George Clyde NOWLAN

NOWLAN, The Hon. George Clyde, P.C., Q.C., B.A., LL.B.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
Birth Date
August 14, 1898
Deceased Date
May 31, 1965
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Nowlan
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=ea30e79d-1feb-461a-bbea-b3e5a570ee30&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister, lawyer

Parliamentary Career

December 13, 1948 - April 30, 1949
PC
  Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
June 19, 1950 - June 13, 1953
PC
  Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
PC
  Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
June 10, 1957 - February 1, 1958
PC
  Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
  • Minister of National Revenue (June 21, 1957 - August 8, 1962)
March 31, 1958 - April 19, 1962
PC
  Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
  • Minister of National Revenue (June 21, 1957 - August 8, 1962)
June 18, 1962 - February 6, 1963
PC
  Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
  • Minister of National Revenue (June 21, 1957 - August 8, 1962)
  • Minister of Finance and Receiver General (August 9, 1962 - April 21, 1963)
April 8, 1963 - September 8, 1965
PC
  Digby--Annapolis--Kings (Nova Scotia)
  • Minister of Finance and Receiver General (August 9, 1962 - April 21, 1963)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 836 of 836)


February 4, 1949

Mr. George C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):

Mr. Speaker, my first words must be of appreciation for the kindly greetings which have been extended to me by all members of the house regardless of the side upon which they sit. In that connection I should like particularly to express my personal appreciation of the greetings tendered me by the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent). These are things that shall never be forgotten. I realize that some of these expressions may be tinged with regret, but I realize also that they are nonetheless sincere and they certainly are most welcome.

If it were not for the ordeal confronting me I would think that this was a most pleasant place in which to find one's self. I am sure that I have the sympathy of all those who have preceded me in this rather trying experience.

I appreciate that on an occasion such as this one does not engage in partisan political discussion. I trust I will have the indulgence and forbearance of the house. I should also like to express my best wishes and congratulations to those other fellow sufferers of the other afternoon who were introduced to the house prior to myself. I am sure that like myself they found the walk from the door to the clerk's table one of the longest walks upon which they ever entered in their lifetime.

I think most of them have already participated in the debates of the House of Commons despite the fact that only a little over one week has elapsed. I wish to congratulate all of them and express my good wishes to them,

although I do not want that remark to indicate my agreement with all the remarks of the last speaker, who, I think, very unfortunately interjected a political atmosphere into something which should be absolutely devoid of politics. Perhaps it would not be amiss to remind the hon. gentleman that those on this side of the house, in order to keep external affairs out of politics, sedulously avoided contesting the election so that the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) might enter the house as he did.

I understand it is appropriate at this time to make some passing reference to the constituency which one has the honour to represent. If I embarked upon that course it would exhaust the time that is allotted to me. Therefore I will simply say in passing that my constituency is a sort of microcosm of Canada. The home of the first government of Canada was in my constituency. It is the land of Evangeline, the background for the expulsion of the Acadians. I am sure that British Columbia members will admit that we grow the finest apples in the world.

I will proceed to other matters without further remarks on that score.

There are various matters of local interest to which I should like to refer. I think we all appreciate that an occasion such as this is perhaps not the best time to deal with them. There are many that perhaps would be dealt with better when the estimates are before the house. I do not intend to enter upon a discussion of local matters to any greater extent than necessary. It is true, however, that the result of the election in my riding was, to some extent, determined by the fact that the people wanted certain protests uttered, and certain demands brought before the House of Commons.

With your permission I should like to refer for a few moments to matters which, although of local interest, may have some interest outside of my own constituency. I should like to say something about our fishermen. When I say "fishermen" I do not mean the fishermen of the riding of the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Winters) who go out on the banks in schooners. I wish to deal with inshore fishermen only.

We have many of them in my constituency. During the last few years United States trawlers have dragged along the coast line of the United States until the fishing grounds there are certainly depleted. Whether that is due to this or other causes may be a matter for argument. As a result, United States trawlers are now appearing off our own coast in ever-increasing numbers. The livelihood of the inshore fishermen of my constituency and of the maritimes-I know noth-

The Address-Mr. Nowlan ing about the west-is threatened because of this practice. As I understand it, under international law these heavy United States, trawlers can drag to within three miles of our coast line. Yet Canadian trawlers, built with Canadian money and manned by Canadian crews, are prevented by government, policy-and, I suggest, proper policy-from fishing within twelve miles of our coast. I suggest that it is a rather anomalous situation that Canadian fishing vessels, manned by Canadian seamen, should be prevented from fishing within twelve miles of our coast, whereas United States fishermen on United States trawlers are permitted to fish within three miles of our coast. It is a situation which should be rectified.

Not too many years ago, the Department of Justice was not slow in moving the three-mile limit out to twelve miles when it was a question of catching rum-runners hovering off the coasts of New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. During the first great war the navy decided to scrap the old three-mile limit and move it out to twelve miles. I believe this is a matter with which the government should deal. It is my understanding that at the present time there is proceeding an international conference on fisheries. I would suggest to the Minister-of Fisheries (Mr. Mayhew), and the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, who I know, has a tremendous interest in the matter, that this question should be taken up at that conference and some arrangement made concerning it. If that is not possible, then I would ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs if this is not a proper matter for negotiation with Washington. It must be done, and it can be done. As the Secretary of State for External Affairs undoubtedly knows, in so far as the bay of Fundy is concerned, this is an open question. If you read the correspondence between Mr. Bacon, who was Secretary of State at Washington, and Lord Bryce, you will find that the British claimed the bay of Fundy was coastal waters, and the United States said it was a part of the high seas. They both agreed to disagree, and to keep the matter open for future reference. I suggest that the time has now come to settle this matter once and for all, and I urge upon the government the necessity of taking action which will avoid the absolute ruin of our inshore fishermen.

Nor is that all of the trawler story. Not only are United States trawlers fishing outside the three-mile limit, but persistently and consistently they are fishing inside that limit-under cover of darkness, and sometimes in broad daylight. They drift to within a short distance of our coast line. As a matter of fact, on more than one occasion lobster

242 HOUSE OF

The Address-Mr. Nowlan traps set within a few hundred yards of our coast line have been caught up by the trawls of United States trawlers. This matter has caused a great deal of concern to Canadian fishermen. It is bad enough to have the three-mile limit, but not to be able to enforce it is something which causes dissatisfaction. The reason for that is that we have in that area only one small, old and inefficient patrol boat, the Capelin. In a stiff breeze no self-respecting sailor would embark upon her because he would realize that he was risking his life. That boat has to tie up at night because it cannot patrol after dark. Representations were made to me by the fishermen a short time ago. I took up the matter with the Department of Fisheries, and as a result of my representations the superintendent of the fisheries department at Moncton sent the big patrol boat, the Cygnus, down to the bay of Fundy. I am sure that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) and the Minister of Fisheries know what result attended upon that. On its first patrol of the bay of Fundy the Cygnus caught a United States trawler within two and a half miles of the Nova Scotia coast line.

If one had the time it would be rather interesting to read the newspaper stories which appeared last week concerning this matter. The first day there was a glaring headline announcing the seizure, and a picture of the boat with men of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police guarding it. The next day the statement appeared that the boat was going to be forfeited and sold. Then there were stories of protests from various places outside the country, but the department still stood firm and said that the boat was going to be sold. On the next day there was a suggestion that possibly the boat might be released in order to engage in fishing, but that a deposit would have to be made with the department. Then the next day, Friday to be exact, the Minister of Justice issued a little statement-for which he should be commended, because it was certainly brief and economical-in which he said that on his instructions the Araho was being released immediately. I asked if it was released without a deposit, and he replied that it was; therefore the incident is closed.

I presume the department felt this was a proper case in which justice should be tempered with mercy, and perhaps one should not quarrel too much with that point of view. But I am sure neither the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Mayhew) nor the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson)-and I am certain not the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Winters)-would be so naive as to accept the explanation that the radio direction finder

was out of order, and that this was the reason this boat was within two and a half miles of our coast line. These were deep-sea fishermen. They could tell by glancing across the water, either by day or by night, whether they were within one, two or three hundred yards or one, two or three miles of the coast line, and no radio direction finder was needed. It is the story we always hear when the murderer is caught; he says the gun went off by accident.

In any case, Mr. Speaker, two things are necessary. In the first place the Cygnus must be maintained in those waters, and in the second place more and more efficient patrol boats must be built. In that connection I should like to mention another matter which has been advocated by the Halifax Herald from time to time and which I think is in the thoughts of most people in the maritimes. We are a maritime people. We are proud of our sailors, proud of our fishermen; yet on our eastern coast, at any rate- whether or not this is so on the west coast I do not know-we do not have any coastguard service whatever. When our ships get into trouble we have to call upon the United States coastguard to help us out. They have done so generously and well. I realize that in this modern day and age the aeroplane renders wonderful service, and certainly the search and rescue squad of the R.C.A.F. at Dartmouth, and now at Greenwood, has rendered yeoman service. But aeroplanes cannot rescue drowning sailors; and I suggest that to help maintain the traditions of Canada as a great maritime nation we must have an efficient coastguard service to help our sailors and carry out the work which has to be carried out in that connection.

Then, Mr. Speaker, if we had a patrol service and a coastguard service I believe the difficulties of the fishermen would be met temporarily, at least until such time as it is possible to negotiate a treaty under which the coastal line may be moved further off shore.

There is another matter to which I should like to refer, a matter which has been mentioned in this house a great deal, of course, during the last few days; that is, the plight in which our farmers find themselves. We in our constituency are particularly conscious of that situation, because the fruit growers of the Annapolis valley have been largely dependent upon the export markets of Great Britain and, to some extent, western Europe. Those markets have been lost to us, first because of the war and now because of sterling restrictions. This applies not only to apples. This week here on parliament hill we saw a committee representing all the poultry raisers of Canada, who were worrying about the restriction of their markets, and who could see that within the immediate

future their industry might be facing disaster. Our fishermen are facing restricted markets because of lack of sterling; our lumbermen see the possibility that the British market may be closed to them through restrictions on sterling, and they are facing a most serious situation.

All these primary producers are in difficulties. This government has inaugurated a system of price support, and that is good. However, I am sure the minister and everyone else will admit that price support in itself is not a solution. We see these surpluses starting to build up; and what the end may be it is hard for any of us to say. I think we must go further than that, even as a temporary measure. Many may not like it; there are those, I know, who are violently opposed to it, but some system of controlled, orderly marketing of all these surpluses which are starting to overhang the markets of this country and of the world must be developed. I suggest to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) one step I believe he should seriously consider; that is, the inauguration of a natural products marketing act. I believe the minister is giving this matter consideration; I hope he is, as I know he has been giving consideration to many of these matters for a long time. So I do urge upon him the importance of this action.

But that would not be a final solution. You can have your price support; you can have your marketing act; but the only possible solution in the long run is some action to regain the markets of western Europe, Great Britain and the entire sterling area. Unless that is done I believe our producers may be in great difficulties and even reduced to the level of a peasant economy. Our principal market has been across the seas, and without that export market we may barely eke out an existence. Thousands may be forced to migrate, as has been suggested; and the economy of the country may be permanently impaired.

I am not suggesting for a moment, of course, that this government is wholly responsible for the loss of the sterling markets. We all realize that various factors enter into this matter. There was the war; there have been the controls which have come on since, and the various policies of other governments. All these things enter into the situation. I do believe there has been a trend of thought-perhaps a proper one-that Canada was going to develop into a great industrial nation because of changes that have occurred in regard to natural resources and so on, and that during the coming years we would see an increasing flow of goods to the south, with the result

The Address-Mr. Nowlan Canada would become a wealthy exporting nation, sending tremendous quantities of goods to our neighbour the United States. Then we would be wealthy and powerful, and exchange restrictions would be a thing of the past. That is a pleasant picture, and it may become a true one; it may materialize within the next twenty-five years. Given that development; given migration; given an increase in population, and all these things can happen. But, sir, that is not a solution for the people of this generation. They will not live long enough to benefit from those markets. They must regain the overseas markets.

So if this government is vulnerable-and I think perhaps it is on some points-I would suggest with respect that there are two points on which I would differ markedly with it. One of these points, of course, is only indirectly in reference to sterling; but I think the financial policy of tying our dollar to parity with the United States dollar brought a great deal of economic loss and disaster and prejudiced our dealings with the sterling area. More than that, I believe there has been a tendency, probably not on the part of the minister but on the part of officials in various departments, to assume that Great Britain was through, that sterling never again would be convertible, and that those of us who had any hope of regaining access to the markets of western Europe or Great Britain were living in a fool's paradise and ought to resign ourselves to the harsh facts of life. I think there was and probably still is an attitude of defeatism in that respect, Mr. Speaker, which has motivated this government in not proceeding as aggressively as I think it should in trying to rectify these difficulties and get us back into the sterling area.

We talk a great deal about the iron curtain; in his speech this afternoon the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) referred to it. There is another curtain which is causing almost as much trouble in the world, economically. That is the curtain which is hanging across the world with a dollar sign painted on one side and the pound sterling painted on the other.

That curtain must be lifted, sir, so that people can trade easily back and forth. Unless that is done the primary producers of this nation face disaster. This government must do something about it. Without interjecting political complications into this opening debate, I say this, that if this government does not succeed in overcoming this difficulty, with respect to trading in the sterling area, then as surely as day follows night it will be replaced by another government which will attempt, and will finally succeed in doing so.

844 HOUSE OF

The Address-Mr. Nowlan

There is a minor matter relating to agriculture to which I should not refer at all perhaps at this time, and that is the plight of the potato growers in my province. I know it is a matter of which the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) has considerable knowledge. It is the unsatisfactory situation in which we find ourselves in Nova Scotia, not only from an economic standpoint, but it is also definitely irritating to the pride of the people of that province. I am not criticizing this government for what it originally did. It had to take some action. The only trouble was that it moved too late. We were embargoed, kept out of the United States market, in so far as table potatoes were concerned.

Then, this government proceeded to set floor prices for potatoes grown in certain parts of New Brunswick, floor prices for potatoes grown in Prince Edward Island, but no floor prices for potatoes grown in Nova Scotia.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Full View Permalink

February 4, 1949

Mr. Nowlan:

I do not know about Manitoba; that is a matter for the Manitoba members themselves to discuss. I am saying that the minister well knows the situation that developed. Unfortunately, perhaps there were election complications injected into it. Assurances were given that floor prices would be forthcoming. A floor price has not been established as yet, as far as I know. Certainly, it is not in effect today.

As a result, potatoes are being sold in my constituency today for export. They are being bagged, graded and trucked, and all those expenses are being paid by the grower who receives less than the floor price that is promised to the growers of New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island next April.

Next April those growers will receive a greater amount for the potatoes in their cellars, in bins, unpacked, ungraded, and all the rest of it, than our growers now receive for potatoes graded and delivered. You talk about your iron curtain! In our case, there fell across the strait of Chignecto an iron curtain which made it impossible for us to export potatoes and which kept the money of the government from coming in.

Speaking of Nova Scotia products, I am reminded of something which I saw in the speech from the throne. There is a reference to loans which are being made for the development of the steel industry. I am glad to see that, sir. I trust, not only that legislation will be introduced to that effect, but that that legislation will afterwards be implemented, because in Nova Scotia we have the potentialities for a tremendous steel industry.

I hope and expect that this government will inaugurate a policy under which the steel

industry will be enlarged and strengthened-If this is done it will provide an additional market for our agricultural products.

In that connection, sir, many statements, have been made in the press lately with respect to a bridge which is or is not to be built across the strait of Canso. I understand the engineers are not yet ready to report on that. Certainly, sir, that must be done. Although I am speaking as a very junior member of this party, judging from the position taken by our party when this matter was discussed in the past, I think I am safe in saying we are unanimously behind this proposal to erect a bridge across the strait of Canso. We believe it must be done by this government at the earliest possible moment.

Dealing with matters of transportation, I should like to draw the attention of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) to a rather peculiar situation which exists with respect to the Canadian National steamships operating from Halifax to the West Indies. Preliminary surveys show the possibility of developing a small export market for our apples in the West Indies. I am sure the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) realizes how important that might be. Our apple marketing board has taken this matter up with the management of the Canadian National boats with a view to obtaining the use of cold storage facilities on these boats. Cold storage facilities are essential in exporting apples to that market. We have been told by the management that we should first get the orders and then take the matter up with them and they would see if they could make some arrangements. How in the name of common sense can you get orders for the shipment of apples until you are assured of transportation facilities?

These ships contain at least three cold storage compartments. I quite realize that the beautiful aroma from Nova Scotia apples might affect the butter, eggs or cheese being shipped from Ontario. But at least, it should not be beyond the bounds of possibility to reserve one compartment for the shipment of apples during the period when apples are normally exported. It is estimated that, had we been able to ship these apples, we would have exported 10,000 barrels this year. I quite realize that 10,000 barrels does not seem a large amount, but to people suffering from a lack of markets, as our people are, 10,000 barrels is an important amount.

Since the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Winters) is in the house, I should like to mention another matter of transportation. In our constituency, we are not served

directly by the Canadian National Railways. "We are served by the Dominion Atlantic Railway, a subsidiary of the Canadian Pacific Railway. In the old days, of course, the Dominion Atlantic Railway provided the most efficient means of shipping to an export market. Today, however, we have to pay freight over the Dominion Atlantic Railway to a Canadian National railway point, then pay freight over the Canadian National railways, which means paying freight for goods to travel over that long, tortuous, winding, military road which was built nearly a century ago when we were expecting an invasion from another country. It is absolutely impossible to ship goods efficiently or cheaply over that road. Perishable commodities cannot be shipped over this route at all because the time taken is too great. We have to face the fact that whatever is done in the future, there will be a restriction on the development of the apple industry. We will have to develop other products to some extent. In the meantime, we have to ship those apples wherever we can. We need faster shipping facilities to the markets of the New England states, Montreal and Toronto; that is essential.

I noticed the other day it was suggested that the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply would have a billion dollars to spend on public works when the period of unemployment is upon us. I should like to tell him that in my constituency unemployment is present today, and there is a great deal of it. If the lumber situation continues to deteriorate, there will be still more. I suggest that the piers at Saint John and Digby be constructed so that a car ferry can be operated across the bay of Fundy. This would mean that we could ship our goods in carload lots direct to the markets of Montreal, Boston and Toronto. That, sir, is more than a possibility; it is something which I think should be done in the very near future.

One other reference should be made to the apple industry, and with that I shall have finished. Our growers have received, and they appreciate the fact that they have received, from the treasury of the Dominion of Canada, substantial payments during the last few years. Those payments were made because of the fact that the industry found itself, through no fault of its own, deprived of its export market. The government realized that, unless those payments were made, the apple industry of this nation would be ruined. Every dollar, sir, which was received by the growers was of direct benefit to the apple growers in all the rest of Canada.

Let no one overlook that fact. If the government had not adopted that policy, the marketing system of Canada would have been completely disorganized. This expenditure

The Address-Mr. Nowlan was for the good of Canada. Our growers do not want, and they did not receive, handouts. They do not want, and they did not receive, beneficences. I am making this statement now, not because of any words or expressions that may have been used by any individual or individuals. I quite realize that statements are sometimes made in a jocular manner and not with the intention of being taken as seriously as they sometimes are. I want to make that plain. But I realize that some parts of the country are under the impression that special benefits have been given to that industry. I want to disabuse the minds of the public on that score. That industry received nothing more than was essential to maintain it. This government now faces the situation that, within the next few days, it will have to decide what its policy will be for the future. Policy is a matter for the government to determine. It will have to decide whether it wants to allow the industry to go under or whether it will give it further assistance. No government is justified in continually spending money on an industry that cannot be saved, and certainly the apple growers of the Annapolis valley do not want that, and do not expect it. I believe, however, that where an industry has every probability of recovery, when it can be reorganized, when it can be put back on its feet, then the government is justified in giving it support. Without discussing the matter further, because I realize that I may be trespassing upon ground on which one should not tread in a semipolitical discussion, I leave it at that. I only say that if help is to be forthcoming, it must come now. Here we have an industry in which within the next few weeks millions of dollars must be spent for fertilizer and spraying materials. The growers have not the money with which to buy them. If satisfactory arrangements can be made so that spraying material and fertilizer can be purchased, those things can be purchased. If those arrangements cannot be made, they cannot be purchased. The worst thing that could happen would be to have this matter delayed and delayed until, in the end, perhaps some financial arrangement would be made; but in the meantime it would be too late, and the industry could not function efficiently this summer.

I wish to deal with one more matter and then I am through, because I notice that my time is rapidly expiring. As I said at the outset, I appreciate greatly the welcome I received from all members of the house, and particularly from those on the other side. I feel that I am under some obligation to them, and I should like to return that courtesy now. The other afternoon the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) was calling expert witnesses to

The Address-Mr. Nowlan deal with the matter he was discussing, that of dominion-provincial relations. I think perhaps, Mr. Speaker, I would not be accused of being immodest if I should classify myself as an expert witness on the subject of why the government candidate lost the election on December 13. I think I might possibly be able to give some information to hon. gentlemen on the other side of the house with respect to that matter. It certainly was not because of the candidate, who was a man who had in the past won by large majorities, and who for many years had been a responsible minister of the crown in that province. Many local factors entered into the situation, but there was one primary matter which motivated the thinking of all the electors, and that was their resentment against the crushing burden of taxation imposed by this government at the present time. I wish to give this explanation to my hon. friends, if they have not already got it. I heard them getting it the other day from their own side, but possibly they can take it from me as a disinterested, unbiased observer! That is the explanation. That is the answer: the burden of taxation, the reckless expenditure, as I think it was termed. I should like to show certain hon. gentlemen opposite letters I have received from many Liberals whom they know throughout the province. These men wrote to me after the election and said they believed that the electors were justified in protesting against a government which imposed such heavy taxation and maintained such reckless expenditure. Those are not my statements. Those are statements from Liberals whom three of the hon. gentlemen opposite know well and whose judgment they would respect.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Full View Permalink

February 4, 1949

Mr. Nowlan:

I hope you profit by it. The only possible hope my hon. friend has of coming back in the next election is that the government accept that advice. It is not only the burden of taxation that is resented, but particularly the administration of the income tax. I do not intend to weary hon. members with a recital of the farmers' complaints with respect to the income tax. As I understand it, the Department of National Revenue proposes to issue to the farmers an income tax return about the size of a post card.

I am glad to hear that, but may I say that it never was the size of the return which bothered the farmers so much. It was the interminable nagging, the questions asked, the letters which were written time and time again, year after year, about something which happened in 1942 and 1943; that was what broke the hearts of the people. Such questions were asked as when a cow was sold,

or what happened to it. The people were asked to give a full explanation about such matters.

I realize that it is good financial policy to balance the budget. I realize that there is justification for decreasing the debt. But I suggest that the debt should not be decreased through the imposition of a heavy burden of taxation when the cost of living is bearing down on the people as it is at the moment. That policy cannot be justified.

I heard the Minister of Finance speak on an occasion on which, as he later said, he had never laughed so hard in his life. Speaking of taxation he first said that the government was setting aside something for a rainy day. Then he said it was to reduce the debt. Then finally he said it was to prepare for national defence. I suggest that this country is prepared to assume a burden of taxation for national defence if it is asked to do so properly, and for that purpose. But if we continue to impose a burden of taxation and try to justify it one minute on one ground, and another minute on another ground, sooner or later, when the necessity for national defence arises, we shall find ourselves in the position of the boy who called "Wolf, wolf," when no wolf was there; and the public will even resent paying taxes for the purpose of national defence.

I see that my time has just about expired. May I say this in closing, with regard to the matter of taxation, particularly as it concerns farmers and fishermen. At this session, I believe, a committee should be appointed- and I believe there is some hope of it-to deal with this whole matter. The farmers and fishermen do not wish to avoid the payment of taxes but they resent certain features and injustices in connection with the administration of the present act. I urge the appointment of a committee of the house to go into the matter thoroughly, to work out a system whereby the taxes may be collected and whereby at the same time the co-operation of the farmers and fishermen may be obtained.

I thank the members of the house for the courtesy they have shown me on this occasion.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Full View Permalink

February 1, 1949

Mr. George C. Nowlan (Digby-Annapolis-Kings):

I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Fisheries of which I gave him notice this morning. Has the United States fishing vessel Araho been released from seizure? If so, was any deposit made by the owner of such vessel?

Topic:   PRESS REPORT AS TO SHORTAGE OF SUPPLY
Subtopic:   FISHERY REGULATIONS
Full View Permalink