Mr. EDWARDS (Frontenac):
How do they know that some of the American wheat shipped by way of Montreal is not credited to Canada instead of to France? The whole point is this: the government have made some very foolish trade arrangements; in fact, they have never yet made a wise one, and they are endeavouring now by repudiation of their own records to bolster up these treaties and to make them appear better than they are. I would direct the attention of the minister to this fact-and it is a fact-that it is a part of the policy of the United States, and has been for years, to encourage the importation into that country of raw material and to work up that raw material into the finished article, thereby giving employment to their own people. In pursuance of that policy over half of the imports of the United States are in raw form and 53 per cent of all they export is in jhe manufactured state. Exactly the reverse is true so far as Canada is concerned. According to this record I have here, be it worth what it may, 26.6 of our total imports is now in the raw state as compared with 28.9 in 1922, and we are importing 64.9 per cent of fully manufactured goods as compared with 61.5 per cent in 1922. So that, measured by the standard the minister himself suggests, we are fully manufacturing less goods now than we did some years ago when this government came into power. Consequently there are fewer people engaged in our industrial enterprises and there is less employment. It is a fact that we do export 73 per cent of our wood and wood
products in the raw state, and we import 64 per cent of such products finished outside of Canada. Canada exports 87 per cent of her metals raw and imports 87 per cent of metal products more or less finished.
In order to present the matter as it impresses me I would like to refer to one particular article; I refer to asbestos, which we export in the raw state to the value of $10,000,000. Those exports go to some ten or twelve different countries, mainly to the United States but also to France, Japan, Austria and so on. The value of the raw rock exported to the United States is about $7,000,000; that is finished in the United States, after which it is worth some $36,000,000. There are 49 factories in the United States engaged in working up that raw material, giving employment to 6,129 people and having a payroll of $7,692,000. On this side of the house our contention is that the government have been indifferent and lax in encouraging the manufacture of our raw materials in Canada to the extent to which we believe they could be fully manufactured here.
Now I wish to refer to New Zealand for a moment; the hon. gentleman said, " Oh, we export goods to the value of some $15,000,000 to New Zealand," and he charged that hon. members on this side would scrap those exports because of our imports of butter from that country. That is not stating the case fairly; we are just as anxious to deal with other countries as are hon. gentlemen opposite, but we hope we never will be guilty of the mistakes they have made in their trade arrangements with other countries. May I remind my hon. friend that previous to the negotiation of this trade arrangement with New Zealand our exports to that country were about $1,500,000 more than they 'were last year. With respect to the dairy industry, the hon. gentleman laboured very hard indeed to bring forth an excuse which would be acceptable to his own side of the house and which might be swallowed by the country at large. He said, " Oh, it is true that we export less cheese and butter, but our milk is being made up in other forms." Very well; again we will take the hon. gentleman at his word and I will refer to another publication issued under his authority, which shows that our total milk production in 1927 was less by nearly 500,000,000 pounds than it was in 1926. I will give the figures; approximately 13,000,000,000 pounds of milk in 1927 and about 13,407,000,000 in 1926, and according to the same authority our production of milk in 1928 was even less. If the Prime Minister were here I would like to
The Budget-Mr. Edwards (Frontenac)
ask him if he believes that the New Zealand arrangement has worked an injury to the farmers; if you like we will admit that the Australian treaty has some advantageous points to it, but in the absence of the Prime Minister I would ask the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat if he will not agree with me when I say that the New Zealand arrangement has worked an injury to the farmers of this country. Will he admit that?
Subtopic: THE BUDGET
Sub-subtopic: CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE