William Foster COCKSHUTT

COCKSHUTT, William Foster

Personal Data

Party
Unionist
Constituency
Brantford (Ontario)
Birth Date
October 17, 1855
Deceased Date
November 22, 1939
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Foster_Cockshutt
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=4377f02c-8021-4cd3-9d64-deaad7b31431&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
businessman, manufacturer

Parliamentary Career

November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
CON
  Brantford (Ontario)
September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
CON
  Brantford (Ontario)
December 17, 1917 - October 4, 1921
UNION
  Brantford (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 191)


June 2, 1921

Mr. COCKSHUTT:

Is it incumbent

upon a single person having an income of say $1,200, or a married person having an

income of, say $2,200, part of that being in both cases, deductable on account of Victory bonds that are non-taxable, thus bringing the income under $1,000 in the one ease and under $2,000 in the other, to make returns if he is not asked to do so?

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS
Full View Permalink

June 2, 1921

Mr. COCKSHUTT:

I think the Bill as

a whole is in the right direction. I cannot agree with my hon. friend who has just sat down that it is desirable we should make up our own bills. I have had a good many dealings with people in the course of my life and I have never yet been called upon to make out my own bill in payment of any purchase. In every municipality the taxes are computed by the assessor or the tax gatherer, and I cannot see why individuals should be compelled to worry about computing their income tax as I know a great many have done. Of course, there may be some who do not worry much and do not want to put in returns, but I know many honourable people have felt it a very great responsibility to be called upon to make up their own bills. They are told that they must not make them up too small or they will be fined heavily; they must make them big enough, and in doing that they may overtax themselves. It is desirable in all matters of taxation that absolute justice and fairness should be sought, and I believe the minister is desirous of . moving in that direction. It seems to me that there should certainly be no penalty if a man or woman fails to make out an absolutely correct return. I doubt if there are ten men in this House who can make up their returns and say absolutely: These are correct returns of my income this year. I certainly could not do it. I spend a great many days on my own return, and finally I referred it to one of the experts of the department in my city. My figures came very close to his, and I accepted the figures given me and paid on them

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS
Full View Permalink

June 2, 1921

Mr. COCKSHUTT:

The hon. gentleman has had his say; I would like him to let me express my views with regard to this matter. .

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS I
Full View Permalink

June 2, 1921

Mr. COCKSHUTT:

The minister says

that is right, so that all parcels of a value less than $100 do not require this certificate. Therefore, there will not he the delay nor the charge. The value of an export must be $100 or more before this certificate is asked for, and the percentage is a very small one. The Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster) has a good idea; he is trying to put it into force at no expense to the country, and that is where the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Clark) makes the mistake. If the policy of the minister is sound-and I believe it is- he proposes to collect from American exporters to Canada all the money that will be required to pay for 75 or 100 trade commissioners in the United States. That is the policy. It has been made to work in one direction. Why should it not work in the other? This is not applied only to the United States; it is intended to be applied to all the countries of the world. Why then should we confine the argument only to [DOT]the United States? I think this item shows that Canadian trade commissioners are required and that those trade commissioners will be able to increase trade; I mean now trade in the direction from Canada to the United States by the sale of Canadian products to United States firms, for the reason that they will be able to show where, certain goods can be got and how they can be got to the best advantage. That will be a marked help to Canadian exporters. Hon. gentlemen opposite, who have not had much experience in export trade, talk very glibly of sending experts to foreign countries to develop the trade of a single firm. I can tell them something about the cost of a single representative for a single year. How much would it be? I am giving a very moderate estimate when I say that it would cost an individual firm from $10,000 to $15,000, including the salary of the expert traveller and of his travelling and hotel expenses. Unless a firm expects to do business amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars per annum, it cannot afford to send a representative of its own. Firms from Brantford have had representatives in Australia for years, and I believe the average cost is above $10,000 per annum. You have to do a big business in order to pay the salary of a man to work up a foreign trade. The minister proposes to have a few trade agents scattered about the various countries so as to take the place partially, if not wholly, of personal representatives. They will take the place of representatives who will draw the attention of those countries to Canadian goods, where and how they can be got most effectively and cheaply. I believe the policy is a sound one and the business men of Canada will be in favour of it to a large extent, in spite of the opinion of lawyers and other men who have had no experience in importing or exporting goods, but who import and export opinions, and who often express opinions that are not wanted on trade questions about which they know comparatively little. I would advise the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Maclean), who has given so much strong advice to the minister, to study trade questions a hit himself. He would be a great deal more guarded than he has been to-night in attacking a measure that has been devised with the best intention, and that will probably result in a vast increase in Canadian trade.

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS I
Full View Permalink

June 2, 1921

Mr. COCKSHUTT:

I have done more foreign trade than you have.

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS I
Full View Permalink