They may be losing money, but they are spending $8 million on a new truck plant this year. Studebaker down in Hamilton is not doing too badly either. As I said before, we produce over $1,500 million worth of goods in the western provinces each year. We sell these goods not in Ontario or in Quebec because we have no market there for those goods. We must sell them throughout the world wherever we can find a market.
The Budget-Mr. Wood But when we need to spend our money, Mr. Speaker, and when we need to buy goods that we require, whether it be automobiles, clothing, boots and shoes, furniture or anything else, because of our tariff system we are compelled to funnel all that wealth right down here into the centre of Canada.
I have a reply to a question of the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond (Mr. Goode) which appeared on the order paper, and in which he asked for the value of the agricultural products of the three prairie provinces. The reply says that in 1950 the three prairie provinces produced $1 billion worth of goods. I also have a statement from the automobile industry showing the number oi cars, trucks and buses produced in Canada, A total of 390,102 cars, trucks and buses wert produced in 1950 at a valuation of $610 million. This reply to the hon. member foi Burnaby-Richmond says that, in Manitoba Saskatchewan and in Alberta 93,763 cars trucks and buses were purchased, which amounts to 24 per cent of the entire production of 1950 at a valuation of $190 million That is 30 per cent of $610 million, the entire cost of these cars, trucks and buses producer in 1950. Therefore when you talk about the wealth that is produced in the west, and wha' becomes of it, just keep in mind that we have to find markets throughout the world but when it comes to spending our money i comes down into the central part of Canada into the cities of Windsor, Oshawa, Toronto and Hamilton, and other cities in this are: that I described when I rose to my feet, am we get nothing in return. We are paying and continually bonusing, the industries dowi here because of the tariff, and we are gettinj nothing in return. I say that it has cos Manitoba producers and my constituents toi much money to belong to confederation.
I have another little quotation that I wisl to bring to the attention of the house. It is ; remark of the leader of the opposition (Mi Drew), which he made on March 18, concern ing corporation taxes. I am going to read thi remark of his because, in my opinion, h probably expresses an opinion here that doe not conform with my interpretation of wha he said. He said, at page 571 of Hansard:
There are different methods of dealing with thos inflationary pressures. There is one way this gov ernment has not attempted, by which it can dea with inflationary pressures better than by any othe method at this moment. That is to stop this ovei taxation. Some $721 million of overtaxation in th first nine months is $721 million taken from th pockets of our people which has added by that muc to their expenditures. Let it not be said that a sut stantial part of this is represented by corporatio taxes. No one knows better than the Minister c Finance that if firms are to stay in business corpora tion taxes are going to be passed on to the consume and they always will. Every hon. member in th
1752 HOUSE OF
The Budget-Mr. Wood house knows that no other method can be employed under a system which seeks to retain some measure of profit as an alternative to bankruptcy. All this is paid by the people, and has been taken out of their pockets.
It is true that that is being paid by the people. I have no complaint to make about that statement. It is absolutely true. I also see that he is quoted in the Hamilton Spectator as making the same statement in Beamsville. The following appears in that paper:
This year's budget, he said, meant an average of $315 for every man, woman and child in Canada to pay the Canadian government alone, not including provincial or municipal taxes.
The invisible taxes were much greater than the income tax, and corporation tax was "a second hidden sales tax with every cent being paid by the people."
That is true. All these taxes are being paid by the people. I am not taking any objection to that statement. It is true that all taxes come from the pockets of the people, whether they are hidden taxes or otherwise. But if corporation taxes are reduced, it does not follow that we shall be able to buy goods any cheaper. That is the point. It means only that corporation profits will be greater, and the shareholders of the corporations will get bigger dividends. Therefore the people that the leader of the opposition is interested in are the class of people who own the corporations. I am not surprised at this, because the leader of the opposition leads a party that has always been interested in the people who own corporations. It is nothing new.
You often hear, Mr. Speaker, of afterdinner speeches being made in some of these cities along the central line of Canada and the United States, where they rise to emphasize the imaginary line. I want to say that there is nothing imaginary about this line between Canada and the United States. I would say that as far as trade is concerned, the line between Canada and the United States is an iron curtain. It is an iron curtain that was first established under the Sir John A. Macdonald government, and made stronger under the Tupper government, and then still higher under the Arthur Meighen government and by devious ways and means under the R. B. Bennett government it was made still higher. They had such things as British preferential tariff, and then the mostfavoured-nation clause, the general tariff, quotas, administrative orders and everything else. The result is that there is great trouble to get anything out of the United States and into this country. You have to get a permit; then there are quotas, administrative orders, and all the various sections of the tariff. That s what we are up against in this country.
[ now come to item 491 in the budget, which provides for the expenditure of $1,500,000 for
the tourist trade. Personally, I think it is a good thing to encourage tourists to come to Canada and see our lovely country, and try to get them to spend their money here. But I have a statement from the Free Press which says that in 1950 Canadian tourists spent $140 per capita in the United States; whereas the United States tourists spent $10 per capita in Canada. There is nothing whatever surprising about that when you consider the different levels of prices. You know, the people of the United States are not any more foolish than we are. I think they are probably a lot smarter than we are. The people of the United States have their own money; they earn that money. They come to Canada, and they look around for something to buy. When they walk into the stores and shops and find that the level of prices is from 15 per cent to 20 per cent higher than they are in the United States they say: What is the use of buying this stuff here? They go home and they buy what they want at home. Many Americans come to Canada, and they would spend the money they have, but they find nothing to spend it on. The only things they buy in this country are gasoline, food and probably a little English chinaware, and a few trinkets that they take home with them just to show that they were in Canada. They walk into the stores, and they see an ordinary shirt. That shirt would cost them $4.95 in Ottawa, but they can get it for $3.95 in their own city, and they say: What is the use of spending money in this country? They look at a refrigerator which costs $400 in this country, but they can buy it for $265 in any city in the United States. The spread in automobile prices is around $500. Many people say that this spread is taken up in the sales and excise taxes. Do not believe that story. The tax on a Chevrolet car today is approximately $353. There is a federal tax on the same car of $129 in the United States, so that the spread in taxes in the two countries is of the order of about $230. The spread between the Canadian and the United States tax is not of the greatest importance; it is the spread the automobile industry collects in this country that makes the difference.
I should not like to close without mentioning one further matter. The farmers of Ontario and Quebec are in a preferred position. Situated here in the central provinces, they are close to the industrial centres where, if there is any little market at all, it is available to them. I say "any little market at all", because it is not very big. Those of us from the west are not able to sell our goods down here in industrial Canada-and I wish to
emphasize that fact. We have had unfortunate experiences with our fish, because we found we could not sell a box of fish in this part of the country.
i say the farmers of Ontario and Quebec are in a preferred position, because they live close to these large industries. We must keep in mind that for the past number of years the federal treasury has been bonusing the Ontario and Quebec farmers to the extent of $6 per ton on feed for their cattle and hogs. I say that, in the light of that fact, it shows a lack of grace on the part of any citizen of either Ontario or Quebec when he criticizes the payment of $65 million received by the farmers of the west for their grain. That is only pin money when compared with the hundreds of millions of dollars we pour into central Canada in the payment of prices that are too high for the goods we buy. I say that hundreds of millions of dollars have been poured in for that purpose, and that it shows ill grace on the part of any citizen of Ontario and Quebec to mention the payment of $65 million. So far as that is concerned, it is a matter of only two or three cents a bushel; so that if a farmer does sell a thousand bushels it is only a matter of $25. That same farmer will buy a Chevrolet automobile and will have to pay $300 more for it than if he could buy it across the boundary line. So I suggest the citizens of Ontario and Quebec should not make reference to that $65 million any more.
Topic: THE BUDGET
Subtopic: ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE