure to get together on this question. He said:

I see no future in Canada going into the shipping business on a big scale after the war.

. . . Some of the ships might well be used to develop trade between Canada and the West Indies and South America-but to enter competition for trade across the Atlantic and Pacific would be a big undertaking.

Then the press dispatch goes on:

Mr. Michaud said that if the Canadian government entered into general merchant business it would be in competition with old steamship companies that have world-wide organizations.

If a ship takes a cargo to a port, it has to have an agent there to get a cargo for the trip back.

He went on thoroughly to scuttle his colleague's policy, announced two weeks before:

Freighters from Norway and Greece are operated by private companies with years of experience behind them and they are likely to resume operations after the war, he said. The wages paid by these foreign companies to their crews are much below Canadian scales.

British steamship companies are preparing service to resume on regular schedules and they will be much faster than the ships Canada has, said Mr. Michaud.

In that last remark perhaps the minister really did refer to something worthy of note; that is, we are not building any of these fast ships, while Great Britain and the United States are, and I think Canada should be

building at least some of them. In any event, there is the contradiction; and this question of shipbuilding is so vital to Canada, or certainly to the provinces on either coast, that I urge the government to make an announcement at an early date. I urge the government not to allow the shipping industry to fold up or die out, but on the contrary to see to it that this industry is maintained after the war. If that is done it will mean the survival of these satellite industries, and then the industrial development bank will be able to help them to carry on.

The same situation exists in connection with other industries. I need quote only one as an example, and I refer to housing. There are many small enterprises in Canada which depend for their existence upon the construction of homes. It would be helpful if the government would make an early announcement of policy in regard to housing. I hope that announcement will be to the effect that the Canadian people are to be rehoused. At the present time that situation is very serious, indeed far more serious than members of the ministry realize. In many cities families have to live in garrets, in basement suites or perhaps in garages. This has an effect upon the war effort, because it lowers the morale of the people who have to live in those places; it is having a serious effect upon the health of our people and has an effect also upon the men who come back from overseas and find that they must live under such conditions. It makes it just that much more difficult for a man returning to this country to enter into the spirit of things in Canada and settle back into his civilian pursuit. Therefore I suggest that an announcement on the general question of housing should be made at an early date.

Finally there are three other points in connection with this bill which I suggest the parliamentary assistant should make clear when he closes the debate. The first is whether or not the bill is intended to cover the processing of metals. I notice that it does not refer to the mining industry. In other words, no direct help can be given by the bank to the mining industry, but I should like to know whether help could be given for the establishment of a steel rolling mill, let us say.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Douglas Charles Abbott (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance)

Liberal

Mr. ABBOTT:

Yes, that comes within the bill.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
NAT

Howard Charles Green

National Government

Mr. GREEN:

That is definite. Also will the bank have power to help to set up a steel and iron industry? Section 2 of the bill refers to the generating or distributing of electricity. It would be interesting to know whether the bank will have power to help municipalities in putting in electrical plants.

Industrial Development Bank

The bill does not make that clear. I take it that a private company could be given assistance, but I suggest that the legislation should be wide enough to enable the bank to assist municipalities in setting up power plants or other power systems.

I should like to know whether or not the bill is wide enough to enable the bank to help cooperative organizations. It refers to loans to persons and I take it that the provisions are wide enough to cover cooperatives. We should be told whether or not such is the case. In post-war years there will be a great development along cooperative lines, and we should know whether this bank will be able to help in that development.

I support the bill because I believe, as referred to in. the preamble, it can be made a most effective instrument for maintaining not only a high level of national income, but also a high level of employment. I certainly hope such will be the case.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. A. R. ADAMSON (York West):

Mr. Speaker, there are just one or two things I should like to mention about this industrial development bank. I do not think anyone can take exception to the fostering of small industry after the war and perhaps the government is to be commended for introducing this bill. However, the sums mentioned are so small that they will hardly prove effective as a means of reestablishing small business in Canada after the war. I know of one new enterprise in my district which would take up more than the entire sum mentioned in the bill. This is merely a token bill which sets up a brand new principle, namely, the principle of the government going into the industrial banking business. That may or may not be a satisfactory solution. It may be that the chartered banks have shown that they are incapable of supplying credit to small industry, or the government may think they are incapable of doing this. That is the problem which face:! the government.

The government has introduced in this bill a principle which I think more than any other was the cause of the disruption and failure of the banks in the United States under the federal banking system. I refer to the fact that loans may be made on mortgages. This is an entirely new principle in Canadian banking. Up to now we have had mortgage companies, trust companies and finance companies, but banls have not been permitted to lend money on mortgages. This is something the government should carefully inquire into. I suggest that an examination of what happened with farm loans in Ontario during the

past ten or fifteen years would prove of value. I think it will be found that a tremendous number of those loans went bad. I mention this as one of the dangers which confront the government in connection with this measure.

The next danger is the fact that there is no mention of a limit on individual loans. A loan is made to an individual to permit him to start in business. He does not make a profit the first year; he has a loss, and he may have a. loss for the second, third and fourth years, as is quite usual with new businesses. What will happen? Who is to decide whether that loan is to be renewed? A small industry may start up and provide employment and it may or may not have a chance of success. But because it has been financed with government money, the government must continue to pay the shot in order to keep the industry going. That is one of the dangers in the socialization of all banking-you bring your banks into the arena of politics.

The other night the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) referred to the question of taxation. Let me give an illustration. Two young men who have been in the army or air force decide to start up a new business, let us say the making of mouse-traps. They go to the bank and the bank consults its-

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Douglas Charles Abbott (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance)

Liberal

Mr. ABBOTT:

Mouse-trap expert.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. ADAMSON:

-mouse-trap expert, which we will say is a firm of reliable exterminators in Toronto. They say there are no more rats left, but there are plenty of mice left to exterminate. These men go into the mousetrap business and the world builds a nice path to the door of their factory. They start making a very special mouse-trap which kills the mouse,' plays a few bars of Chopin's funeral march, throws the dead mouse over the neighbour's fence and resets itself. This trap becomes popular and they make a profit out of their business, but at the end of the first year what do they find? As there was no base rate for their company they are subject to excess profits and corporation profits taxes, and all their profits are taken by the government. Unless the government is prepared to repeal the excess profits tax you are not going to get anybody to start up new businesses. In fact these two men will probably go into the business of breeding mice in order to show their irritation with the government.

Then there is the question of the development of our natural resources. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar told us that the concentration of the mining industry is more

Industrial Development Bank

and more in the large companies. This bank, it is said, is not going to help in any way the financing of mining or prospecting, or any similar development. The taxation problem for the mining industry has been such that the large companies have been the only ones that have been able to afford to go into the exploration business. What usually happens is that a syndicate or a small group of prospectors starting out with a property would do some trenching and a little diamond drill work, which shows perhaps that they have a few assays which warrant spending a little more money. There is a trace of gold. Accordingly they go out and raise a few more thousand dollars. Then further drilling shows that they have discovered a commercial ore body. But because they are a group of only four or five individuals they have not the money to sink a shaft and provide the milling and crushing equipment required to go ahead and develop the property. So they sell it to a mining company or else form a company. They are taxed with the exploration profit they make on that property, therefore naturally the small prospector is handicapped and tied. He is discouraged in every way from going into the mining business. This is a serious matter because, up to recent years when the present taxation system came into effect, the majority of our mines were discovered by the individual or by a small group of prospectors. But today we have made it almost impossible by our taxation system to allow the individual prospector or the small group to operate.

In passing, let me say that if there is any industry that would1 pull us out of the postwar reconstruction difficulties it is the mining industry. No matter what sort of world we are going to live in after the war we shall have need of metal, both precious and base, and there is no country so bountifully endowed with metals as is Canada. We are milling to-day at the rate of approximately a hundred thousand tons a day. It takes on the average three men to mine a ton of ore; the man in the mine, the man servicing, and the man providing the equipment. As a rough empirical rule one can say that three men get direct employment out of every ton of ore milled. If we can double our production, which is feasible if we remove the restrictions, our untold mining capacity would provide work in the next five years after the war for 600,000 men directly employed in the mining industry. That, I believe, is not any dream but a practical possibility. But we are not going to do it unless we have new properties discovered, and I look with disfavour on the fact that it is specifically stated 100-86

that this industrial bank is not going to aid the mining industry. I believe that the prospecting syndicates are one of the most useful means of providing employment immediately after the war is over.

Again, Mr. Chairman, it is specifically stated that this industrial bank is not interested in housing. In the city of Toronto there is a housing plan which may take a hundred million dollars or more to bring it into effect- the actual cost has not been estimated at the present time. The building industry is the key industry of this country. It is the barometer of our prosperity and of our depressions. The building industry is not only the barometer; it is the key. There are, it has been estimated by Mr. Mathers, president of the Builders' association, 450,000 men actively engaged in the building industry of Canada in normal times. Most of the building industry has been in the hands of the small builder. In many ways that has perhaps been uneconomical. Nevertheless that has been (he system in Canada. One of the greatest costs in housing has been the price that the small builder and the man who is buying or building a house have had to pay for money, and I say that consideration should be given to including in this bill the provision of credit for the small builder. That is an omission in the bill which should be repaired.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Douglas Charles Abbott (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance)

Liberal

Mr. ABBOTT:

If my hon. friend will allow me, I mentioned in my opening statement that the government was giving consideration to and would be proposing measures to provide similar credit facilities for agriculture and housing.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. ADAMSON:

I thank the hon. gentleman. But it is not mentioned in the bill, and I want to emphasize to the parliamentary assistant that that is very much one of the omissions in the bill.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Douglas Charles Abbott (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance)

Liberal

Mr. ABBOTT:

I made it very clear in my opening statement (hat consideration was being given to other measures.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
NAT

Gordon Graydon (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. GRAYDON:

That was an afterthought, after the speech from the throne.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of Pensions and National Health)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):

We have forethought. *

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. ADAMSON:

Finally I have this suggestion to make to the parliamentary assistant. The majority of the medium-sized industries in this country at the present time, because of the fact that they have come through a depression period, and the further fact that they are now paying almost one hundred per cent excess profits, practically all their profits, to the government, are not going to find them-

Industrial Development Bank

selves at the end of the war in a position to provide the necessary replacements to their plants and modernize their equipment to enter the new post-war type of trade. They are going to find their treasuries virtually depleted. But when the physical fighting ceases-the actual political declaration of peace may not be for some years-and the need for the munitions industry to work at its tremendous pitch comes to an end, I suggest that there be a tax holiday for business, to allow them to build up a surplus in order to re-tool and retrench, so that they may enter into the competitive world in which we shall find ourselves after the war.

They will see ahead of them years in which they will be faced with tremendous tax burdens. They will see, too, an almost immediate cessation of war business. What would be their reaction? They would say, "We are going to be bankrupt if we continue at the present rate, because we are faced with heavy payrolls and heavy overhead. We are going to be stuck with a tremendous taxation at the end' of the next fiscal period." One thing we must avoid at the end of the war is the condition which was found at the end of the last war. In other words, when industry stopped production the men who had been working were immediately discharged, with the result that unemployment at once became a problem.

I say to the parliamentary assistant that unless industry sees a possibility of continuing, its first instinct is to do exactly what was done after the last war. After this war it will be only that much worse, because taxation is so much higher. There are some exceptions, of course, but the majority of industries have not been able to build up sinking funds or reserve funds which would allow them to go into competitive business, re-tool, establish an export market, and do the hundred and one different things which business must do in a competitive market.

We must remember that during the war there has been very little competition. The government has said, "We will buy from you all you can make." After the war we shall be in a world in which there is competition, and business will have to say, "We will make what we can sell." That is the difference in the psychologies of peace and war, and unless the government recognizes the difference we shall find business men saying, "I do not know what we can make." They may say, "Let us wait for six months, to see what the world looks like. At the end of that time we may either close the plant, or run on a skeleton staff."

That is one of the dangers, and one of the conditions this bank should help to prevent. It can be a success, however, only if there is some change in respect of corporation taxes and excess profit taxes after the war. No one minds paying taxes in a time of war. All are fighting with their last drop of blood, because we have to beat the hun. But when the war ends, a different world will emerge.

I am in favour of the bill, as far as it goes. It contains several dangerous provisions, and may lead directly to inflation; but, so far as it goes, in its small way I believe if it is controlled it will prove a step in the right direction.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
CCF

Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. T. C. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):

Mr. Speaker, I had not intended taking part in this debate, because the financial proposals of this group were well stated before the house by our leader, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). However, I am prompted to take part in the debate because of a statement made the other evening by the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker). His statement is to be found at page 1286 of Hansard, as follows:

It is quite true that in certain places the C.C.F. say that they do not intend to take over control of some particular industry, and in other places they say they do. In British Columbia they stated, for example, that their programme is actually to take control of farmland as in Russia.

We are now changed, apparently, from being national socialists to communists, depending on what part of the country one comes from, and what is the most unpopular group in a particular constituency. I challenged the statement of the hon. member at the time, and the hon. member for Rosthern said he was quoting from the Vancouver Sun. I was not calling in question the hon. member's integrity. I know the quotation from the Vancouver Sun which he had in mind. I was, however, calling in question the authenticity of the source of his information. If the hon. member for Rosthern had taken the trouble to verify, or to attempt to verify the source of his information, I doubt very much if he would have made the statement he did make. I say that because the quotation in question from the Vancouver Sun has on numerous occasions been publicly repudiated.

I have in my hand a copy of the C.C.F. News for January 20, 1944, containing a signed article by Frank J. McKenzie, British Columbia provincial secretary of the C.C.F. organization in that province. I wish to read only part of it, so that the situation may be clear

Industrial Development Bank

to hon. members. This article is headed "Misrepresentation of Farm Policy Repeated by Papers across Canada", and states:

The C.C.F. has found it necessary to complain about false press reports with growing frequency during the past year. An example of the effect of false reporting is to be found in the case of a report published by the Vancouver Sun on the British Columbia provincial C.C.F. convention of April, 1943. It is being quoted from one end of Canada to the other.

At frequent intervals since the publication of the Sun report, various spokesmen of the C.C.F. in British Columbia have found it necessary to explain that the provincial platform of the British Columbia section of the C.C.F. does not contain this plank: "Collective agriculture by the institution of methods of collective farming, such as have featured Soviet Russia's system."

The latest example of this to come to the attention of the writer is a statement by Captain W. R. Tucker, M.P. for Rosthern, at Saskatoon, as reported by the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, January 11, 1944: "In British Columbia the farmers were swinging against the C.C.F. except in labour districts. As a factor in this swing in British Columbia, he quoted the second plank in the platform of that party in the coast province as calling for the collectivization of farms, as in Russia." There can be no doubt that Captain Tucker is relying either upon the April 19 issue of the Vancouver Sun or upon some other journal which relied upon the Sun as an authority.

Shortly after the publication of that report by the Sun the British Columbia provincial secretary wrote to that paper the letter reproduced below. The Sun published the letter, but, unfortunately, the damage was done.

Here is the letter to the Sun:

Editor, Vancouver Sun:

Sir: I would be glad if you would publish this letter by way of correcting a misrepresentation of the C.C.F., for which you are, I believe, in part responsible.

On your front page of April 19 you said: "The C.C.F. policy for British Columbia, as outlined in a statement by the party convention, will ..." Then you set out seven "planks", from which I quote the following: "2. Collective agriculture by the institution of methods of collective farming, such as have featured Soviet Russia's system." This statement -was not true.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Walter Adam Tucker

Liberal

Mr. TUCKER:

That is not the end of the quotation. My hon. friend pretends to quote from the Vancouver Sun but he has not quoted the whole of paragraph 2.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

James Lester Douglas

Liberal

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):

Mr. Speaker,

I am quoting-

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink
LIB

Walter Adam Tucker

Liberal

Mr. TUCKER:

I am challenging my hon.

friend to do the same thing he asked me to do, to get the paper and quote from it, not from some letter or some alleged quotation. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that he is not correctly quoting from the Vancouver Sun.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK
Subtopic:   PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL CREDIT FACILITIES FOR FIXED AND WORKING CAPITAL
Permalink

March 10, 1944