January 21, 1926

CON

Robert Rogers

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

We are not responsible for *that. If we are to bring back to normal conditions the people of this country we must have stability, and we must have a common sense government who will stand behind stability in the carrying on of the public services of Canada. We must restore confidence and security in all parts of the Dominion. And let me say that there is no class of people in Canada to whom confidence and security will *mean more than to the farming classes of western Canada. Agriculture in its widest and broadest sense is Canada's great field for enterprise and for development.

Now, Sir, I want to say something with regard to the policy of rural credits, as announced in the House a few days ago, but as it is now six o'clock I will defer my remarks until after recess.

At six o'clock the House took recess.

After Recess

The House resumed at eight o'clock.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Robert Rogers

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

When the House took recess at six o'clock I was about to say a few words in respect to rural credits. As far as I know,

there is a desire and a willingness on the part of hon. members on this side of the House to do anything they possibly can to assist the western provinces by way of rural credits. But in all fairness the members of this House should know at all events some of the reasons why it is necessary that we Should be called] upon at this time to assist in the matter of rural credits for the prairie provinces. The difficulty in our western provinces, as I understand it, Mr. Speaker, is largely due to the fact that we have the misfortune in Saskatchewan and in Alberta of having had Liberal governments for many long years. In fact the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan have never yet had an opportunity to know and to understand the real value of Conservative government. The prairie provinces were formed twenty-one years ago, and now that they have become of age I hope that they will exercise better judgment and be more careful in the guardianship of their great resources. I believe they are improving to some extent; but the improvement up to the present is not very marked; otherwise they would not be appealing to this parliament for assistance by way of rural credits. I wish to present a few examples of what I mean when I say that these provinces have suffered a great deal as a result of maladministration.

In 1917, just before the provincial election, the legislature of Alberta hurriedly passed certain legislation. First of all they passed an act entitled The Alberta Co-Operative Credit Act. Then they passed the Alberta Farm Loan Act; then the Live Stock Encouragement Act, and a fourth was the Seed Grain Act. I desire to point out the effect and purpose of the Alberta Co-Operative Act. This legislation provided for the formation of co-operative societies which might borrow money from the banks or any other source. It was intended to supply the needs of the farmers for short term loans. The municipalities within which the societies operate under this act may guarantee such loans up to one-half the subscribed capital, and the province may also give a guarantee up to one-half. The farmers generally have not availed themselves of the provisions of this act. I understand that the total amount borrowed by these societies in the whole province since 1917 amounts to about $935,000. The cost of the administration' of the act was borne entirely by the government of Alberta.

The Alberta Farm Loan Act, which was chapter 10 of the statutes of 1917, was in-

The Address-Mr. Rogers

tended to meet the needs of t'he farmers for long term loans. First of all, as hon. members will observe, they had an act for short term loans. Then, just before the election, they concluded that an act for long term loans might be popular, so they passed this act. It provided for boards which would issue bonds guaranteed by the .province, and1 the proceeds of the sale of those bonds was to be loaned to the farmers. Although passed in 1917 and widely used in that election campaign as an appeal to the farmers, the act was never brought into operation; no board was ever appointed, nor were any steps ever taken to put the act into effect. In 1924 the present government of Alberta repealed this act and introduced another one. This is chapter 4 of the statutes of 1924 and it creates a farm 'oan board which may be authorized by the Lieutenant Governor in Council to issue bonds for the raising of money for farm loan purposes. These funds may be loaned to farmers direct over a period of thirty years or thereabouts. I understand that (he farm loan board had been appointed by the present government but the bonds have not yet been issued. In respect to the Live Stock Encouragement Act, popularly known as Duncan Marshall's Cow Bill-hon,. gentlemen are no doubt familiar with the name- the object was to loan money to settlers and homesteaders who were in poor circumstances and who were desirous of buying cows. The settlers formed themselves into groups of five and each man borrowed 1500 dollars, but each of the group was responsible for the total loan of $2,500 to that group, the aggregate loan to be about $1,500,000. No advances have been made since January, 1922, most of the advances having been made at a much earlier date. There is still outstanding unpaid nearly $1,000,000 and it may safely be said that the whole of this amount will be a total loss to the province of Alberta.

Under these conditions, it seems to me that if this House undertakes to pass the rural credits bill now before parliament it must very carefully consider "that legislation in order that it may not be possible for the provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba to undertake by some circuitous route to use the credit they obtain from this parliament to be applied to debts that have arisen out of legislation passed by their own legislature. If we are to take up the question of rural credits in this parliament we want to take it up with the view of assisting the farmers of to-day in those provinces where assistance is necessary.

TMr. Rogers.]

There are many other conditions similar to those I have recounted but I shall confine my remarks to the province of Alberta. I have the record of the legislation passed in the three prairie provinces on matters of this kind, and while I do not want to delay the House with too many quotations I desire to read briefly from a memorandum of statutory encumbrances on land and crops in Alberta. There does not seem to be any complete statement of the taxation imposed on rural lands there but such figures as I have I shall give. In 1923 the following amounts were collected in municipal districts in Alberta:

Muniiciipal taxation $3,000,000

School taxes 2,000,000

Dainage taxes 2,000,000

Provincial taxes 1,500,000

Seed grain relief 500,000

These figures, given in round numbers, come to a total of some $9,000,000 odd, and there is still due to the province over $3,500,000 on these loans.

Under the heading of municipal taxation there are periodically added other charges all down the line. They have a rate of $6, $8 and $10 an acre, and a surtax for indemnity is payable. There are collectable telephone taxes, noxious weed taxes, taxes in connection with the destruction of agricultural pests, drainage taxes and various other forms of taxation. Then there is the co-operative society lien tax, which is rather an onerous one. In 1921 the provision charging growing and future crops was inserted in section 6 and 7, and early in 1924, in the case of the North of Scotland versus Bartawson Credit Society, it was decided that the wording of the act was ineffective to give the lien on crops the priority which was intended. We must bear in mind that various charges under these acts so passed were given priority through the legislature against loans and mortgages on the farms in different parts of the province, and complaint is made in this regard.

In 1924 a portion of the act relating to priority was amended and made retroactive so that the effect was negatived as regards not only future but past transactions. Now when a legislature undertakes to pass such a law it is surely wise on the part of this parliament to exercise some care in arriving at the proper course to follow in the matter of making the grants proposed under this rural credits scheme. Having made these observations, I am satisfied that this parliament will look carefully into the subject and see to it that we shall not lose any of the money of the Canadian people in assisting the local legislatures of those provinces that have passed legislation which is

The Address-Mr. Rogers

unwise and undesirable even in the interests of their own people.

The only real assistance that our prairie provinces ever had was secured through Conservative channels. Even before the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta were formed, the province from which I come passed railway legislation which was put into force, and a short time afterwards made an agreement with the Canadian Pacific Railway for a fixed and definite rate. The province of Manitoba exacted in that contract an arrangement with the Canadian Pacific that that rate should extend to every city and town in Saskatchewan and Alberta, and the reduction that we so exacted amounted on wheat to two cents per 100 pounds from every point in Saskatchewan. That arrangement lasted from October 7, 1903 to 1918. In confirmation of my statement may I be permitted to quote a portion of the report made foy Hon. A. K. Maclean as chairman of a committee of this House which considered the subject of transportation costs in western Canada:

In respect to this very -important matter, in 1899, I think i-t was, the effect of this agreement was reflected in the grain and flour rates which came into effect in the autumn of that year; I think if was in the autumn of 1899 that the ful'l effect of the Crowsmest agreement was seen.

Now I would direct the attention of the House particularly to what follows:

In 1903, however, an agreement was made between the government of Manitoba and the Canadian Northern railway, or what afterwards became the Canadian Northern railway, providing for a control of freight rates within the province of Manitoba. This had its effect upon freight rates upon grain throughout the whole of the prairie country. In 1903 the grain rate in the west was considerably below the Crowsnest rate and that rate, that is the lower rate, prevailed until March, 1918.

Will my friends from Saskatchewan and Alberta kindly note that through this legislation, passed in the legislature of which I was b, member they reaped that benefit for the iong period between 1903 and 1918? And it was a very handsome benefit, for it represented ten million dollars a year to the people of those provinces. I should like my friends to refer me to any legislation passed by a Liberal government that ever gave such substantia! advantages to the people of the west.

The Speech from the Throne promises completion of the Hudson Bay railway. Well, for many long years the people of western Canada have been veiy anxious to secure completion of this line. ' The Hudson Bay railway was promised by both parties. The Liberals when in power were always promising to undertake its construction, and before the election in 1911 they did a little work on a bridge at Le 14011-21

Pas. The then Minister of Railways was presented with a shovel and turned the first sod.

Mr. (MEIGHEN: And the last.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Robert Rogers

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

Yes. The Conservative

party was pledged to the construction of that railway, and when we came into power in 1911 we proceeded in due course to redeem that pledge. To-day every mile of that railway is graded, all the bridges have been built, and there remain only about ninety miles of steel to be laid. I understand from the department that there is on hand sufficient steel to lay an additional twenty miles of track. So all that is necessary is to lay the balance of seventy odd miles and the Hudson Bay railway will be completed to Port Nelson. That is the proposal before parliament. I would lemind hon. members from eastern Canada that the railway has been well and economically built, and a large sum of money being already tied up in the undertaking, in our judgment we have a right to ask from this parliament for such further assistance as will be necessary to complete the road. I believe thait the additional expenditure is warranted even if the Hudson Bay railway served no other purpose than that of supplying the local needs of the country through which it passes; but undoubtedly -the development of _ the lumber and fishing industries in that territory will provide an enormous volume of traffic. And there is a further reason for completing *the undertaking. The railway for some distance runs alongside the Nelson river. In that river we have the greatest potential power development to be found anywhere in the Dominion. The prairie .provinces have to look to the Nelson river for their hydro-electric requirements. This development will be impossible without those transportation facilities which the completion and operation of the Hudson Bay railway will provide. For these reasons, Sir, I hope and trust that the House will give this proposal fair and just consideration, and if hon. members approach it in -that spirit I am confident that they will never have any reason to regret their action in agreeing to an expenditure that will mean so much for the development and prosperity not only of the country to be served by the Hudson Bay railway but of the prairie provinces generally.

Transfer to the province of Alberta ot its natural resources is also referred to in the Speech from the Throne. I do not think there will be much difficulty about this. Before 1911 the Conservative party was pledged, to turn over to the prairie

The Address-Mr. Rogers

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

William Richard Motherwell (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. MOTHERWELL:

May I ask what

paper my hon. friend is reading from?

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Robert Rogers

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

That is from the Winnipeg Tribune.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

William Richard Motherwell (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. MOTHERWELL:

There is a good

deal of that which is correct and there is a good deal which is incorrect.

The Address-Mr. Rogers

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Henry Herbert Stevens

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. STEVENS:

Sounds too natural, that.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Robert Rogers

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

So much for the relations

between the Liberal and Progressive parties in the House of Commons.

Mr. Speaker, for years the Liberal party have been advancing remedies to help the farmers of western Canada. I know western Canada, I know the conditions there, and I say that if we will only give the farmer of western Canada a market for that which his indefatigable energy produces, he will neither ,ask nor accept remedies born of political fright such as are presented in the Address we are now considering. The Conservative party today stand where they have ever stood. They stand to-day, as ever, for national development, for national unity between the family of provinces making up our Dominion, and above all they stand for national economy in the administration of the business affairs of this country. Call these things what you like; are they not the three fundamentals of our country's requirements to-day? Who will say that we do not need national unity, after the evidence presented this afternoon by the hon. member for Kent, N.B. (|Mr. Doucet)? Surely, Mr. Speaker, the time 'has come to inaugurate a campaign for national unity among all the provinces. There was a time in the history of our country when we had the spirit of national unity. We had it in days that are past and gone. But come with me, if you will, to my old native province of Quebec, to the capital city of that province, and I will show you there a monument erected to the memory of two great generals, Wolfe and Montcalm. Both of them fought for their respective kings, both died at the same time, but they sealed with their blood a union between the English-speaking and the Frenchspeaking races of our country. That union has continued and never was disturbed until the recent events that have taken place in my old native province of Quebec, events for which I am sure the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) is now indeed heartily sorry.

For six months, Mr. Speaker, we have had practically no government in Canada. What else but misfortune and disaster could have been expected when, during the past six months, this country has been run by the civil service? I say six months because Mr. King was engaged prior to and during his campaign for that length of time, in visiting every city and town almost in Canada, endeavouring to add additional ministers to his cobweb cabinet. But of all the serio-comic incidents of the Mackenzie King campaign the most ludicrous was the elevation of Vincent Massey to his cobweb cabinet. A year pre-14011-211

viously the lamentations of Vincent Massey resounded through the lobbies of this House of Commons. His jeremiad would have drawn tears from the eyes of the hon. member for Melville (Mr. Motherwell), and from the Minister of Public Works (Mr. King). But suddenly a change came over the spirit of his dreams, and I am told that a couple of Mr. JCing^s bodyguards, after listening to Mr. Massey's lamentations, appealed to Mr. King to help the stricken one. He was a rich young man, a liberal spender, and they thought it might be disastrous to let him escape into .the Tory camp. I am told that Mr. Massey is rather insinuating and persuading when he is not playing the part of Jeremiah, and that he was able to lead the right hon. gentleman who leads this government into a cul-de-sac and kept him there until he had agreed to let the Massey-Harris Company import all their paints, parts and accessories from the United States free of duty. This accomplished, Mr. Vincent Massey's wails and groans were no longer heard in the corridors of the House of Commons. But, Mr. Speaker, one hundred or more different workshops and foundries in Canada which formerly supplied the Massey-Harris Company with their parts and accessories were put out of business, and some thousands of Canadians left without employment. That is what Mr. Mackenzie King calls, in the Speech from the Throne, " the elimination of any element of uncertainty in respect to tariff changes." The only possible result that could follow such an arrangement was that the Massey-Harris Company's profits would be swollen by huge sums of money, but that no reduction would be made in the price of their implements to the farmers of western .Canada.

I do not wish to detain the House longer. In closing, I just wish to appeal to hon. gentlemen opposite to consider well the block that they constitute in the progress of our country. I appeal to them with all sincerity and in all earnestness to consult together and endeavour to give, for once in their lives, some assistance in the upbuilding and development .and progress of their own country. I appeal to my hon. friend the Minister of Justice. I regard him as a fair-minded man, and I hope, indeed, I trust and believe, that he will at least be fair enough to consider well the manner in which the public business of this country has been obstructed for such a long period1 of time as the result of inefficiency, and as the result of the government being unable to function and carry on the business of our common country. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Address-Mr. McMillan

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Thomas McMillan

Liberal

Mr. THOMAS McMILLAN (South Huron):

Mr. Speaker, may I also, in opening congratulate you on your re-election to the high position you occupied in the last parliament? I can assure you that I cherish very pleasant memories of our mettings together in years gone by. I remember your cordial greeting and your hearty handshake when we used to meet and sit in council with our great 'leader of former days and listen to his words of wisdom and advice as to our duties and responsibilities as Canadian citizens. Sir, words fail to express my pleasure that during this parliament you are again to fill with dignity and grace the office of the speakership, with myself as a humble member.

As a new member, and one who is quite inexperienced in parliamentary life, may I crave the indulgence of the House with respect to whatever I shall have to say to-night? In studying the returns of the recent general election, in which none of the recognized political parties had a clear majority in the House, and in view of the fact that the issue of protection was the leading issue before the country, I feel that the right hon. Prime Minister took high and safe ground in his decision to carry on, summon parliament at the earliest possible day, and in the meantime to refrain from making any appointments to office or committing the government to any course of action. The sane judgment of any man should teach him that under the circumstances, under our system of responsible government, the sensible course was to remain in office and carry on until the representatives of the people should meet and register their decision. That decision has already been recorded, and as one who fairly understands the viewpoint of our western people, and as well the agricultural interests of Canada, I can testify that the decision of our western friends has not been lightly taken. No class of representatives could have regarded their responsibilities more clearly. None could have given the matter more constant or more careful consideration; none could have realized more fully the consequences of their action, and I commend their decision. I do not believe the country wants another election immediately if it is possible for the business of government to be carried on. If ever there was a time when it is the first duty of the representatives of the people to get down to business and to put country before party, to act regardless of political leaning, that time is now. Every student of Canadian conditions knows that Canada, with its wealth of natural resources and the unfolding * of those resources going on apace, stands at the threshold of a wonderful development; and

to the people's representatives in this House for the time being the torch has been thrown to guide that development aright.

Sir, much has been said regarding the record of this government, and after reading the public utterances of the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) throughout the country I was really amused at the gentle, dove-like amendment to the Address which he proposed the other night. It reminded me of my boyhood days when our teacher used to train us in the art of writing motions. He would proceed in this wise: One, write a

motion which might seem much but mean little; and two, write a motion which might seem little but mean much. The amendment of my right hon. friend belongs to the latter class, and it can only be interpreted in the light of his many utterances throughout the length and breadth of this country.

In view of this contention we might well ask what is the present national situation under a Liberal government. The Liberal government, under a policy of tariff primarily for revenue purposes but still carrying too much protection; facing uncontrollable expenditures off from two hundred to three hundred million dollars per annum; facing also a most serious handicap in the control and management of the civil service, and an annual loss of almost eighteen millions in revenue due to the issue of non-taxable bonds by previous governments, has been able in four years to reduce the annual expenditure by $114,000,000. It lightened the tax burden of the people by nearly $75,000,000 per annum below that of 1921, and at the same time, without taking the National Hallways into account, it has been able to reduce the national debt, as at the end of the last financial year, by some $3,000,000. Considering the most difficult financial situation which this government had to face on assuming office-I am not going into it, because every student of the political life of this country knows it-this is a record of which any government might be proud.

I have mentioned the Canadian National Railways. Much has been said in the House regarding this subject, and while it is our duty to discuss the condition of the National Railways, yet, Sir, I believe it is a mistake in parliamentary discussion to mix up the business of the National Railways with the general public business of the country. If this parliament will simply let the present management of the National Railways alone, stick to its own special work and give to this the world's greatest experiment in public ownership a fair chance to make good, as parlia-

The Address-Mr. McMillan

ment agreed to do, the management under Sir .Henry Thornton will no douibt work out its own salvation.

The figures I have given show that the tax burdens of the people are already becoming lighter. Under this government times are improving. I thought that we had heard the last in this House of the wail of distress respecting the condition of the country, but it has started again to-day. I say conditions are improving. The Canadian dollar has risen in value. It is now worth almost as much as, if not more than, its face value in any other country in the world. It was not always so. In 1921, when the Meighen government was in power, the Canadian dollar was only worth from 85 to 87 cents on the New York exchange. But times have changed and the dollar is at par to-day. Why is that so? Because in the aggregate the Canadian people are prospering. They are selling more goods than they are buying, and , thus financially they are becoming better off. Their credit is good. Canada's national credit is good, because the Canadian people are selling or exporting more goods than they are buying, and they are also encouraging international trade. It was not always so. In 1921, under the former government, we were importing or buying more goods than we were selling, and our unfavourable trade balance amounted to over $29,000,000. Our trade records are growing and expanding in the right direction. While for the financial year 1921-1922 our aggregate foreign trade amounted to some $1,501,000,000, yet for the financial year ending March 31, 1925, it had grown to over $1,878,000,000, with a favourable trade balance of over $284,000,000. And if you take the figures for twelve months ending October 31, 1925, you will find it has grown to over $2,063,000,000, with a favourable trade balance of over $331,000,000. This phenomenal trade record shows that this country is prospering.

Then again turn to the Canadian stock market, which is regarded (by business men as a reliable business barometer. When trade prospects are good and underlying conditions are sound the market price of leading bank and industrial stocks goes up. I have before me the quotations for a number of well-known Canadian companies showing the prices of their stocks in the open market as of September 15, 1921, and September 15, 1925. As it would be unintelligible, Mr. Speaker, if I were simply to go over all these quotations, I ask that this table be inserted in Hansard in order that every member may have the privilege of studying and verifying the figures

-which go to show that our business and industrial life is in a healthy condition. This table is as follows:

September September

15, 1921 15, 1925

Bank of Montreal 5205 00 $259 00Royal Bank of Canada 196 00 238 00Bank of Commerce 184 00 213 00Canada Cement Company 54 00 106 00National Trust Company 199 00 225 00Toronto General Trust Corpora- tion 198 00 215 00Consolidated Mining & Smelting Company 15 00 117 75Hollinger Consolidated Gold Mines 7 35 14 95International Nickel Company. 13 75 34 50Dominion Textile Company.. .. 137 25 265 50Penmans Limited 95 00 159 00Canadian Cottons Limited.. .. 72 00 119 00Canada Salt Company 22 00 152 00Dominion Camners 27 00 134 00Dominion Glass Company 55 00 107 00Steel Company of Canada.. .. 55 00 91 00Spanish River Pulp & Paper Company 54 00 100 00Sherwin Williams Company.. .. 90 00 125 00

I could stand here for hours and give the House figures to show that the industrial life of this country is prosperous, but we have now arrived at the time when, as our former great leader who has now passed used to say, we do not need to quote figures to show that this country is prosperous. Canada is a good country in which to live. Canadian savings per head of its population rank among the highest in the world, and our wealth is I believe mpre widely diffused among the people than it is in any other country in the world. Consider the life insurance carried in Canada-that also is a good business barometer. There was held by Canadians in Canadian life insurance companies in 1924, insurance to the amount of $3,764,000,000, an increase of $829,000,000 over that of 1921. In 1924 we paid over $130,000,000 in annual life insurancg premiums, an increase of over $31,000,000 as compared with 1921. During 1924, it will be interesting to note, life insurance increased by over $500,000,000, and according to the latest returns for the past year, 1925, it increased still further by some $800,000,000. This is indisputable evidence that the people are prospering. And over and above this $130,000,000 of savings in the form of insurance premiums, and large amounts otherwise invested, we find, in the form of deposits in the chartered banks of Canada, nearly $170,000,000 more than in the twelve months previous. This information all goes to show a favourable trend of business, tremendous expansion in Canada's trade. Now this is not the result of accident; it is a condition that has been aided by means of a well-defined

The Address-Mr. McMillan

Liberal policy which has (1) enforced, so far as it could, the most rigid economy consistent with efficient public service; (2) reduced the tariff and consequently the cost of many of the requirements of home and family; (3) reduced the duties on implements of production required in the development of natural resources; and (4) obtained more favourable marketing conditions abroad. This government realizes that Canada can no longer continue to live to itself and that through the medium of international trade and commerce we have become citizens of the world. And in the course of this Dominion's progress Canadians have been finding markets for tlheir goods in almost every country on the globe.

In connection with the fat cattle trade, it may be interesting to observe that when I sent my own cattle to Glasgow in 1921 it cost me no less than $45 a head in freight rates, and when I landed them in the Glasgow market there were no suitable conditions for taking care of these cattle, and it was necessary to slaughter them within ten days of their arrival. The hon, member for Marquette (Mr. Mullins) rather amused one the other day when he suggested that this government deserved no credit for the removal of the embargo. I was wondering whether he had ever heard the story of the three frogs. Two old Scotchmen were talking outside the hotel when one of them said to the other, "Tell me, Sandy, if you saw three frogs on that log out there and one of them took a notion to jump off, how many would be left?" Sandy of course said there would be two. But he was wrong, according to his friend. "There would be three still", he said, "they only took the notion to jump off". That is the way with our friends opposite; they only took the notion to get the embargo removed and they nursed that idea for thirty years. The only difference is that through the wise diplomacy of the Hon. P. C. Larkin, an appointee of this government, in co-operation with the officers of the Department of Agriculture. the present government not only took the notion to jump off but did actually jump off and do the trick.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Henry Alfred Mullins

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MULLINS:

Had . not the embargo

been removed before the Hon. Mr. Larkin went to London?

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB
CON

Henry Alfred Mullins

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MULLINS:

You are misinformed.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Thomas McMillan

Liberal

Mr. McMILLAN:

Not at all; I think I know as much about the embargo and just as much about shipping cattle to the Old Country as does my hon. friend. I learned the business

as a boy and I have followed the trend of the British markets for over twenty years. I ought therefore to know something about the subject. Now notwithstanding the fact that the freight rate on cattle has been reduced from $45 to $20 a head, considering that in years gone by we did have a rate as low as $7.50, it must be admitted that the present rate is still far too high. My hon. friends across the way amuse me immensely. You know, a great deal depends upon whether people know just when to jump off the log. Right after the election the leader of the opposition and a good many of his friends jumped off and thought that they could persuade the' members of the government to do likewise. But the government said, "We were off the dog and we have got back on again and this is no time to repeat the performance. If there is any more jumping-off to be done it is the representatives of the people in this parliament duly constituted who will instruct us whether to jump off or not." When I look around this House and see my Progressive friends-

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. MEMBER:

Brothers.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Thomas McMillan

Liberal

Mr. McMILLAN:

Yes, and I am proud to call them brothers; they are brother representatives of the agricultural interests of the west. When I see these gentlemen and hon. members in other parts of the House, who represent not only the agricultural life of Canada but other interests as well, all supporting the government, I do not think that members on this side need pay very much attention to the cries of hon. gentlemen of the opposition to jump off the log. My hon. friends on the government benches may rest, I think, in peace.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. MEMBER:

That would bury

them.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Thomas McMillan

Liberal

Mr. McMILLAN:

I know that if the representatives from the city of Toronto and neighbourhood could bury them they would have been buried long ago; but Toronto does not represent the whole province of Ontario.

Mr. McQUARRlE: What about British

Columbia?

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Thomas McMillan

Liberal

Mr. McMILLAN:

What do you want to

know' about British Columbia. This government realizes that in order to find markets and encourage trade with the people of other nations, that trade must be reciprocal. We must follow sound economics. If we are going to encourage trade with other nations we must be ready to accept their trade in return.

I heard some of our hon. friends opposite tell us the other day that all these treaties and

The Address-Mr. McMillan

trade arrangements had been a nuisance, yet, Sir, I believe that not only are they a benefit to-day but they will continue to be a benefit to the people of the countries concerned in years to come. Now, my hon. friend wants to know about British Columbia, and no doubt he is referring to the Australian treaty.

I have the facts regarding that treaty and the importation of butter that my hon. friends opposite have been talking about. The only place where they could get any records was in the newspapers-and newspapers will never refuse ink. I have the returns here from the Bureau of Statistics. For the three months up to the end of November not one pound of butter came from Australia.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

John Arthur Clark

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CLARK:

When did the Australian

treaty come into force?

Mr. McMillan : On October 1. I understand. From New Zealand we imported 38,700 pounds of butter.

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The hon. gentlemen must be misinformed; four million pounds came in last week.

Mr. McMlLLAN: I am saying as far as

our records go, and they are up to the end of November. But even if some butter is coming in and is selling at a lower price, who is it going to benefit?

Topic:   GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
Subtopic:   ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink

January 21, 1926