March 17, 1949

PC

Harry Rutherford Jackman

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Jackman:

I said you will get elected if you keep on talking like that.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
LIB

David Arnold Croll

Liberal

Mr. Croll:

I wish the hon. member would stop mumbling.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Frank Exton Lennard

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Lennard:

There was no mumbling about it.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Order.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
LIB

David Arnold Croll

Liberal

Mr. Croll:

Did the hon. member say that I would be elected?

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Harry Rutherford Jackman

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Jackman:

Yes.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
LIB

David Arnold Croll

Liberal

Mr. Croll:

I start to shake in my boots. I do not trust his judgment. But I thank him just the same.

It is worth while to note that those whom hon. members opposite claim to champion-

1596 HOUSE OF

Foreign Exchange Control the exporters themselves-have not to my knowledge leaped forward with a demand that our dollar, as my friends so inaptly put it, "be allowed to find its own level." When I say exporters, you will realize that I mean not those dealers in essential raw products to whom a devalued dollar would mean an automatic increase in price; I mean those others who send their finished or processed goods abroad to compete in the open market against similar goods from other countries, on the bases of price, quality and Canadian standards of fair dealing.

These estimable firms have an active organization called the Canadian exporters association. They have a first-class trade paper known as the Canadian Exporter. I have yet to learn, Mr. Speaker, that either this organization or its trade paper has endorsed the devaluation which our friends across the way are advancing as the salvation of these very exporters. They have not done so, in spite of the fact that in a handful of dollar markets, and just a handful, and I can name them, Venezuela, Panama, Haiti, the Dominican Kepublic, Cuba, devaluation might help. Their trade paper, which takes a realistic approach, has not argued for devaluation, as have the Bay Street gold miners, which, to put it as kindly as I know how, will never advocate a policy, or force a policy upon its spokesmen, if that policy runs counter to the interest of those who own the mines.

This is one of those occasions, Mr. Speaker, when I wish that parliamentary practice permitted an hon. member on this side of the house to borrow a weapon with which our democratic processes equip our opponents.

I wish it were possible somehow to move a vote of non-confidence in the sincerity of His Majesty's loyal opposition, and to apply it specifically to the single issue of devaluation, which up to the present time is the solitary plank which has miraculously been suspended in mid-air over the site where we should have expected a finished platform to arise long before this time.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Rodney Adamson (York West):

It is

rather amusing, Mr. Speaker, to hear the statements of the recent speaker, and it was particularly amusing to hear him quote the opinions of certain industries in Canada. His whole speech can be judged by an example of what he has just said. He mentioned specifically the Coleman lamp company, the Moffat stove company, and one other company, and said that they were happy about the policy of the foreign exchange control board and of the government. As it happens, Mr. Speaker, I hold in my hand a letter from the export manager of the Coleman lamp

company, and I shall quote just one paragraph from it:

We believe that the export trade of the whole world, but particularly also of Canada, is greatly hampered by the many regulations to which our monetary system is subjected. Personally, I can only hope that in the not too distant future the policy of the Canadian government will change in this respect.

Again this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) played the game of the clever fox leading the hounds astray. This afternoon the Minister of Finance discussed the problem of dollar depreciation. The problem is not depreciation; it is convertibility. That is the main problem which is being accentuated by the action of the present administration. We have not got a convertible currency. Let me emphasize, Mr. Speaker, that it is a convertible currency that we need. Until we get a convertible currency we are going to be hamstrung by the actions of others and the actions of our own administration.

I want to go back briefly because I supported the Bretton Woods agreement. I supported it on December 6, 1945, at page 3075 of Hansard, in these terms:

There is, however, the method by which the parity of exchanges shall be fixed, and that appears in article 20, section 4. It merely states that each country shall settle its own parity of its own exchange. That is to me, Mr. Speaker, the crux of the whole question-the method of arriving at parity or of arriving at the currency exchange value in gold of the various members of the agreement. At the present time the huge majority of currencies have a fictitiously high value in terms of the United States dollar, in terms of gold and in terms of the Canadian dollar.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
CCF

William Irvine

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

Mr. Irvine:

Who is the hon. gentleman

quoting?

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Adamson:

I am quoting what I said in 1945 on the Bretton Woods agreement.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

A real authority.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Agar Rodney Adamson

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Adamson:

I continued:

We in Canada are dependent upon a stable exchange. Probably we are more dependent upon stable rates of exchange than any other country in the world at the present time. We are in the focal point, situated between the sterling bloc and the gold exchange currency of the United States ... If we as a small country cannot come to some arrangement by which our currency and our trade is not at the behest of the great trading nations which can control managed currencies, and which, because of their great wealth, can jockey with international currencies to our disadvantage; if we as a longterm exporting country cannot be sure that we trade with a currency which is convertible, exchangeable and stable, our future is extremely dark.

We are now in that serious position which I foresaw in 1945. There was no question of devaluation. There was the question that our currency should be exchangeable and it was my hope at that time that the Canadian

dollar, through the operation of the Bretton Woods agreement, would be an exchangeable currency. Unfortunately, because of the fictitiously high value placed on currencies by the various members of the agreement, the Bretton Woods agreement has failed to work and the international monetary fund is more abused than honoured. Until the condition obtains where we can exchange our currency freely into the currencies of all nations we are going to be faced by an ever-constricting world market. I say that, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that our exports last year were the greatest in Canadian history.

I want to mention one thing which I think shows what the policy of the British government is likely to be. I shall quote Sir Hubert Henderson, who is the president of the Royal Economic Society. In the current issue of the Economic Journal he has this to say about the British position with regard to currency and discrimination:

I submit, then, that for correcting a huge maladjustment in the balance of payments, such as still confronts Great Britain, counter inflationary financial measures, though helpful, cannot suffice, and that exchange-rate variations might be harmful. It is essential to keep down the volume of our import purchases as effectively as we now do by means of import restrictions. And not only to keep down their total volume but, more particularly, that part of them that comes from what we call hard-currency sources. The principle of non-discrimination does not fit a world in which the whole international balance of payments has been upset.

What does that mean? It means simply this, that the policy of the United Kingdom, the policy of the London School of Economics, which is the socialist school of Sir Stafford Cripps, is going to follow a discriminatory policy against the hard-currency countries. In other words, we are going to be discriminated against in Canada because we are a hard-currency country. There it is, ia black and white, from the highest authority in England.

This government-and any government of Canada-is going to have to face that problem. We are, I think, going to say "Our United Kingdom exports are stopped", or else we are going to have to arrange some methods by which our currency is exchangeable into United Kingdom currency. That is the problem facing the government at the present time. I say in all respect it is the problem which they have brought on themselves by their action of tying our dollar rigidly to the American dollar.

The report of the foreign exchange control board is most illuminating. The paragraph quoted this afternoon by the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Macdonnell) is pure Schachtism, in the very essence; it is the same policy as followed by Germany prior

Foreign Exchange Control to the last war; it is the same policy of having a number of currencies and offering them at fictitious prices for various purposes, and it will have exactly the same result.

There is in this report a section at page 25 which I consider extremely illuminating. It sets out the problem in these words:

Until recently there was little occasion for Canadian exporters to seek to export on terms other than those specified above.

And that is a reference to the original terms of the foreign exchange control board. It continues:

With the growing severity of import restrictions imposed by many countries, however, an increasing number of cases have arisen where Canadian exporters find it impossible to sell goods on the prescribed terms of payment. In these cases alternative proposals for payment are sometimes made by foreign buyers; and where they are acceptable to the Canadian exporters the board has indicated its readiness to consider applications for the necessary permits. The following appear to be the main types of case which warrant consideration.

The first case is merely a case where extended time credit is asked. But the second case-and this I suggest is the real admission of failure of the foreign exchange control board-is this:

Exports to previously established markets for payment in blocked foreign currency, i.e., foreign currencies which are not freely convertible into United States dollars or sterling. In these cases, the exporter must of course be prepared to assume the risks involved of being unable to convert the foreign currency into Canadian dollars for an indeterminate period.

If that means anything, it means a free exchange. It is an advocacy of free exchange, allowing the exporter to sell in a foreign country and in a foreign currency, that foreign currency, under our present system, not being convertible into Canadian dollars. My first quarrel with the foreign exchange control board under its present set-up is that some machinery should be made available for the conversion of that foreign currency into Canadian dollars, and that machinery should be left in the hands of the exporters and the chartered banks. The next, and again a very significant admission, is found in section 4:

Exports to be paid for by the acceptance of goods of equivalent value.

If that means anything, it is straight and absolute barter. Receiving goods of an equivalent value is a definition for barter. Here, in the report of the foreign exchange control board, we have an advocacy of, first of all, free exchange, and secondly of barter. I assure you that those are important and serious considerations.

I believe there is a way out which we can take to overcome the blocked currencies of the various countries with which we find it

15S3

Foreign Exchange Control so difficult to trade; and I shall come to that in a moment. However, this afternoon the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) emphasized, and rightly, the difficulty of trading with countries which exercise this same vicious foreign exchange control. He was quite right.

Last June when speaking in the house I mentioned that the total number of permutations and combinations, if every country had a barter deal with every other country, including all the countries of Europe and South America, was about 326 barter deals. Last June there were actually 156 barter deals already consummated between those countries. That is economic chaos. That is the condition in which we are forced to trade, and no one emphasizes more than I do the seriousness of that condition.

But under the present system of making our dollar almost the hardest currency in the world to get, we are excluding ourselves from every hope of becoming a factor in the external trade of those countries.

What are the methods by which we can overcome the trade barriers erected against us? What can we do in order to increase foreign tradq? What can we do to prevent ourselves suffering from the most gigantic squeeze play in international history? Our prices are right and our products are good. Our exporting firms have great ability. Our financial institutions have been world traders for generations. It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that we should allow a great deal more latitude to these institutions to work out their own deals. We should give a great deal more authority to the foreign exchange departments of the chartered banks to deal with individual firms in Canada and individual firms elsewhere in order to work out their own deals.

I realize that the foreign exchange control board is moving in that direction, but under this control measure to have to go through a government agency is always a stultifying control, and a restriction on the freeness of trade. No matter what the control is, it is always a restrictive control.

Coming to the position of our gold and dollar reserves, I spoke about this before, but today the latest figures available show that the total Canadian authorization for Marshall-plan purposes is $671 million. Deduct that from our holdings of foreign exchange and gold, and you will see that our situation today is an extremely perilous one. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) has no reasons at all for complacency or satisfaction over the situation. As a matter of fact, had it not been for the Marshall plan offshore purchases in Canada, our gold and hard currency situation would be desperate. That it is not due to

a very far-seeing and extremely generous act by the former secretary of state of the United States, General Marshall, and by the present administration of that country.

Of these purchases of $671 million some $246 million are wheat and $58 million are wheat flour. If, as is extremely likely, wheat is declared surplus in the United States, on that basis half of our Marshall plan purchases will be immediately cut off, and I submit that with a cut of $300 million in Marshall-plan purchases our exchange and dollar situation will be extremely critical even if the purchases of base metals and other Marshall-plan offshore purchases continue. Entirely apart from our trading position, entirely apart from our situation with regard to the United States Marshall-plan purchases, we have two alternatives. We can either take steps now to rectify the situation or we can continue, and no matter what happens we shall be subject to an economic squeeze which we shall find it impossible to overcome.

Two things are happening today. Our historic European market is being closed off, partly by force and, I submit, partly by design. We are becoming ever more dependent for our exports on the United States market. I assure this house that, with the enormous productivity of the United States, immediately there is a surplus of goods and a surplus of materials in the United States our exports to the United States will fall off just as Niagara Falls drops over the brink. That may happen a great deal more quickly than anyone in the house thinks. Therefore we are faced with a barter economy being closed against us, and a market in the United States subject to the tremendous possibilities of production creating surpluses in that country and shutting us off from that market, in all manufactured goods.

What are the alternatives which we might follow? We might, and I believe we should, endeavour to make the Canadian dollar a convertible currency. What do I mean by "convertible currency"? Every currency must have some common denominator to which it is related. The historic common denominator to which all currency is related is, of course, gold. Today the operation of the gold standard is impossible. There is no currency in the world, with the possible exception of the Swiss franc, which could stand fixed convertibility into gold. When I say no currency I mean the United States dollar as well.

If the United States offered to sell United States gold for $35 an ounce and let their own nationals buy it, the hoard at Fort Knox would not last very long. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we must arrange some tie, some convertibility between the Canadian dollar

Foreign Exchange Control and gold; and the obvious, classical machinery, which was used by Great Britain all through the last century and until the gold standard was established, was the free bullion or free gold market, call it what you will. On this market you could buy or sell bullion at a price agreed upon between the buyer and the seller; and that is the only way you can get the true value of any currency in terms of gold, what people are prepared to pay for it, not what any government may say it is worth. It is a question of what it will sell for in the open market under the law of supply and demand; that is the true value of any currency.

I suggest that the first thing we should do is to go to the international monetary fund and tell them very definitely that we are suffering through the operation of the present economic system, and ask for the establishment of a free gold market in Canada. I have in my hand a letter from a United States economist who today has given me permission to use it. He is Mr. Henry Hazlitt, who writes an article for Newsweek, and who is one of the foremost advisers to American business. I quote one paragraph:

I heartily approve of your proposal that Canada should re-establish a free gold market.

It could not do so, of course, without meeting the strongest possible opposition from the international monetary fund, the British government, and from our own. But if the Canadian government maintained sufficient courage and clearsightedness to go ahead, nevertheless, the American government would soon have to follow suit and the fund, the British government and every other government that is now trying to combine inflation with exchange control would have to readjust its thinking, and the first step, at least, would have been taken toward the return to a real international gold standard.

Now I want to say a word as to one of the other advantages of convertibility into gold. Your purchaser of Canadian goods would have an opportunity to exchange his own currency in terms of gold in order to buy Canadian dollars, because the market would be open. Admittedly many countries would find their currencies extremely low when they came to purchase gold; nevertheless they would be able to purchase it and effect a trading transaction, which they are unable to do at the present time. What about the Canadian exporter? Exactly the same principle would apply; he would be able to offer his goods in terms of a foreign currency, and would be able to exchange that foreign currency into Canadian dollars in terms of gold at will. The classic trading pattern, call it old-fashioned if you like, is not going to return easily; but the present restricted, controlled and impossible trading position can cause us nothing but the most severe headaches in the very near future.

As to the policy of devaluation, I have always said that vis-a-vis the United States 29087-101

we are in a strong position. Our economy is strong. The reason it is strong has nothing to do with this government, however. Our economy is strong in comparison with the United States simply because the United States is becoming a have-not country. It is running out of many basic raw materials and becoming more and more dependent upon Canada for those materials. They find themselves dependent upon us particularly for many of the base metals, for newsprint and many other things. On that account I would have no fear at all that if we took this action our dollar would sell at a great discount. Our dollar would be freely convertible, and free convertibility is an essential to any currency. We hear that if our dollar went to a discount of ten per cent, coal would cost more. Well, Mr. Speaker, in 1936 I paid $8 a ton for coal. Today I am paying $18 for the same coal, or 125 per cent more than I paid at the time these agreements were made. That is a very serious matter; but for anyone to say that a discount of ten per cent would cripple this country is sheer nonsense. We have withstood shocking advances in the prices of many commodities such as coal and oil. These are the chances we have to take. There is no safe, easy way of walking through the valley without running any danger. That is not the way the world is constituted. There is the way of this government, which is leading us directly into a chaotic impasse. On the other hand we can take courageous action now and see that the essential quality of free convertibility into gold is restored to our dollar.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. E. G. Hansell (Macleod):

Mr. Speaker, I shall not take a great deal of the time of the house, but I would like an opportunity of saying a few words on a matter which to me and to certain sections of my constituency is important. In prefacing my remarks, I might say that I have always had the best relationship with the various ministers of the crown. I must say that when I have presented cases to them from time to time they have served me well. I hope that I have as happy relations with their successors after the next election.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
CCF

William Irvine

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

Mr. Irvine:

We will treat you well.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

I do not know who will take their places, but I will be here to face whoever do. While I commend the present ministers of the crown, I must say that there are two departments that I regard as particularly tough. One is the Department of Finance, the minister of which is sponsoring this bill, and the other is the Department of National Revenue, which rudely lays its hands upon the taxpayer.

In dealing with most ministers of the crown, I find they look over my case and

Foreign Exchange Control say, "Now, Mr. Hansell, I believe we might be able to handle that through section so and so, subsection so and so, clause so and so." Somehow or other the legislation written for the Department of Finance and the Department of National Revenue has no section so and so, subsection so and so, clause so and so through which they can creep to accommodate us. Their legislation is sewn up so tightly that when you present them with a case the reply you receive is a rather cold one. It reads something like this: We beg to advise you that section so and so, subsection so and so, and clause so and so states this. We wish we could do more for you. Yours sincerely.

I should like to say a word about the austerity program under which the country appears to be still labouring. It came upon us so suddenly that the Minister of Finance must take some responsibility for failing to keep his finger on the pulse of the nation's financial welfare. If I were about to drive my car down a hill having a gravelled road, what would I say? I would say, "Now, IJansell, just a moment; this is a gravel road and it is a rather steep hill. You had better put on your brakes a little and take your foot off the gas." I would anticipate what might happen. I would know something about the road that I was going to take. Evidently the government either did not know the route they were taking or did not know the dangers of the road they were traveling. Something must have happened because suddenly, out of a blue sky, the austerity program was thrown upon us under the controls which the government have, and which we have permitted them to have.

I do say, Mr. Speaker, that the government should have known before the nation got into such serious difficulties with other countries, particularly the United States, and should have put the brakes on a little sooner instead of plunging them on suddenly and giving the nation such a jolt. I say, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Finance should warn the country, if it is possible, that he expects something to happen. I have in mind the small business concerns and a few large business concerns that are capitalized with millions of dollars. These concerns receive a jolt at such times, but perhaps they can stand it. They have capital reserves and they have certain business administration, directorates and so forth that have steered these concerns over the rocks in days gone by.

The small businessman who has invested five thousand, ten thousand, or up to $50,000 in some business in a small community cannot stand it. These announcements that have been made in the past have well-nigh wrecked this type of business concern. I suppose some

LMr. Hansell.I

of them have had to go into bankruptcy. I recall having to take up on one occasion a case concerning a very small woollen mill. A few people had invested money in the mill and then quota restrictions were placed on woollen goods. It made it difficult for this small concern, but there was nothing that could be done about it. It was a matter coming under the Department of Finance and there were no holes to crawl through. The legislation was sewn up tightly.

I go along a road and I see a beautiful new building with a large sign "Hudson Cars". I stop to buy a little gasoline, perhaps, but I see no Hudson cars. The owner has a tale of woe about being a small businessman who took the agency for these Hudson cars. He put his money into the building, expecting that when the war was over he would be able to do a good business selling these cars. Suddenly, he finds he cannot get any cars. He might have had the agency for another car, but he chose Hudson and suddenly finds he cannot get any cars. Surely, there should have been some warning to protect these small business concerns.

I know that next Tuesday night the budget will be presented. It is anyone's guess as to what may be in the budget. The minister is going to adjust the hangman's noose around the poor taxpayer. I do not know whether he will make it a little tighter, but it is expected he will let it out a notch or two. I do trust that the minister will be able that night to make some announcement that will alleviate the distress in which small business concerns find themselves because of the austerity program. Surely the government must play fair with small business. It is only reasonable. I know that the minister cannot answer at the present time in this debate, but I think he should be able to give the country some lead so that small industries may know what is in store for them in the future.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Arthur Leroy Smith

Progressive Conservative

Mr. A. L. Smith (Calgary West):

Mr. Speaker, my contribution will also be brief. I was much interested in the speech made by the member for Spadina (Mr. Croll) because I approach this matter, as I am sure he did, as a very amateurish amateur. I promise you I will not speak about gold. The member for Spadina read a speech about gold. There again we have something in common, because neither of us knows anything about the gold problem. I admit that. He demonstrated it. That is the only difference between us.

He accomplished something more. If he had set out to give a speech which would be a prize example of demagogic, forensic effort, he succeeded exceedingly well. I almost cried when I thought of the poor child in his home in Toronto who, when he got his orange, found that it had a piece bitten out of it by

these nabobs on that street in Toronto on which the hon. member practises; I just forget the name of it, but I am told that it is Bay street. Then I see the rich men, these nabobs, putting away their ounces of gold, bringing them out and tallying them up every week. Then he went so far as to say, or clearly to imply in this demagogic talk of his, that an effort was being made by certain persons in authority in matters of business and finance to do a certain thing; that the object of those persons was-to use an expression that I hear quite often in this house from the socialists to my left-to keep poor people in a state of enslavement. Frankly, one needs great patience to listen to that kind of argument, because surely the answer must be obvious. If the rich are to get richer they must do so by selling to somebody; and if we enslave and impoverish our buyers, then the rich man cannot get richer. He also will get depressed.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
CCF

Rodney Young

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

Mr. Young:

Then you will have your depression.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Park Manross

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Manross:

That is what you are hoping for.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
CCF

Rodney Young

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

Mr. Young:

That is what you are asking for.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink
PC

Arthur Leroy Smith

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Smith (Calgary West):

I do not intend to reply to that; because to suggest that I am working for a depression is so utterly silly as to be completely unworthy of an answer from me at this time.

I intend to. make a reference to the speech made by the minister, and I am asking him to correct me if I misunderstood the effect of his remarks. He said that the devaluation of the dollar meant a higher cost of living to everyone in Canada. I think I am correct so far. Then he went on; and I think he will admit that, if that be true, an increase in the value of our dollar therefore must have the opposite effect.

Topic:   FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL ACT
Subtopic:   CONTINUANCE IN FORCE UNTIL SIXTY DAYS AFTER OPENING OF FIRST SESSION OF PARLIAMENT IN 1951
Permalink

March 17, 1949