Robert MILNE

MILNE, Robert, B.S.A.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive
Constituency
Neepawa (Manitoba)
Birth Date
August 19, 1881
Deceased Date
July 1, 1953
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Milne_(Canadian_politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=59c768fb-dc29-4eb7-83df-999c1d5d5eda&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
farmer

Parliamentary Career

December 6, 1921 - September 5, 1925
PRO
  Neepawa (Manitoba)
September 14, 1926 - May 30, 1930
PRO
  Neepawa (Manitoba)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 17)


May 21, 1930

1. What department of the government administers the veteraft shops?

2. Who are the officials responsible for their administration in Ottawa?

3. What is the cost to the government in maintaining these shops?

4. How many men in all are employed in these shops?

5. What are their rates of pay?

6. How many shops are there in Canada and where are they located?

7. What do they make and sell?

8. What is the total sum received on account of manufactured articles?

9. What selling agencies are employed in the sale of such articles?

10. What commission, if any, is paid?

11. Have these shops the exclusive right to manufacture the poppies sold in Canada during Armistice Week, and, if not, why?

12. What was the gross sum represented by the sale of these poppies in 1929, and what was the net sum received?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   VETCBAFT SHOPS MANAGEMENT
Full View Permalink

May 16, 1930

Mr. MILNE:

Apparently the hon. member is not accountable for all he says. I gathered from the discussion this afternoon that the duty on artificial silk was 35 per cent, and my hon. friends were complaining that the changes under discussion were going to mean less profit for the manufacturers. I would like to know how many requests the hon. member for Lincoln has had from the employees in these factories who are wearing artificial silk, artificial silk stockings and other

such goods. What the farmer is interested in to-day is to get more for his dozen eggs when he trades them for other commodities than he has been getting in the past. We trade eggs for commodities largely, and what we want is more boots, more clothing or other products for the eggs we have to sell. I maintain that the tariff will not help the farmer. That is my stand.

This question was discussed before the tariff board, and I have read very carefully the evidence presented there. I am convinced that there was no case made out to warrant an increase in the tariff on eggs. I wish to quote a short extract from a letter written by the gentleman who presented this case before the tariff board. It is dated May 9, 1929, and says:

The poultry producers of western Canada are not requesting protection for the purpose of inflating the price of eggs to the consumer.

That sounds familiar.

They desire protection because they believe that the best interests of the producer and the consumer can only be protected by a stabilized market.

That sounds familiar too.

They wish to protect the distributors who purchase large quantities during the period of over-production, and who place them in store in order to protect the consumer from overinflation during the period of low production.

I have not a great deal of sympathy for the man who is gambling in eggs, who stores them up at one season of the year and unloads them at another. It is such concerns, apparently, that the writer of this letter refers to and is tlying to protect. The consumer in the city is paying from 55 to 60 cents a dozen for the eggs for which the producer in the country receives 30 to 40 cents a dozen, and I know of cases where the consumer is paying almost double what the producer within a hundred miles of the city receives.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

May 16, 1930

Mr. MILNE:

Most certainly.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

May 16, 1930

Mr. MILNE:

Yes, agricultural products or any products over the production of which you have no control. The United States endeavoured to increase the price of eggs, I suppose, in that country by raising the duty. I have here a clipping, one of several, showing the price of eggs in various markets. Tt is dated March 10, 1930, and shows that the price of extras in Toronto was 29 to 30 cents a dozen; Montreal, extras, 34 cents a dozen; New York, extras, 28 to 28^ cents a dozen. I think this shows conclusively that the high tariff of the United States is not having the effect of keeping the price of their eggs above the world's market price.

I have another reason for believing that a tariff on eggs is not in the best interests of the farmer. Unlike some other members of the house, I have a little sympathy for the consumer. We have been getting a fairly satisfactory price for our eggs as a general rule, and what the farmers are more interested in than a tariff on eggs is to get more commodities in exchange for the eggs they have to dispose of. I listened with a great deal of interest this afternoon to my hon. friend from Lincoln, with others, pleading that a 35 per cent tariff against the material that enters into the manufacture of artificial silk products was not sufficient to keep that industry alive in Canada. He apparently had received many communications from the manufacturers-

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

May 16, 1930

Mr. MILNE:

I have been consistently

opposing any increase in the tariff on eggs. I do this for various reasons. The first is that I do not believe a tariff on eggs will be of any benefit to the men who are producing eggs. During the past few years eggs have been bringing a fairly good price, and as a result of that Canada has now reached a point where she is producing practically as many eggs as she consumes. According to the figures given in the hearing before the tariff board, our exports of eggs for 1929 amounted to about 1,147,000 dozens and our imports amounted to about 713,000 dozens. Those figures show conclusively that we are reaching the point where we produce practically as many eggs as we consume. I am going to make a statement which I believe, and I think most of us believe is correct, namely, that when any product is on an export basis the tariff will not materially affect the price

Ways and Means-Customs Tariff

to the producer. Tariffs increase the price of manufactured goods because the production of manufactured products can be controlled and the production of farm products cannot be controlled. Therefore tariffs do not generally increase prices to the producer. I am not going to labour that point because it has been made clear in the house several times already.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic:   CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink