Mr. H. A. FORTIER (Labelle):
I have the honour, Mr. Speaker, to lay on the table of the House a petition from the council of the township of Marchand, praying for an act to provide for old age pensions.
Hon. A. B. COPP (Secretary of State) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 47, to repeal The War Charities Act, 1917. He said: The War Charities Act was passed in 1917 entirely as a war measure. It provided that all associations collecting moneys for works of charity during the war should be licensed, and that a register should be kept in connection with these organizations; it was also provided that returns should be made to the Department of the Secretary of State every six months in regard to the work done, showing what moneys had been collected and what disposition had been made of them. During the war 846 of such associations were licensed, and, of these, since the close of the war 671 have been dropped from the register, being no longer in existence. There are 143 associations now under license as chapters of the Imperial Order of the Daughters of the Empire, and these are practically all the organizations at present under the licensing system. It has been deemed advisable to repeal the act, as it is felt that the system of licensing such associations is no longer necessary and is only a burden on the women working in these organizations. The officials of the department have advised me that there is no longer any necessity for this particular statute. Motion agreed to apid bill read the first time.
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):
Is
the government aware of the establishment recently of a national committee for the relief of the Nova Scotia miners? If so, will the government take into consideration the possibility of extending financial assistance to that organization?
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):
I am sure that every
hon. member will be pleased to know that a national organization has been formed for the purpose mentioned, and will hope that it may be successful in its efforts. I do not see, however, that the formation of such an organization should be expected to change in any particular the attitude which the government has taken in this matter, from the outset.
The House resumed from Monday, April 27, consideration of the motion of Hon. J. A. Robb (Acting Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the House to go into committee of Ways and Means, and the proposed amendment thereto of Sir Henry Drayton.
Mr. ROBERT MILNE (Neepawa):
Mr. Speaker, in rising to make a few remarks in this debate I cannot help referring to the changed attitude in certain sections of this House during the last two or three sessions. If the pictures that have been painted of the calamity that has overtaken Canada and the glowing scenes that have been depicted of conditions prevailing in the United States and France are to be taken as a test of patriotism, then I think the Progressives are entirely exonerated from reproach for any unpatriotic speeches that have been made here at any time. Our Conservative friends have certainly painted a very gloomy picture of existing conditions in the Dominion; on the other hand, the government and its supporters have endeavoured to convince us that members of the official opposition were entirely wrong and that everything was running along satisfactorily. Now, I do not like to believe that conditions are as bad as they are pictured by our Conservative friends, and at the same time I am sorry that I cannot believe they are as rosy and as satisfactory as pictured by the government and its supporters. Knowing that agriculture is the basic industry of the Dominion I feel perfectly
The Budget-Mr. Milne
satisfied that other industries cannot be more prosperous than this basic industry. I know the conditions of our agricultural sections, and therefore I am forced to the conclusion that things are not as good as we would like to see them. Undoubtedly many of our citizens are leaving their country for the United States, and our tax burdens are too heavy; but our main trouble is that we cannot sell our commodities at a profit.
The causes for these unsatisfactory conditions are not all to be laid at the feet of the present government. No doubt world conditions have had a considerable influence in causing the depression which we are now experiencing. On the other hand, it must not be forgotten that in the past there has been a good deal of blind optimism in running our national affairs, and in addition for the last thirty or forty years there has been considerable unsound financing. By blind optimism I mean that our railways were constructed fifty years ahead of our requirements, and many of our public buildings have been erected in an extravagant manner and. equally far ahead of our needs. These huge expenditures that were never warranted are to-day imposing an extremely heavy burden on our citizens, a burden which will have to be borne for generations to come. We have heard a good deal about our huge national debt of 82,400,000,000. This debt has increased since 1911 by five hundred per cent. A good deal of the increase has been attributed to our war expenditure and the cost of demobilization. If we deduct the moneys paid out on this account, we find that we still have an increase since 1911 of over 135 per cent. The expenses of government have increased from $122,681,000 in 1911 to $344,221,000 in 1923, or about 173 per cent. While this mountain of debt has been piling up what provision have we been making to meet its payment? It is true our population has increased from 7,206,643 in 1911 to 9,082,000 odd in 1924, or about 25 per cent. Since 1867 our national debt has been reduced only nine times, the reductions totalling less than $80,000,000. There has been no attempt to establish a sinking fund to meet maturing bonds and to take care of depreciation, or anything of that nature. We have followed since confederation the insane policy of borrowing money to pay the interest on our debt. We know very well that if a business concern adopted such an unsound practice it would be only a very short time before it would be bankrupt.
While this insane financial policy has been pursued, what has been happening to our natural resources? Our farms have become depleted of their fertility; we have plant diseases, insect pests, weeds and many other things established in our soil; and these are going to increase our cost of production tremendously. W'hat is happening to our forests? Large areas have been wiped out entirely. I refer especially to the forest areas of the western provinces. The country has suffered the loss in order that certain influential individuals might become immensely wealthy. What has this depletion brought in its train? I could show hon. members areas in the western provinces through which flowed streams that had their source in the forests and watered our prairies for miles and miles. To-day those streams run only for a veiy short time in the spring, thereby depriving many districts of a regular water supply.
Mr. ARTHURS:
The hon. gentleman, I
am sure, is making some very interesting remarks, but we in this end of the House have not been able to hear him.
Mr. SPEAKER:
I would direct the attention of hon. members to the fact that there is so much private conversation going on in the Chamber that I myself can hardly hear what the hon. member is saying.
Mr. MILNE:
I will try to make hon. gentlemen hear, but I fear it is impossible to drown the conversations that are being carried on.
I was speaking about, the streams having dried out due to the forest being cleared away in some of our prairie sections. Besides, we are informed-and we believe it to be true-that the presence of forests has an imiportant effect upon the extent of our rainfall1. Through the wiping away of our forest areas in the prairie sections our rainfall has decreased, and that is one of the things the prairie provinces need in the very worst way.
What has been happening in our mines? We are informed that certain coal mines have been drawn on to such an extent that it is necessary to go several miles under the sea to secure the coal, thereby increasing the cost of getting it to the head of the mine. I may say just here that I am decidedly opposed to the increased duty on coal. I am not an admirer of the dole system, but I would rather dole out assistance to the miners if I know it is going right to them than to dole it out to a corporation or company which has absolute control of the whole situation, there
The Budget-Mr. Milne
being no assurance that the workmen of our country will reap the benefit of the protection afforded.
Mr. LOGAN:
Is the hon. member aware
that there are a large number of independent coal companies operating in this country?
Mr. MILNE:
Yes, I believe there are, but what I say to one I say to all. What has been happening to the fisheries? A good many of our lakes throughout the Dominion are fished out. We used to hear of tremendous catches of salmon in the British Columbia streams, but to-day, I understand, many of the canneries that formerly operated there have had to shut down owing to the want of fish. It is essential that large sums of money be spent in the very near future to replenish our supply of fish in order to keep this industry going.
Mr. LOGAN:
Why keep the fishery industry going if you are not willing to keep the coal industry going? The coal companies to which I refer have been working from one to three days a week for the last year and a half. Is the fishing industry to receive assistance and the coal industry to receive none?
Mr. MILNE:
That is a very pertinent
question, I suppose, especially when a man is interested in coal mines. You cannot make coal; but no departure from policy is involved in the suggestion that the streams and lakes of our country be replenished with fish, the policy is regarded as a sound one and there is no question in my mind that it will have to be carried on to a greater extent than it has been in the past.
In any reference I make to our resources being depleted, I do not mean to intimate that they are practically exhausted or anything like nearly wiped out. We still have unlimited natural resources, but the resources that were easily accessible, Mr. Speaker, are practically gone, and the production costs of all these basic industries have been greatly increased. The sorry part of it is that instead of making some reservation while these easily accessible resources were being exploited, nothing was done in that direction and our liabilities were increasing all the time while the resources were being depleted.
It seems to me we have been wallowing around in financial difficulties long enough and that we should turn our faces the other way and head for some solid ground. All the conditions I speak of have been brought about while we have been following the old policy of protection. There has been very little difference between the tariff policies in
161i
force in this country as far back as I have been able to get information. From 1915, ut to the last few years the highest average dutj on our total import was 26.1 per cent; to-daj it is about 22.3 per cent. As a matter of fac* a few years ago it was down as low as 20.5; in the last two or three years there seems to have been a slight increase. But I do not consider that these slight fluctuations are due to any change in policy; the policy, so far as we can ascertain, has been practically the same. When one party was in office the other was advocating lower duties, but when those in opposition got into power the other party promptly started off on the same tack. My observation has convinced me that both the Liberals and the Conservatives are protectionist parties. Some try to get under the flag of low tariff, but they have a hard time to establish themselves there and an even harder time to convince the people that they are sincere.
Let me deal for a few moments with agriculture and agricultural conditions-and I do so because I have been familiar with those conditions all my life. In this respect I may depart from the general method that is followed in the east, because from what I can gather it would seem that most people in this part of the country like to talk about agricultural conditions when they know very little about them. Agriculture is one of the most important industries of our country. It is our basic industry-and you do not have to go very far these days before you get conclusive proof of that. During the Easter recess I was visiting around the country a little, and every business man I spoke to about business conditions would say, "Oh, if the west gets a good crop this year, things will foe all right; we shall be on the royal road to success." I have heard that, I would not like to say how many tames, but at least a dozen times during the last six months. That convinces me more than ever that agriculture really is of vital importance to the country. Our friends in the government do not seem to lay much stress on agriculture this year, that is, if we are to assume that their sympathy is indicated by the proposals in the budget, but some of the officials in the government service apparently realize its importance. I will read an extract from Seasonable Hints, No. 31, March, 1925:
Canada's prosperity depends largely on agriculture, and in turn agricultural prosperity depends on our ability to satisfy local markets and produce a large surplus of superior quality for export. Unless this surplus is produced at a cost per unit sufficiently low to compete with other exporting countries, then our export trade, in fact our agricultural prospe-:*v. is curtailed if not doomed.
252*
The Budget-Mr. Milne
I say that when our agriculture is doomed there is not .much hope for Canada's prosperity.
Agriculture leads in our products exported. The total exports of agricultural products, including raw, partly manufactured, and manufactured, amount to $527,807,628; products of forest origin, $273,603,598; products of mineral origin, $170,686,286; of marine origin, $30,988,812. I think that is a sufficient reason why agriculture should receive consideration, and I propose to deal with it for a little while.
What are the farmers of Canada doing? The value of their total field crops has increased from $899,834,000 odd in 1923 to $995,234,000 odd in 1924. Our 'butter production has increased from approximately
126.834.000 pounds in 1923, to 182,287,000 pounds in 1924. There has been a slight decrease in the amount of cheese produced. Then as to the total value of our live stock -and I might say that I did1 not try to get the numbers, because to give the numbers in each, particular class of live stock would have meant giving a lengthy list of figures -the total value of our live stock in 1923 amounted to $613,260,000, and in 1924 to $641,144,000. That shows an increase in the value of our live stock, and at the same time the price per animal was somewhat less than in 1923. Our poultry also shows a substantial increase.
I want to be pardoned for referring to Manitoba specifically, but I do this for the reason that the western provinces are continually-being accused of "wheat mining"; that is the term that is invariably used, especially in eastern Canada. I will give you figures to give you an idea of what Manitoba produces. In 1924 her total field crops were valued at approximately $136,000,000. Her total wheat crop was valued at $55,296,000. That shows the proportion of the wheat crop to the total field crop. Other field crops that were produced in Manitoba were fodder corn to the amount of $2,070,000; potatoes, $2,063,000; hay and clover, $5,320,000; turnips and mangels, $540,620; alfalfa, $208,000. Other cereals produced were: oats, approximately $33,250,000; barley, $28,500,000; rye, $6,000,000; flax, $6,500,000.
Manitoba has increased her number of cattle holdings from 691,000 odd in 1923 to
710.000 odd in 1924; sheep have increased from 93,000 to 95,000; swine from 291,000 to 425,000; poultry from 3,289,000 to 3.693,000 odd. Her butter production has increased from 10,730,000 to 12,632,000 pounds; her cheese from 231,000 pounds to 500,000 pounds;
her honey production from 66,047 pounds in 1920 to 1,302,000 pounds in 1924.
Mr. PUTNAM:
What does her grain aggregate?