» of the party now in office. when

MARCH__13, 1

scathing

Bennett Turns Spotlight Uni The Dunning Budget . iVit/l Devastating Result

Quotes Page After Page Frgm Hansard Showing Inconsistency Of Government Attitude And Moves Vote Of Non-Confidence For Failure To Implement Em- ployment Pledges. l‘

The hypocrisy of the Mackenzie King Government in its pro-elec- tion campaign against the sales and income taxes, the Empire Trade agreements and the lin. employment situation, as revealed in the Dunning Budget and in numerous orders-in-councll. was ex- posed iii a remarkable speech de- livered orl March 2 in the House of Commons by the Conservative Leader, Rt. Hon. R. B. Bennett,

The full text of Mr. Bennett's speech follows:

lliglit l-Ioii. R. B. Benn |,i, (Ll-ltd- er of the Opposition): Mr. Speak- er, I desire to congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning! llpoii the very complete statement he made a few days ago and fol- the clarity of ills exposition of the position of the country with respect to its finances.

I derived some satisfaction from listening to him, for I recall that ill his budget speech delivered on lilay 1. 1930. his only endeavour to make it into a budget speech was to estimate in May what the rev- rullcs and expenditures had been during the year ending the previ- nus March 31. I suggrstcd that it was desirable that in this house we should have a real budget speech in the true sense of the term. and on June 1, 1931, I sug- gested five factors that should b:- 0011510161601 in the making of n budget speech. They were: first. that the financial operations oi the Dominion for the fiscal year should be shown; second, that the balance sheet of the dominion as oi the preceding March 3i should be shown, together with amets ac- tive and non-active and liabilities direct and indirect; third, that re- ference should be made to trade and commerce; fourth, that thcre should be an estimate of the rcv- enue and expenditure for the twelve months ending March 31 following; and fifth, the ways and means which would be adopted for the purpose of providing the necessary revenues to meet the proposed expenditures. It is a matter of some satisfaction, Mr. Speaker, to know that since that date every ,, ‘ speech has fol- lcwcd that practice. So that I can congratulate the Minister of Fili- llllCf‘ the more readily in that he adopted suggestions made in 1931. and wlllcli have since been follow- ed.

It does not occur to me that there is any very good reason why we should lake any great leiigtn of time, considering all the circum- stances, in discussion details of revenues and expenditures. There will be ample opportunity in con- nection with estimates and mai- ters oi that sort to discuss ques- tions of expenditures; but present- ly 1 shall have something to say with respect to the revenues. and the effect that the raising, of them has had upon the capacity of the people to pay.

So far as I can see, the minis- icr was quite right the other day whcn he said that taxation had been imposed upon the Canadian people to raise a sum nearly as large as if not larger than at any time in their history. I can say only this, that it la my firm cun- vlctlon that any effort to HIM from the Canadian pcollll by "Xi" tion any substantial mm in cx- cess of $400,000,000 is to P!" "P9" them a strain which they cannul- bear. I think that is not an un- fair statement to make. havinl TL‘- aard to our general economic con- ditions, and the views expressed by economists as to conditions in new countries such as this. 8nd the“ ability to stand taxation. ‘

In this regard however. I should like to revert to just one observa- tion made sby thc financial (‘rim-

I wonder what lVIr. Ralston would have said if he had seen the sales tax raised to eight pef “m? I wonder what he would have and had he known that this govern- merit, which has now brought down two ‘budgets, still retains the same taxation? I wonder what he would have said had he known that hon. members who declared that a three per cent. excise tax was another form of protection, as a government in its second bud- get still retains that three per cent.‘ excise tax? . 1 mention “m; because it 15 9111811118. if nothing E168. to find a government which in "Pllllsltlon so loudly declaimgd against the increase in the sales tax and the inliposlt‘ of a,“ ex- clse tax of three per cent, now in its second budget makes the declaration that it propoggg u, make no changes with respect to ways and means for raising the revenue of the country.

With respect to the income tax, charged as we were with increas- ing it, the minister was frank the other‘ evening in 5Rying that h,- had lllCl'\"1\.\f‘(i it slightly". And so all along the line we have the same position,

NOW, I was apprehensive, remem- bering as 1 did tile history of thc 11180001‘, when the 11011, gentleimm said he proposed to make no changes with respect to taxation; for I recalled that on the first oi‘ May, 1930, standing in the place he now cscupies, he reduced tlic sales tax from two per cent. to olic ller cent... in thc face of a deficit in this country, in the face of ab- normal conditions, in the face of 824.000.0011 less revenue than had been expected in thc last six months of 1930. which must have hi"! “WWII; in the face of dwind- ling trade in every country of the world. Why was it done? Does anyone suggest it was done to bal- ance the budget. when a deficit was known to be inevitable? was it for any .purpose other than merely political, and the knowl- edge that an election was not fa: off? When I hear the declara- tion made that we will make no concessions to the taxpayer I woli- der tf the same idea 1s in the mind of the minister and the govern- ment which pervaded their minds in i930. and if in due season. when the occasion offers. they will make u great gesture to the peo- ple with respect to a reduction of taxation. even us they did in 1930? Those are the facts to which at- tention I believe might fairly be drawn. ,

All that may be said with re- spect to the balance sheet is that we have an increase ili the lia- tional debt of something less than $100,000,000. If we left out the $8,- 000,000 to which reference , was made as coming fronl the profits. on grain sales, we would have a deficit of approximately $95,000,- 003. The minister budgeted for a deficit of $100,000,000, and this little windfall of $8,000,000 to which I shall presently refer moans that the deficit is $07,000,030 instead of $95,000,000. ,

1 do not l11'(“‘.0“". therefore. M1‘. Speaker, to deal at length with tlr balance sheet items, except to point out. that we are increasing by leaps and bounds the respon- sibilities of the consolidated rev- enue fund in connection with many funds for which we arc real y trus- tees. The minister is not to blame for that. It has 1396111119 prac- tice in this country for a genera- tion, 1f not for more than that, to put into the consolidated revenue fund moneys received for superan- nuation funds, for annuities. for Indian lands and from the sale of school lands. and they provide working capital for tlic country. on the theory-

Mr. Dunning: And the Post OI- fice savings bank.

Mr. Bennett: Yes, and they pro- vlde working capital for the coun- try on the theory that whenever called upon we shall be able to repay them. In theory that is unsound. In practice it has been useful. Whether or not. having regard to the magnitude: of the fund the time has come when we should carefully consider our posi- tion I leave it for this house and the future to determine. But I think it only fair-to direct atten- tion to the fact. because the sum has assumed very large propor- tions. I can conceive of a. posi- tion where lt might be difficult to obtain the necessa y moneys to meet the demands ' which ~might ' suddenly be made upon the treas- ul-y. ml- instance. uiwn the data of maturity of school fund bonds which we gave some years ago. when the resources were turned over to thc provinces. it might be difficult. if a Province had the right to demand that the money be paid, to pay it readily. 1t might

it sat in opposition. with lezard i" the general raising of taxes. On April 33, 1934, speaking I01‘ W‘! then opposition, M1‘. Ralston said= "But, if my right 11011. friend the Prime Minister is looklns for the privilege of having it said of him that he imposed taxation 1n ‘this country sure- 1y his amibition is satisfied in the increase of the sales tax from one to six per cent, in the imposition of an excise tax which did not exist when he came into power but which has been put up to three per cent, in the imposition of a two cent tax on sugar. in tak- ing away exemptions from the sales tax. in the reduction yo! exemptions in the income tax: 1n these and in every other field of taxation I think my hon. friends opposite will be given full marks and will be held fully responsible when they come to the people of Canada, for having invented and imposed many new and onerous forms of taxation."

be difficult, too, with respect to many ctlicr matters to which re- ference might be made.

As to Li: estimated revenues and expenditiaps I think it is fall to say that having regard to the forms of taxation to which resort has been had the revenues have shown a buoyancy that was to be anticipated ulid expected. with respect to the expenditures I shall have something to say presently.

But that we had a satisfactory surplus oli o.dinary account is quite. apparent, from looking at

the figures, evcn as the predecessor of llic nliilisicl" had a. surplus on ordinary account during his last year of office. The present min- ister has a mucll larger one, be- cause he has resorted to other methods of taxation. although thc expenditures, as 1 shall presently point out, are in my judgment out of keeping with tlic present condi- tions iii Canada.

stupendous Sales Tux

Then the other question arises, namely the ways alld means to be resorted to for the purpose of making good tile expenditures coil- icmplatcd for the next year. I have already pointed out that the nliil- ister lias declared he has no in- tention of departing fronl present taxation, except in some slight items, and that he proposes to maintain the present scale of taxa- tion. Mr. Speaker, it must he the opinion of most. holi. members that the eight per cent. sales tax has worked a great hardship upon many people in Canada and that. applied as it is by wholesalers and utilized as it is by the retailer. in thc sum total of thc price upon which he makes his-nizlrk-up. it amounts more nearly to twelve pcr cent. when it reaches the eon- sumer than the eight per cent. as enacted by Parliament. .

This is a stupendous tix. As i pointed out last year it is a strain that I do not believe the people oi‘ the country call long endure. And when I recall Mr. Ralstons vigor- ous denunciation of the raising of the sales tax to six per cont. I can readily understand why so many complaints are heard ironi various parts cf Canada lvlili regard to tlic increase to an eight per cent. rate. Under normal conditions an eight per cent. rate should result in much larger revenues than we are now receiving. I recall Mr. Robb saying that he believed that in normal tlmcs in this country every one trier cent. of sales tax was equivalent to $20,000,000. He spoke of the remission of $20,003,000 of taxation when he reduced the sales tax by one per cent. liaviiig- re- gard to present price levels I do ilot think under existing (rendi- _tioils thc sales tax can be said to be equal to $20,000,000 for every one per cent., bllt I do believe that under the normal conditions that now prevail in connection with price levels and matters of that kilid it is not too liluch to slly it is worth somewhere between $15,- 000,000 and $17,500.00 for every one per cent. In other words, for every one per cent. of salon tax imposed upon the people of this country I think we can expect to realize at least $15,000,000. and perhaps a little more. depending upon the price of goods that are imported. That ls a stupendous charge to make upon the Canadian people. I suggest it. is a charge which can- not long be borne wllcn. in tlic hands of the retailer. it is trans- lated into in figure which more. nearly appi lmatcs twelve per cent. than eight per cent,

The Income Tail

Closely associated with the rats" Ving of revenue is the question of ' trade and commerce. as has been pointed out by the minister in the speech which he made. Before one deals with that he must realize that the income tax is one of the large sources of our revenue. While the customs tax did not fall last year, it. has fallen as being the principle source of Canadian rcv- enue. At one time it was not thought possible that the income tax would yield any such sum as $100,000,000. This tax as imposed against corporations and indi-

viduals last year yielded more than

rule "CHARLOITEIUWN “GUARDIAN

Exposure Of Premier King’s

Insincerit

that amount. It is difficult to dis- cuss these matters in detail in view of the fact that our figures are for only ten months; however, the esti- mates of the minister must be taken to be reasonably accurate. I am not objecting to the budget having been brought down at ax. early date, having regard to the demands made upon thc time of the government for other reasons, but it is difficult to discuss these matters as they should be discuss- ed in view of the fact that for two months we are dealing with esti- mates and not. with realities. I realize the minister had this fact, in ills mind in making the state- ments he did, but I am handicap. 118d in What I really want to say with respect to some of these matters. ,

The income tax collected this year was llected on the incomes of last year. It came to me as somewhat of a surprise that this country had the measure of pros- perity that it did have in 1935. Not that I was so greatly surprised iii one sciise, bllt 1 was surprised in view of tlic statements to which i used to listen from hon. gentle- men opposite. In view of the state- ments made by hon. gentlemen opposite when in opposition it seems almost impossible to im- Ilglﬂc that this country could have been lll r enough to pro- duce $100,000,000 from income tax; nevertheless the fact is that the largest sum of money ever realized from the income tax was realiz- ed last year.

Mr. Dunning: The current year.

Mr. Bennett: the current year. but from the incomes of last year. It is true that there has been an increase in the tax on corpora- tions, but there has been no change in the tax against 1IldiV1d1iBJS.Ti‘|C increase in the tax against col-- poratlons has not been very large. Corporations whose fiscal year was not the calendar year may have had higher earnings during the latter part of their year than they had in previous years, and this may have accounted for some of the large increase in the income tax. This is a striking illustration of the extent to which a tax which ill the early days yielded but ii small sum of money has been made to yield a very largo amount. Last. ywar l think this was the largest single item of revenue.

Provincial Jurisdiction

I am not. uiunindful of the fact. that the provinces have complain- ed that the income tax is an en- croacllment upon their jurisdiction. Those who recall the early days of the imposition of this tax will re- member that Sir Thomas White ili the early part of 1917 declared that he would not impose on in- come tax because it was some- thing which realiy was within the powers of the provinces and should be left to them to impose. Later on in the year, before the close of the session, tle found it neces- sary to introduce into this parlia- ment the first income tax, the oi- fect of which, was to raise a very substantial sum of money. I call remember that a previous niinis- ter on the Liberal side was of thc opinion that there might be a div- ision between individual income taxes and corporate 111001118 taxes. the provinces to secure one and the dominion the other. I think the view was then expressed tliat it was desirable that the provinces should secure and collect. the taxes". on individual incomes. leaving to the federal power the right. to rc- covcr taxes from corporations. No such division has been made and no such steps have been taken. It it only necessary to point out that the result has been the applica- tion of two lncolne taxes in many of tlic provinces of this dominion. For instance. we have two income taxes in British Columbia. where such has been the case for many years. we now have two in Oli tarlo nlid ili most of the wcstcrn provinces. But it goes further than that. Iii reality we have a third income tax because the tax now imposed operates to impose taxa- tioli upon the tax itself. The tux itself is included in the taxable income alid the lcvy is made against the whole. Instead of lls being double taxation, in reality lt is treble taxation.

I suggest to the minister and to this house that the time has come when we must consider this inat- tcr. ‘if we are to make this couii- i-ry attractive to new capital; ll we are to induce people to lllVEst their lnoney ili this country, we shall have to have regard to the fact that taxation is a. very im- portant item 1n the minds of those who are sending their capital to new coilntrics. For instance, l was amazed at thc number of peo- ple wllo have gone into Kenya. and other districts of South Africa to settle there because the burden of taxation is less than in most otli- cr parts of the British Empire; Iii nll new countries great effort is being ma): to lessen the burdeli of taxation, not for the benefit of those who are there already, but in order to induce additional peo- ple to make their homes there. 1 received a letter the other clay tonsequent upoli a casual observa- tion made by the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crearer) l-Ie stated that $200,000,000 had been spent in wages in the iii1n- iug districts oi Canada and that about. $71,000,000 was all that had been paid 1n dividends.

Mr. Crearcr: Wages and supplies.

Mr. Bennett: This gentleman who had been in communication wltil a western citizen in connec- tion with invrstmclits 1n this couli- try then sald, "I am not going to risk my money if it coats that much to make a dollar." It must bc kliown that that factor is ever in the mind of those who are seek- ing new fields for attractive in- mstments. While it is very un- popular with my hon. friends t0 my left to suggest that there should be any lessening of the bur- dcn of income taxation, you have

to choose between two things: on the one hand, the attractiveness of the country for the investment of capital. and, oil tlic other hand, the question of the raising of rev- enue, or, to use a. euphonious terln now so current in the United States, soaking the rich. A happy lnediuni is possible. I am certain the minister must have ill mllid the fact that if ivc are to develop the great latent resources of this country we can only do it. by lnzlk- ing Cliliadli as attractive as pos- sible for those who desire to risk their money ili its dcvdupmcnt. Of that I am perfectly certain from my own observation and dis- cussion with tliose who contem- plate making such investments 1r. this country.

1 should like to say but a few words with respect to trade, be- cause it is difficult to deal with it in detail in view of the fact llial; we have an estimate only for in; last two months of the fiscal year. ‘Illcrc is one point to lvllich 1

should at olicc direct attention, and that is that Canada has dur-, ing the last ten or twelve moniil: marched to a new position iii cx- ‘ port trade. Tile League of Na-

tions lias supplied us with tellta-

rive figures, and from time to time

him pointed out that in many ill-

stances the final figures are dit-I ferent from the tentative figurcs;, but froili tlic authoritative figures‘ we have now Canada is fifth ill‘ foreign trade for this year, and- has been fifth for many yearsﬂ» During the dark days of the dc-, presslon we lust something of our

positions; and we were sixth on sev- ‘ eral occasions, in fact ili 1931 we ivcrc

seventh. This year thc minister, says we are again ili tlic fifth posi- ‘ tion, whicli is thc position we oc-j cupied last your. With respect to‘, export trade the Minister of Fill-l ance stated that we have reached‘ fourth position whereas we were fifth l, last y/eaizBllt in so far as officiall authoritative figures are conccm-l ed there has been no change from

tile position we occupied last year.

Export Trade

Witll respect to export trade. the answer is so simple that it hardly requires :1 statement to.

carry conviction to tho iniiicls of tliose who would know the reason why’, From a. |\l‘i"|iﬂllll{.)"\' sale- ment in appears that Frami- (ll-op- ped from fourth to fifth place. and we took the fourth instead of the fifth place. Tile reason for France falling to that position was found in the fact that her gold standard was maintained up until recelit months. DllIlllg the time

that she maintained the stau- dard it was obvious t h ll t her export trade l. as failing

off; she did lose her position dur- ing that period and Canada took her place. But as I pointed out to you, sir, the League of Nations is responsibie for these tentative figures. and when the figures for the year are finally compiled we may again be ili the position we occupied last year, namely, fifth, with respect to cxports, iii view of the fact that France's position has entirely changed by reason of the arrangemcilts that have rc- ceiltly been lnpdc. I lilcntioli that only lest aii erroneous impression be lcft upon the iiliurls of ll" people of this country with respect to Canada's progress. The truth is there has been great improve- ment throughout tlic world.

World lmprvlvcnioiii

I shall not l'(‘i(‘l' to tlic records of the League of Nations with re- spect to tile general iiiiproveliiciit. throughout the world, although I may read one or two extracts. I was surprised that lily friend the Postmaster General (Mr. Elliott) ili July last made a statement such as this:

"Wlieil the present glv/crii- iriclit came illio power inst fnll, steps were imni.‘tilnl.c y

taken to Ifllltfiy tlic s‘ laiioll and already thc domi on has climbed back into sixth posi- tioli ill world trade and the volume of business has. "d- vanccd month by month."

No Postage Cuts

To say that the dominion had climbed buck liito a new position in July, 1936. indicates that lily lloii. fricild was not. us careful on‘ flint occasion as lic 1m»; b.‘ ll ill tlic adnliliiletriilloli of his d ‘parl- incnt. That. affords inc us. oppor- tunity lo soy that speaking of taxation I did ilcnture to risk the Postmaster General i.‘ with his bouiltiful post office rtvalluc." lie contemplated rcdileirg thc post- age. That used to he ll favorite suggestion from lion. gentlemen on thc other side ili day- ifllll‘, since past, and I thought possiby that with his clcslrr‘ for consistency llc might contemplate reducing the postage at the vcry cllrlicst (late. and once liiorc cry "penny post." But. 1 have not seen any signs of it.

With respect to our trade I think it might be well to place these figures upon tlic record. Since 1932 we have shown a steady increase in our exports to the Unit- ed Kingdom. Ill 1032 we 111111 an

export trndc \vit'.l the United Kingdom of $178,171,630; in 1933, $258,030 000 odd: 1934. $297,000.-

000 odd; 1935. 33060001300 odd; and

in 19.06. $399. 0.000 odd. m‘ nearly‘ 900.030.1200. ‘Plicrn has hrcll .i; steady lllf1".'l.‘»" tliercforc ill the: development of ollr export llfldvi wit-h thc Uilitczl Kingdom. But I want to point out what 1 conceive to be all important mutter, name-I ly, the steady expansion of our trade with our great sister doill- inions.

Empire Trade

British South Africa in i932 took from us $4,415,000 worth of goods; in 1933, $5,700,000; 1931. $11,570,000; in 1935, $12,498,000, and last year, 1930. $14,073,000. That is a very remarkable devclopmcn.

That our export business" with Bri- tish South Africa should increase from $4,400,000 in 1932, to $14,673,- 000 in 1936, is, 1 submit, a. very remarkable record.

If you turn to Australia the fig- ures are even more striking. In i933 we sold to Australia $7,133,000 worth of goods. Next year it had climbed to $10,208,000 odd: in 1934 it had risen to $16,870,000 odd; iii 1935, to some $22,709,000, and in 1936, last year, it had reached the large total of $96,210,712. In other words, Australia had become our third best customer, Belgium be- iiig next I think with $23,000,000. That is a very striking alid signifi- cant record—$26,000,000 worth of export trade to Australia, which has a population of only seven mil- lions. It indicates the extent to which intro-empire trade has de- veloped.

Turning to New Zeaiand, we sold in 1932 t0 New Zealand $3,405,667 worth 0i’ goods: in 1933, $3,832,688;

iii 1934, $6,820,707; in 1935, $0,- 403,347, and last year, 1936. $12,- 436,314. I thilik it will be agreed

by all that that. is a remarkable

‘.‘\']l11llSlDl'1 of intro-empire busi- l between Canada and Aus- t.alia New Zealand and South

Africa. I am not unaware of the fact that there is a clamour on the part of these domlnions that we should buy more from them. But we could hardly buy from them the things we were ourselves ex- porting, and they bought from us tlic goods they did because they could not get goods of similar qual-

ity and price elsewhere. That I think is agreed to by all. That is on the export side. British Imports

Oil tlic import side our pur-

chases from Great Britain have

risen from some $93,000,000 in i932 to $122,971,264 in 1936, increasing gradually to more than $97,000,000 ill 1933, $113,000,000 ili 1934, $116.- 000,000 ili 1935, and $122,971,264 in 1936. From British South Africa. our imports have not risen to any great extent. In fact, last year we bought from tlieni about only one-half of what we did in 1935. We bought fronl them in 1932 $4.- 000.00 worth of goods; in 1'12 snirir‘ $4,500,000; in i934, $2,800.00), iii 1935, $4,700,000 and in 1031i wl: bought from them only 321183.101. To some extent that may be ex- plained by the fact that there was almost a complete failure of the Indian com crop in South Africa. and we having purchased from thenl in preceding years very large quantities, the result of the crop failure was necessarily reflected in our purchases because then we could not secure our requirements from them. Iii Australia our pur- chases were $5.845,000 in 1932, slightly more than $5,000,000 ili 1933, $6,330,000 1n 1934, $7,395,000 ili 1935 and $8,871,119 in 1936. In ‘New Zealand our purchases have certainly increased greatly‘ since 1932. We bought less than a mil- lion dollars‘ worth of goods, name- ly $855,723 worth, in that year from New Zeairind; in the next year $2,- 013,392; iii 1934, $2,935,000; iii 1935 $2,796,000, and last year $4,574,078 worth.

The L‘. S. Market

So it may bc said that our intra- enipirc trade has steadily iii- (‘.|‘P1\S(‘t"|. and so has our trade with thc world lit largo because iherc. has been a steady improvement ili international trade throughout the world. That is true particu- larly with respect to the United States. We have increased our exports, we have increased our im- ports. lion. members who are llere for the first time, if they are interested in studying the develop- mcnt of our trade, will find it use- ful to look at the figures wliicii indicate the slow and steady les- sening of oilr purchases from Great Britillil alid the increasing of our pilrcliase fronl the United States. During all the years since i870 that process has been going on. Prob- ably it is attributable. not to any desire on the part of Canadians that it should happen, but rather to the proximity of the United States market. Ability to get what is wanted by the use of telephone aiid telegraph service has made it possible to increase trade wltil tlic United States rather than with Great Britain. It is a fact to keep

'lll mind in considering the prob-

lciii 0f preferences iii connection with British trade.

The summary given by thc Min-

ister of Trade and Commerce (Mai

Euler) in a review of tile foreign trade of Canada with the United States in 1935 is, I think, a very complete and fair statement of thc situation, in fact, it is so coili- plcte that 1 vciiturc to place it upcrl tlic record:

"The total trade of Cllllildﬂ. with the United States dur- ing the calendar year 1935 ivas valued at $589,026,000, compared wltil a similar trade ill 1932 valued at $432,497.000. iii 1933 at $392,545,000, and in 1934 at $521,818,000; the in- crease in the total trade with tlic United States in 1935 over 1932 [amounting to $157,429.- 000 or 36.4 pcr cent. over 1933 to $197.39l.000 or 50,3 per cenL, and over 1934 to $60,108,000 or 13.1 per ccnt. Imports from, as well as exports lo the Unit- ed States in 1935 show iii- crrmecs over thc years 1932,

1933 and 1934f” “TTIiTiiiip-oitls "

from thc United States ili 1935 amounted to $312,416,000, com- pared with $283.549.000 in 1932, wltil $217,291,000 in 1933, and with 3293780000 in 1934: the increase in the imports in 1935 over 1932 amounting to $48,- 867,000 or 19.0 per cent. over 1933 t0 $95,125,000 or 43.8 p.c. and over 1934 to $18,636,000 or 8.3 p.c. while the total exports to the United States totalled $277,510,000 in 1935 . Domestic exports from Canada to tho United States were valued at

\.__....

$265,975,000 in 1935, compared with $162,631,000 in 1932."

Gold Exports

The figures given last Thursday by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) as to the expansion of trade during the calendar your 1936 with the United States dicate the improved world condi- iions. I cannot say how HIU-Jh of that may be attributable L: illlz agreement which was niadc with the United States. broadly there has been such a dc- velopment of inteniatiollill trad" as has been responsible fill fill- proved conditions tili-ougllout the world. Perhaps lioli. membeis are

familiar with the review prepared‘

by the League of Nations with rc- spect t0 the general situation oi the world at large. It attributes the improved world condition to the fillip given to business by tho United States in 1935. If we tzikc

the sales to the United States we i

have in 1936 an increase ill c1:- ports over tliose of 1934 of 134 p01‘ cent-from $158,000,000 to $100.- 000,000.

Formerly the gold cxpurtcd from this country was not included in our figures of commodity exports. It will be within tlic lilemory of every member of this house that

this was not doiie because in those ‘

days gold was dealt with purely us money, whereas it is now dealt

with as an export and included iii g

our exports, most of the world, ii‘.- cluding this couiitryq being off tlic gold standard. The value of thc

gold that was shipped from this,

country 1n 1935 reached tlic large sum of $95,000,000. In 1936 tlic amount was only $71,000,000 but that does not represent the sales ol gold ill Canada because largo quantities are held in

shown on deposit for foreign buy-i

ers who may utilize that supply :15 their necessities demand, to meet their requirements from tliilc to time. So that. the Bank of Culi- ada and, I venture to say, probably

also the Department of Finance, ‘ is holding gold that has been sold _

but does not appear ili our figures because it has not been exported. Mr. Dunning: But it is paid for. Mr. Bennett: 1t is paid for, oi course, but it docs not show in lilo exports of‘ tlic country‘ hi‘

cause no license for its expon. h»: g

been issued. Therefore rcllallrl-

should not. be placed on the figure

of $71,000,000 as indicating tlic amount of gold which has been lic-

tually sold, a5 compared with $95.- ‘

000,000 ili I935, because ili point of fact, I believe, thc alnouiit sold by this country in 1936 was sonic- what larger than in the previous year.

Mr. Dunning: lThat is right.

Mr. Bennett: I think ll. lilay be important to read a paragraph or two from The Review oi Trade prepared by tlic League of Nations, because it indicates what the basis of the improvement ili world trade has been:

“The expansion of tlic lor- cign trndc of the United States in 1935 was probably one of thc most important single factors influencing the revival of world trade in that year. Tile gold value of the total trllclc of the United States in 193.3 was by 14 per cent. higher tiiali in 1934, exports increasing by seven per cent. ill value and imports by as much as 1Z4 P01‘ cent. The expansion oi trade was particularly lnzlrkvzl ili the last quarter of 1935, u-llcli cs- ports exceeded by 25 poi" ccllt. and imports by 29 pcr cciii. tlic values recorded in tile corrc - ponﬁig period of i934. The export surplus (general trade» 0f $235,000,000, whicli was lCnS than half of that ili 1934, was the lowest recorded for the inst. twenty-five years, wltil the ex- ception of 1933, when it amounted to $225,000,000." l-Ie proceeds on luiotlicr page:

“In the face of a rise oi 5 pcr cent. in tile level of doliicstic wholesale prices, thc price iii- dex for import goods remain- ed unchanged, and the increase in the quantum of inlports was". in the same proportion as that in value. Prices of export. goods in 1935 were on tlic av- erage 3 pcr celii. liiglicr tilnli in 1934, and the quantum oi exports thus rose only by 4 per cent. The risc in thc prices of export goods was coll- fined to foodstuffs. lliaillly‘ as a result of tlic drought ill 111311. Iii conscqucilcc. cxports r~i foodstuffs declined ili quantum. whereas tlle quantum of manu- factured articles exported rose by about 11 per celit. as 5il0\\'ll in the diagram."

in- ,

I do know that ,

tfllh t OI‘ '

World I

PA CBILLEVEN

Y-

Pickup Under Olll ’l‘.lriffa

filled ililprovciiiclit ll: . world tfﬂfkhfillld it is r- ' i the trade oi this couiih _ ‘ill tlic trade oi iill cunii rlrs. , might be well, iioxlcvtw, tl» funk at lone Oi‘ two matters wll ‘some iiiipui'tz:ll:'l‘ ultii 1 I tlic goods llll])f|1'\t‘li 11:10 ili:

try, wliotllcr dullllbfe or lire.

l 1936 v.1‘. illl|)0l‘i()d illl0 fills Cllilfllfl"

' from llir~ Lliilicll iiiiiglipll: Duty V.il1ll‘ ("H1011") l Uiidrl" general ' rates $ l litilllf .°» 332 37‘ Uiltiﬂ‘ prt-fcrcillzxli i rates S 1.13-1.81? s

sliglll change. ‘illl- ll.i.li (iili h. goods tlint (all l: ili iruili liil- imm- (‘(1 Kingdom ill lllilfl 'llll"lll‘.l(’[i 1| $58.015ti.033 nil ulill-ii ‘ criilcctec duty aliinlliiiliiu to ' "'7 all! iii i030 v10 i)')l l‘! 1‘ glued from tiir‘ lliiil ilig In $5.314“ . llirrcuii oi 5 .fl'iuii ill!‘ lhlilml i". v

, totalled $43,310 1W7

no =1 ili tariffs with (J1 l llig tlicsc tivli _‘.1 ‘ 'ed voiunie oi i:- attvibutod to illv pl |iiieiil. of lixitlr. ll‘

~ iiiiii dt-vrlop- ii. \\ill ht

l l‘ ulletl that (iiillllLi ll l‘ ~< l o 11111.3, lll thc lil-z. o1; r prwh o l Mr. Rhodes, s-lili 1.. lilllllﬁlfl ('. lijiill

7i Cll

' zliiwtl"

,g'.it4‘ lll(‘_\' l! to ~

‘lflgurciz. ".i‘li:it, lilfll, . 3iioli v.i'.ll i't'.‘]|l(l 1» | i fret‘ goods from iii" L‘

l dom.

From illl- Ullilwl Slim . lilc. fl»: urcs are diffcrcilt. 'i'll¢» l’) iii dull able goods iii 1935 illlll/lliﬂid i

.$l81,l57.64'2, l'E‘I)l‘(“i‘lil‘.il}_f 0

77G ili duty. mid iii iieliﬁ '

lwcrc $189,833,430, on \

' collected ivns s. " ' ‘l’ U1 some, lhlliiciy‘. $40.9 ilic fr!‘ lllipcrls aiiiolliiivti tn 41.158 1 i936 rlild $122,482, l) ill 1035. Th,

i dilly ("Jliﬂiilifl lllll "ml in all t.

,slightly mcr ant in but}

, yours. 'i'hr‘ (lliivrlliilc ziiiiounte.

', 4,. |,~~,~, Hitlll siimilml l illcliiio

l iiini i)f‘";lil .1‘ ii i‘ llnli ll"'“- 1X1’!

‘ lllfiﬂlll. ill iclilri-Prwl l" r-fcfii

.tli \\'ill|'|\ tic!‘ l.'"‘"ii "“"lll'l‘ llilri this cwuilll“ Llulu of Oil-E

i, friclirls, l‘.\l)f‘f'l{ ll. l‘ from was,

item (Jzinlldu. li.i\v‘ lill‘ idcn thhf

' everything flint, cone-r- llxo Cilliﬂd,‘

l mugs ll \'t"l'_\' il"tl\_'l' filll‘ Tilef,"

‘figures will liclp their. l1) rcalil;

lilic cxic-lit to wllzl -‘ colliit!'

l is inlpol-iiiig goods i‘ 'l‘ruc. t

l courier, lilo foriiul- go‘, iicilt <15,

lllllptlht‘ a iiircl- pvl‘ ("l ~- 0X01!

' iflx, which this 2""<""l'"<"\'- h‘.

l seen fit to rctzlili. ilpil "ole. in a. classes oi’ qllliib, vll {roe I i dutlilblc, l‘ l / l “ ' ll 900T» i1’ i Grout Brlluili v2‘ ' l‘ "5 "i! 01',‘ l year and lull.’ off . l-‘ilvl’ YPKP. i" that as. idl‘ us 13:21.1. lUi-iih. ai, coiiccrllcd they .'~ "e l‘ ' "llhlcct i i-iir‘ cxli-c tux a _ "115 5W1!“ thc Ulllit‘(i 51.11:‘: l iviici‘ tour

i tries. . Fllrvigll Trlilic , lllljltlfLll‘. » a <11: ‘.lUll

ill lll'lill'lli ‘I -' 011M‘. 111.114‘ lll~r|'i"'il'\ tcrcsicd :1. ll ivillll .\l(lil\ uliil- t lir- in tiiiir‘ rc rim. bl‘ tilt‘ ]lil\'ll,i ill.

stop iurilu r gurdcd by on" Bflililvlll ~ ill aiico. 'iiil_‘: iill‘~L' tlilll‘ flllli tiilll u. trad:- iills country self ill u \f‘l'_\' li.li and they ll.l-.-<~ loll ill? llPilllllllllfill < l lilrllis Willi \.il'li‘ll\ l l Ilet us cxuiiillli- Ill first. llilil; l ability depends on i. pcte succlnnl tries ili lii. chasing coulltr . ‘than our I ‘pa. w . l 1» ‘depends llpoli our 191'

ability lo plrulm- - tor (‘iicllirti- illiill wt" gWilill‘ i lllll no l‘|\'l - l‘. .dc.sire lo lmim l .- lcloscsl in‘ -‘~~~‘ ,Ill)]i‘ ti» ll." i Hilllliltlll, u iiiow. '1' siziiirianl feroni. llTlll . o1 \\‘.lg'.‘> .: ca... ours-not flint. t‘

m" go‘ iliipol‘ i 111i ‘:

lvli s lWllll ti‘ li-r-

ill their cou tlic~ WM“ Exmﬂ‘ lsizllirlllrll of l: . i thc fﬁlllllllfb. llili l‘ . lilll‘ Lil-w‘ The importance of thc llliiorlzlli- , pm “m, UH,» “Hi aic drought in tlic Uilitcd Slates, m“ {Mp m. ,,,_“~ H,“ and Canada upon thc fortllilcl. oil u“. cmn,l,,,,,._,,,, ‘ml this country cannot be vxaggcrlit- i ,|,,,._,,._.‘ mm. m,“ ,, ,~ J M.‘ cd. The fact is that thc United “W. o; c,,,,,,,,.l,u,,,, w, ,,,_-,. nu“... 595595 bought {mm U5 ‘wiwom- iilg it ll(l\\ ("“.li lllillli i\.l.. iii- forty and fifty million busllcts oi l i,‘ for ,,.__,_,, , m, m, ,. m, wheat-forty millions at least ~10; AyﬂmL ,, . _,.l,_,, y“, ;_ q hp and the effect oi that iipoil our i mark“, m, 1., ,, ~.,. ,,_,,-,__ , general trading position with tlic ‘. n“, “~()1~7“1 1, l. K, ,, ._ A _l United States is, I tliiiik. recogii-i “HM m, “L _ I _ .‘ M, n; lzed by all who liavc inkcll 1114‘ z ,,,,,.,",A_,n,,_\_ H“, l‘ . , m,’ trouble to look into tlic iii-utter m, _.,.U»-,_ , l .1 ,, » pomf The league documents also states: t... “p0,, H, ,._\,,_,;, - .,,, “pmj "The trade agreements coll- l T“ m, A, . . . I ,. __ - eluded with various countries ~ s{)'.\‘1:\ p. ,,_ ,,,,;,.._ u! under thc reciprocal trade . 1,, (p, m... n; l... t‘ agreements act of Jllnl‘. 10114. i ,,_-,,,,,.l-,_ |H\ill' did not almrcchibly‘ illilucllcc luau]: |,,~,\,~, |,~- ‘,1’ the aggregate nlovcnlcni ui '\ ':i~li i soy l-._l~ ill l » ~.

"TEHGPIIYIMS, as most of tiles-e agreements tSllCh as those Willi Brazil, Canada, Colombia, 1loil- dilras, thc Netherlands, and Switzerland) though ilogotiatcd in 1935, did ilot collie iilto ei- fect. before the early p.11‘! of 1936. It may be of interest to show the trade of the United States wltil the countries wltil which such agreements came into force before or during 1933.

‘Ilien a short table follows with ‘

respect to Cuba. Belgium and Swcdcii. which I shall not trouble

ilic house by reading.

for I llrlv~ aiiiplr‘ c" i: you filid ii Africa. ulid i

i ivol-lll _ |

(Tn

I . i ‘Therefore we have ii ucll 6Q- i

It;

li‘l are 0ft

For 193.’) tlic llvurls ilioi‘: i1 \i"l\ ‘