Mr. STIRLING:

I assure the right hon.

gentleman I am not dealing with insinuations. What I desire to direct attention to is the fact that Hansard of May 1, 1930, the day on which the budget was brought down, does not, contain printed in its pages the budget as brought down.

Mr. STEVENS:

Hear, hear; and it ought to.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I hope my hon. friend will make some charge that can be investigated. He has the machinery of government in his hands; let him do it.

Air. STEVENS:

It is not a question of a charge; it is a question of the accuracy of the record.

Mr. STIRLING:

The point I am endeavouring to make, Mr. Speaker, is that those features which were introduced in the budget unquestionably icontained the principle of protection. I think that is more evident if one reads the next few words from the speech of the minister, remembering that the right hon. gentleman has told the house that the Liberal party never advocated protection. The former Minister of Finance said:

After careful study of the situation from all angles, we have decided to apply to fruits and vegetables a combination of specific and ad valorem duties: this combination will, it is believed, meet the urgent need of the growers during those periods when they suffer from

424 COMMONS

Imperial Conference-Trade Agreements

.acute instability of prices and, at the same time, guarantee to consumers, at all seasons of the year, supplies of these products at reasonable prices.

The right hon. gentleman said:

When it has advocated a tariif it has been a tariff for revenue-

Is that a tariff for revenue?

-protection being only incidental.

Was that incidental?

The Liberal party has never advocated protection.

Hon. members who were in the house at the time will readily recall the difficulty in which the former Minister of Finance found himself when a certain seotion of his supporters found themselves unable to support that budget. Hon. gentlemen will recall also the very easy expedient which he adopted in order to get out of his difficulty, how his recalcitrant followers went into a room with representatives of the vegetable and fruit growers and were asked by the minister to hatch out a compromise which he would insert in his budget. Having done that, the budget was brought down containing these features of protection, and his recalcitrant supporters found themselves in the difficult position of either accepting a pretty considerable dose of protection or voting against the budget. Consistency may be a jewel, Mr. Speaker, but certainly it does not sparlde conspicuously on the- hand of the right hon. gentleman.

During tire earlier part of the fight which the fruit growers waged, though they received no assistance from the Canadian government a ray of hope did appear. The government of the United Kingdom decided to bring forward for the approval of the parliament at Westminster a series of duties on certain imports, from which dominion products should be exempt. If my memory serves me aright there were ten or twelve of those items, and the eighth one referred to apples. It was suggested that there should be a duty and a preference of five shilling per hundredweight of 112 pounds on apples entering the United Kingdom. When parliament proceeded to debate the resolution the government, finding itself in rather deep water, decided not to proceed beyond the first few items, and for that time at least no more was heard of that preference, which would have been of such great assistance to the fruit growers of the dominions. Hon. members can realize, then, with what satisfaction they greeted the news that under the treaty which this government has succeeded in arranging the United Kingdom has again agreed to a duty of 4s. 6d.

per hundredweight, our produce being exempt. When the fruit growers of Canada realize that they are receiving assistance of this description, as they scan the other provisions of the treaty it will make them the more ready to accept this agreement as one which in ali probability will be of assistance to other industries. They know full well that if those other industries prosper there is likely to lie a larger market for their own products.

Having reached this stage in my remarks. Mr. Speaker, I would be very grateful if you would call it eleven o'clock, and I move the adjournment of the debate.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned

On motion of Mr. Stevens the house adjourned at 10.55 p.m.

Friday, October 21, 1932