Mr. Sinclair:

The answer to the second question is yes. The answer to the first question is that probably the hon. member did not understand my reply. That probably is the reason why hon. members, like the hon. member for Saskatoon, are continually making these demands for bigger expenditures, and have no realization at all that somehow, somewhere, the Minister of Finance has to find the money to finance these expenditures.

I used the example of education only because the hon. member has put forward on various occasions his thought that there should be financial aid from the federal government for education. That being the case, I would think that he should realize that somewhere, somehow, the federal government is going to have to find that revenue to maintain all these desirable projects.

I am informed that in Saskatchewan, for example, they very recently increased their sales tax from 2 per cent to 3 per cent for this very reason, not that they wanted to impose an extra tax on goods which may still be necessities, or used in schools or businesses, or in industry, but because they had to get extra revenue. Therefore again I say to him, as far as this matter of dictaphones is concerned, which is not an item covered by this resolution at all, that if he wants to secure more information on it he has only to ask the appropriate minister, the Minister of National Revenue. We have come here prepared to discuss every item on the schedule, but not to discuss policy or items which are not covered in these amendments.

Mr. Knight:

Mr. Chairman, the avowed policy of this government, so far as I know, is not to charge tariff against these educational machines. I think my question was reasonable enough. Why is this item I have in mind not included among these other items for which the government itself has given us a precedent in the matter of allowing them in free? I am not asking for federal aid to education in this instance. I am asking the government to do away with something that is a drag upon education. Why should that one particular item regarding tape machines, or whatever the technical name is, not be on this list when there are on the free list many other things having to do with education? Personally I think it is a matter that has not been considered. I think it is carelessness on the part of the department concerned. I see no other reason. I believe it has not come to the attention of the government, or they have not given it consideration. If they had they would realize and see that it is simply one machine that should be free because of its similarity to the items that are free. I am not asking for anything; I am simply asking that the government follow its own precedent, the precedent of not charging tariff on educational machines. I do not see why we should have to pay $270 for a thing which, in the United States, is worth $125 in Canadian funds. I do not think that these remarks about the C.C.F. government in Saskatchewan and what it is doing there are applicable or relevant to the matter under discussion. It is simply the same old story

Customs Tariff

of playing politics with a matter which in my opinion should be considered seriously. I am interested in the children of this country, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with politics, or with the C.C.F. government in Saskatchewan.

Mr. Knowles:

I think the parliamentary assistant should give a little thought to the nature of the answer he has given to the hon. member for Saskatoon. The hon. member for Saskatoon asked why educational institutions have to pay this particular tax. His answer was that the government has to collect that tax from educational institutions so as to provide funds for federal aid for education, which it is not providing.

Mr. Sinclair:

The hon. member is very good at playing on words. I do not think anybody in the committee except himself took that meaning out of my words.

Mr. Knowles:

That is what the hon. member said.

Mr. Sinclair:

If the hon. member is no more accurate than that in phrasing things he has just heard, I can understand why he is so loose in paraphrasing things that happened weeks or months ago.

Mr. Knowles:

You said it; now you

straighten it out.

Mr. Sinclair:

Getting back to this question, it is quite true that the sales tax and excise tax are remitted on a great number of things used by educational institutions. To my knowledge there has never been a request from any educational institution of standing in the country for exemption for these dictaphones for recording and mechanical use by educational systems in Canada. If that request comes forward and is supported by a good case no doubt the minister will give careful consideration to it.

Mr. Fraser:

Just before we close this discussion, the assistant to the minister made the statement that these duties were imposed in order to raise revenue.

Mr. Sinclair:

That is part of it.

Mr. Fraser:

I do not think that is all the reason. I think the reason is to protect our workmen against other goods coming in here and stopping them from manufacturing them.

Mr. Sinclair:

It is a combination of these two.

Mr. Fraser:

Yes; it is to protect our men and secure their jobs for them.

Mr. Fleming:

Would the parliamentary assistant indicate to the committee briefly how much of the Geneva agreement has now been carried into effect, first by order in

Customs Tariff

council and second by statute, and what portion of the agreement may yet not be in effect in Canada?

Mr. Sinclair:

I am informed that of the almost 1,000 items on the Geneva schedule we have now implemented, through this and other changes, some 435, and we have carried out, more than perhaps any other country, most of the undertakings which we gave at Geneva; and that will be one of the points which we will raise at Torquay, the fact that we have taken the lead. That is why we are anxious to get this through. We have taken the lead in trying to implement in our tariff schedules the concessions agreed to at Geneva. The fact is that out of almost 1,000 items we have implemented 435.

Mr. Fleming:

That is to say, there are roughly 565 that have not been carried into effect. Is that correct?

Mr. Sinclair:

Yes, on which further negotiations will take place at Torquay.

Mr. Fleming:

As to the 435, assuming the enactment of a bill to give effect to the resolutions now before the house, how many of the 435 will then rest on a statutory basis, how many on an order in council basis?

Mr. Sinclair:

The entire 435 will then rest on a statutory basis, and as the other undertakings are agreed to at Torquay they too will be put on a statutory basis.

Mr. Wright:

On a former item the parliamentary assistant said, in reply to a question by the hon. member for Moose Mountain, that he would explain on this item how the tariff and dumping duties benefited western farmers. I should like to hear his explanation.