Mr. YOUNG:
Would the minister tell us where in subsection (a) he finds authority for saying that the value for duty would be $4.86j? R states here that the value for duty is the value they fix.
Mr. RYCKMAN:
That was in the order
in council, passed September 29, 1931, P.C. 2415.
Mr. YOUNG:
What does it say?
Mr. BENNETT:
Yes, it is.
Customs Tariff Amendment
Mr. RYCKMAN:
It says:
By order in council (P.C. 2415) dated 29th September, 1931, it is ordered that in computing the value for duty of goods imported into Canada from Great Britain, the rate of exchange shall be fixed at $4,861} to pound sterling being the par value thereof.
Mr. YOUNG:
The section reads:
Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, the governor in council may, from time to time and as occasion requires, order and direct, subject to such exceptions as may be made, what shall be the rate of exchange fixed for any currency in computing the value for duty of goods imported into Canada from any place or country the currency of which is depreciated, and in case a sum in Canadian currency less than the invoice value of the goods in the currency of the place or country of export, computed at the rate of exchange so ordered, be paid for in goods, the actual selling price of the goods to the importer shall be regarded as less than the fair market value of the goods when sold for home consumption, and the provisions of this section shall apply.
Mr. RYCKMAN:
This legalizes that, if
there ever was any doubt as to its legality.
Mr. YOUNG:
When the minister fixes the pound at $4.25-that is the power given him in the first fifteen lines of this section, is it not?
Mr. RYCKMAN:
I would like to say that the minister does not fix the value, it is done by the governor in council.
Mr. YOUNG:
Well when that is done,
when the value of the pound is fixed at $4.25, and then when they fix the average current value, the difference between those two shall be the dumping duty. Is not that the understanding? "And the first value fixed shall be the basis on which the value for duty is computed."
Mr. BENNETT:
Mr. YOUNG:
Mr. BENNETT:
Mr. YOUNG:
But you have changed that.
Mr. BENNETT:
Mr. EULER:
Mr. EULER:
Mr. BENNETT:
That is what was expected, and that was why $4.40 was agreed upon by us all as being a fair price for the pound. It was expected that commodity values would rise about ten per cent; therefore, deducting ten per cent from $4.86 would give you some idea of what the value of the pound might be. As a matter of fact that was not exactly what happened. Perhaps the hon. member for North Waterloo has been reading the British trade journals. Nothing has been more surprising than the fact that instead of commodity prices rising with the depreciated currency, commodity prices actually decreased with respect to many basic commodities. There has been some increase during the last two weeks, but prior to that there was a steady decrease.
Mr. EULER:
I have not checked it up,
but in one of the financial papers, I think the Financial Post of Toronto, the statement was made that commodity prices did increase to such an extent that the imposition of the dumping duty on the basis of $4.40 was entirely unnecessary, because the rise in commodity prices was sufficient to offset that depreciation. I have not checked it up, as I say, but certainly that statement is made by interested importers in this country.
Mr. YOUNG: