Mr. RYCKMAN:

Mr. YOUNG:

The minister has just read

an order in council authorizing him to do certain things which he has been doing for the last two years. Now he says some doubt has arisen as to the legality of those things, and he brings in a bill to legalize what he has been doing.

Mr. RYCKMAN:

No, it is to remove any chance of doubt. In my own mind I think council had ample authority to do what was done.

Mr. YOUNG:

Then the minister wants this bill to contain ample justification for everything that was done, but it does not contain anything that would justify the order in council he read.

Carried.

Mr. YOUNG:

No, it is not carried. I

may say that I have received complaints about this regulation-, and I should like to read a portion of a letter I received from a broker. Referring to another letter he had written he said:

My letter does not start with parliamentary language but expresses the exasperation felt by the vague meaning put into many of these regulations. It is quite possible there is a bidden meaning and I would suggest you ask that tliis resolution be explained.

This gentleman says he cannot find any meaning in the resolution and suggests that there may be a hidden meaning. I have read the resolution carefully, sentence by sentence, and I cannot find any hidden meaning at all; if it is hidden it is well hidden. I even read it backwards, and it makes just as much sense that way. Will the minister explain just what he means by a country whose currency is depreciated? Does he mean depreciated in terms of gold, in terms of American dollars, or in terms of Canadian dollars?

Mr. RYCKMAN:

Currency is depreciated when it is at less than its recognized par throughout the world.

Mr. YOUNG:

In terms of gold?

Mr. RYCKMAN:

There might be a country where they traded jack-knives.

TMr. Ryckman.]

Mr. YOUNG:

That is a sharp answer. I have here the Commercial Intelligence Journal for May 6, showing the value of different currencies. I find that on that date the United States dollar was worth 88 cents in gold and the Canadian dollar was worth 74 cents in gold. Now I want to ask the minister whether United States currency would come under this clause. That currency is depreciated in terms of gold, but it is above par in Canadian money; the United States dollar is worth about SI.13 in Canadian money. Would United States currency be considered depreciated under this clause?

Mr. RYCKMAN:

No.

Mr. YOUNG:

Let us see how this will work out. If this applies to -a country whose currency is depreciated in terms of gold but is still above Canadian currency, any advantage or supposed advantage which that countiy might derive from the depreciation of its currency would be more than offset by the further depreciation of the Canadian currency. In a case like that I ask the minister how he would justify the application of this section.

Mr. RYCKMAN:

If the currency is at a premium of course the section would not apply.

Mr. YOUNG:

I want to know whether that means at a premium in terms of Canadian money or in terms of gold. Here is a currency that is at a premium in terms of Canadian money and at a discount in terms of gold.

Mr. RYCKMAN:

In the money market of Canada we have listed the currencies and their values; some are depreciated and some are appreciated, and we govern ourselves accordingly. The banks furnish the department, at eleven o'clock in the morning, the exchange rate in respect of any currency regarding which information may be asked.

Mr. YOUNG:

I take it the minister means depreciated in terms of Canadian money. What will he do with respect to a country whose currency is above ours?

Mr. RYCKMAN:

Frankly, I do not understand the question.

Mr. YOUNG:

I want to know how the section will be made to apply.

Mr. RYCKMAN:

The section does not apply.

Mr. YOUNG:

Then I will ask this question. The United States is such a country: if we are buying goods from the United States does any currency dumping duty apply?

Customs Tariff Amendment