Carl Olof NICKLE

NICKLE, Carl Olof

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Calgary South (Alberta)
Birth Date
July 12, 1914
Deceased Date
December 5, 1990
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Nickle
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=0f4410c6-c39e-4ce0-b9ce-072bdc2937f0&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
editor, oilman, publisher

Parliamentary Career

December 10, 1951 - June 13, 1953
PC
  Calgary West (Alberta)
August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
PC
  Calgary South (Alberta)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 64)


April 5, 1957

Mr. Nickle:

There was one question I

would like to put to the minister in respect of part of his answer to my previous comments. He said that serious study has been given to the Gordon commission report and recommendations to the government on the tax laws as they affect the national resource development. I mentioned something along this line a year ago in this house, and I recall that in answering my speech at the time, dealing specifically with the so-called tax concessions on natural resources, the minister said that since the Gordon commission was sitting

at that time it might not be advisable to make any change in the regulations or in the act until after the Gordon commission findings had been submitted.

Now that the preliminary report is out, and I presume the detailed follow-up report will be available shortly, can we take it that the government will in the very near future be giving detailed consideration to the Gordon commission recommendations with regard to natural resource development and particularly the tax laws applying thereto? May I also take it that the government may be counted upon in the next parliament to bring forward specific recommendations and further amendments to the Income Tax Act to achieve the things which I am sure the government will agree are highly desirable; a greater rate of natural resource development of all types in Canada for the benefit of our country as well as all the world, and a greater proportion of the development being undertaken by Canadian companies who are given at least as great a measure of encouragement as is now provided to foreign capital under foreign tax laws.

Topic:   INCOME TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

April 5, 1957

Mr. Carl O. Nickle (Calgary South):

I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare, of which I have given notice. It is based upon an article in the Calgary Albertan reporting a serious shortage of Salk anti-polio vaccine in the Calgary area.

In view of the shortage of Salk vaccine in southern Alberta for use by private practitioners, caused by curtailment of exports of vaccine by the United States, will the government now make available a portion of the Canadian-produced vaccine currently earmarked for public health in order that the medical profession may resume service with this vaccine to Canadians not covered by the public health program?

Topic:   POLIOMYELITIS
Subtopic:   SALK VACCINE-REPORTED SHORTAGE IN CALGARY AREA
Full View Permalink

April 5, 1957

Mr. Nickle:

Mr. Chairman, by way of general comment on this clause I might say I do not think any hon. member of the house could disagree with the purpose of this particular amendment to the Income Tax Act. That purpose appears to be the encouraging by every possible means of exploration of the mineral resources of this country, this particular measure of encouragement being extended to those companies now engaged in the processing of mineral ores in Canada.

I gather from the comments of the industry in regard to this amendment that its probable immediate value will be to further encourage such projects as the aerial survey which is now getting under way in the Ungava area of northern Quebec and Labrador, and also to encourage certain of the mining or processing companies who have engaged in exploration work and expect to expand this activity in Ontario, northern Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon.

Inasmuch as this amendment extends to those companies now processing mineral ores in Canada the same right to charge off against their taxable income the actual costs incurred in the exploration for minerals, in addition to other forms of liquid or gaseous minerals such as oil and natural gas, I and my colleagues in this party certainly agree wholeheartedly with the extension to our processing companies of the concession which has been applied to oil refining companies and certain other mineral processing companies over recent years.

However, I would like to say again, as I have in previous years, that I do not think the concessions provided under the Income Tax Act and the regulations pertaining thereto which are designed to encourage the exploration and development of mineral and other resources in Canada by Canadian companies go far enough.

In discussing this clause I cannot deal in detail with the particular so-called concessions, except to say that the recent report of the Gordon commission did go a long way toward endorsing certain of the recommendations which have been made in this house by representatives of my party over the last few years, designed to encourage more Canadian investment in Canada's resource development.

Income Tax Act

This particular development does take one big step forward along that road. I only hope that before the Minister of Finance brings in another budget, if he has the right to bring in another budget in his present capacity a year from now, he or the next minister of finance will adopt more of the suggestions made in this house by members of my party, and will also adopt the recommendations made by the Gordon commission in order to give far greater encouragement to a faster development of Canadian natural resources by Canadian companies and Canadian individuals.

Topic:   INCOME TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

April 5, 1957

Mr. Nickle:

I think the minister is quite aware, as are other members of this house, that donations to any charitable organization cost the taxpayer money and involve to some extent a loss in revenue to the government.

However, my point is this. As indicated by such recent federal actions as the setting up of the Canada Council, our grants to universities and the increase in various welfare payments, the government of Canada recognizes the fact that there is a need which must be met either by private capital or by government capital, the capital of all the

Topic:   INCOME TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

April 5, 1957

Mr. Nickle:

May I ask a supplementary question. Perhaps before doing that I ought to give an explanation of the bootlegging of grain as defined by the president of the farmers' union of Alberta. This is taken from the report of the special committee of that union:

Some irrigation farmers or ranchers who have no grain of their own to sell to the wheat board find a straight grain farmer who is short of dollars and buy a readily saleable grade of wheat at a price considerably less than the legal initial payment price at the elevator, and deliver the grain on their own producer's permit.

In some cases this type of transaction is facilitated by the elevator agent who may do it as a service to his customer or take a cut from both producer and the seller in the transaction.

I believe, sir, the rather serious charge involved here is a matter that would certainly come under the jurisdiction of the Canadian wheat board.

Topic:   ALLEGED BOOTLEGGING IN ALBERTA
Full View Permalink