1927-02-09

NATURAL RESOURCES-PRAIRIE PROVINCES PETITION PRESENTED BY HON. MR. EDWARDS

Hon. J. W. EDWARDS (Frontenac-Addington):: I have the honour to present a
petition, addressed to the Prime Minister, the cabinet and members of the House of Commons, earnestly requesting that their natural resources be transferred to the prairie provinces at the earliest possible moment, without restrictions or limitations of the said provinces as to the complete control of their educational or other local affairs. The petition is signed by fifty electors of Chatsworth, Ontario; by fifty-seven electors of Lambton county, Ontario; by twenty-one electors of Kamloops, British Columbia; by fifty-two electors of Walkerton, Ontario; and by sixty-two electors of Yarmouth, Nova Scotia.



ESTIMATES FOR 1926-27

[Stage Direction]
A message from His Excellency the Governor General, transmitting estimates for the year ending March 31, 1927, was presented by Hon. J. A. Robb (Minister of Finance), read by Mr. Speaker to the House, and referred to the committee of supply.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: With respect to the motion I made yesterday regarding Wednesday sittings, I understand that the leader of the opposition (Mr. Guthrie) is agreeable to having it presented again to-day in the form it was intended to be put:
That on Wednesday, the 16th instant, and every subsequent Wednesday until the end of the session, the House shall meet at three o'clock in the afternoon.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 47, to amend the Post Office Act (newspaper ownership).
He said: Mr. Speaker, the object of this amendment is to provide for a uniform law for newspapers in regard to the use of the mails, similar to those acts in the mother country, Australia and the United States. The proposed bill requires sworn semi-annual statements from all newspapers, magazines, trade journals and other periodicals which contain articles designed to influence public opinion, giving the names and addresses of editors, owners and stockholders. There is a proviso that this act shall not apply to religious, fraternal, temperance, scientific, or other such publications, and the names of the small stockholders are not required to be given. A copy of these sworn statements must be published in such newspapers or othei publications, and paid editorials and othei reading matter for which money is paid must be plainly marked "advertisement". Failing this, such publications shall be denied the use of the mails.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 48, to amend The Railway Act, 1919 (special rates on coal).
He said: The object of this bill is to assist the establishment of a national coal supply for Canada and to provide a remedy for the provinces supplying the coal market-that is, the maritimes and Alberta. At present grain and flour are carried on a special preferential basis, and since coal is almost as necessary as flour and grain, it should be carried on the same basis. The bill seeks to establish a national coal policy for Canada. This country
Questions
[Stage Direction]
owns the railways and the merchant marine; in the coal question the matter of transportation plays a very large part, and the object of this bill is to place the carrying of coal on a preferential basis with grain and flour.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I have not called the first reading of Senate bills because on December 15 the examiner of petitions for private bills made a special report on most of these bills, and on the remainder to-day, to the effect that while the rule regarding publication of notice had been fully complied with last year, no notice has been published in reference to any of them this year.
Under the provisions of rule 96, subsection 2, the petitions and the above mentioned report stand automatically referred to the committee on standing orders for a recommendation as to the action the House should take; under the circumstances these bills should not be proceeded with until the report of the committee has been received. I have no doubt that the committee will report that these bills be favourably taken into consideration by the House, but we must follow the rules.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).

Mr. HOCKEN:: 1.	How many firms in the Dominion were in default in payment of the sales tax on December 1, 1926?
2.	What is the number so in default in each province?


Hon. Mr. EULER:: Province	Active	Inactive	TotalNova Scotia	23	55	(18)	78.Prince Pdward Island	1	9	(6)	10New Brunswick.. ..	9	16	(4)	25Quebec	280	690	(208)	970Ontario	149	770	(240)	919Manitoba	21	99	(32)	120Saskatchewan	12	16	(14)	28Alberta	11	59	(9)	70British Columbia .. ..	18	175	(35)	193Totals	524	1889	(566)	2413
Note-*
Active arrears represent those firms in default being followed up by the collectors.
Inactive arrears represent firms in default being followed up by the department at Ottawa, the figures enclosed in brackets representing the number in litigation.


TAXATION IN CANADA
Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest) moved:: Whereas it was deemed necessary and expedient to impose an income tax by the parliament of Canada as a revenue measure growing out of the war and to temporarily invade the former exclusive field of the municipalities to collect this form of taxation.
And whereas such taxation has led to duplication and there is an urgent demand for further reduction of taxation and to restore to the municipalities their former exclusive rights and prerogatives to this form of taxation. Therefore this House will support the government in any immediate measures it may take to give effect to the principles of this resolution or to reduce taxation generally, including income tax, sales tax, stamp revenue postage and other forms of what are called nuisance taxes.
He said: I am introducing this resolution at the request of some of the municipalities who are complaining about the duplicate income taxes. A resolution very similar to this was introduced last session, and the minister asked that it be withdrawn after several hours of debate, with the understanding that some form of reduced taxation would be brought down in the budget, which was done.
Until 1917 the municipalities always had the exclusive right to impose income tax; rightly or wrongly, that field belonged to them, and there were reasons for that. Under the British North America Act the federal government has very extensive powers of taxation, in fact their powers are almost unlimited. This was necessarily so, because by that act matters of general import were referred to the parliament of Canada, such as trade and commerce, railways, banks and banking and so on, and in these fields this parliament was supreme. The war broke out and it was thought necessary to levy different forms of taxation and some new innovations were brought in. So in 1917 the federal government invaded the field of the municipalities and provinces and imposed an income tax which affected a large number of people throughout the country. The imposition of that taxation at the time was justified, probably, in view of the very heavy burdens resulting from the war. Owing to the dislocation of business, the disturbance of the industrial equilibrium and the resultant disturbance in the industrial and financial worlds, and to many other factors that entered into the situation, it was found that more money was needed to carry on the affairs of the country, and so recourse was had to this method of taxation.

Taxation in Canada
May I say that the question of taxation is one of the most important that we have to consider. It is discussed wherever business men meet in public and in private, it is discussed by boards of trade, chambers of commerce, business men's associations, and other organizations. The three greatest problems in this country that await solution are those of taxation, immigration and the taking care of the deficits on the national railway. It was intimated some time ago by the present Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) that in view of the double-headed taxation and the pyramiding of taxation that has been in operation in this country ever since 1917 a conference would be called on the subject of taxation between the Dominion and the provinces and their allies, the municipalities. A conference took place, I think the year before last, and resolutions were passed having for their object the remedying of the existing situation. But nothing practical has resulted from that conference, and we find the municipalities still debarred from using sources of revenue which should rightfully be theirs. In addition the federal parliament charter certain federal companies which have powers of taxation in a municipality; such as the Bell Telephone Company, and express and railway corporations.
In addition to the other heavy general burdens imposed upon the municipalities they are saddled with the responsibility for caring for the unemployed. Although the federal government makes laws regulating trade and commerce, immigration, and the banking system of the country, it takes the stand that it is not responsible for unemployment or its relief and passes that burden on to the provinces, which in turn thrust it upon the municipalities, although the last named have enough to do already in maintaining hospitals and other institutions for the care of the sick, the infirm and the aged and other municipal institutions.
The amount required to run the country annually is in the neighborhood of $346,000,000 and the revenue for this purpose is derived from customs and excise taxation, income and sales taxes, and other impositions. The time has come when, notwithstanding the admittedly heavy burden carried by the Dominion, some relief should be afforded the provinces and the municipalities. In providing this relief regard should doubtless be paid to the action which has been taken in New Zealand, United States and Great Britain. But in doing so the ability of the people to pay must not be lost sight of. Take for
example the case of Great Britain. The mother country is paying no less a sum than $500,000 a day, amounting in the aggregate to billions of dollars, in repayment of its reparations debt to the United States. Therefore I say do not forget the ability of the people of Great Britain to pay, bearing in mind the enormous burden of debt they are carrying and the sacrifices they have made in the interests of civilization. So when we consider the position of the people of England and Canada in regard to income tax, when we compare the amount of income tax which they pay with the amount paid in this country, we must not forget those facts. As to taxation in the United States we must remember that it is the most highly protected country in the world, and that the republic to the south emerged from the Great war in a much better position financially than any other country.	.
In considering the double-headed form of taxation let me remind the House of the income tax form sent out in Ontario by the municipalities which must be filled in by business men on February 14-and in a few weeks the federal forms will be required. So complicated in character is this form that it would take a Philadelphia lawyer to fill it out properly. When the needs of the municipal law have been met in this respect the business man is confronted with the federal income tax form and the same procedure has to be gone through again, and so we have duplication of income tax and pyramiding of taxation all along 'the line. The present federal income tax form is of so complicated a character, there are so many provisos and so many exceptions, that an expert lawyer would have difficulty in filling it out correctly.
I repeat, that the time has come for the Dominion to allow the municipalities to occupy this field of taxation again to themselves, and I may say in this connection that the amount of federal revenue derived from income tax is diminishing year by year. It is now 52 millions a year.
There is no doubt as to who pays this and other taxes, it is the consumer. An undue share of this federal income tax comes out of the pockets of what I may call the working class. In the case of a man with a fixed salary no evasion of payment is possible; the collector can walk into his office and find without any difficulty the exact amount of salary which he receives. I am familiar with the case of a jobber in Toronto who, although his transactions are on a large scale, pays no income tax. What he did at the

Taxation in Canada

I admit that the Minister of Finance brought in an amendment to the act last year which will slightly modify the above table, but substantially the figures are correct.
According to all the text books on political economy the principles upon which taxation should be based to be fair and just are, first of all, ability to pay; second, certainty; third, convenience; fourth, economy. According to Andrew Mellon, secretary of the United States treasury, the principles underlying his taxation of last year are, first, it must be scientific; second, the taxation must not disturb business; and third, the taxation must get the most money with the least inconvenience.
There is a great deal of dissatisfaction in this country over the numerous methods of taxation that are now being collected, and which are passed on to the consumer. In addition, there are many people in this country who are escaping altogether payment of the income tax. The Minister of Finance did announce a general reduction of taxes of some $25,000,000. That was his estimate without the reduction made later on motor cars, and without regard to the amended import duties on the materials that enter into motor cars, which in my opinion, if taken into account, would very materially increase that $25,000,000. I admit that the minister was entitled to some credit for that reduction, although his reduction, did not go one-third far enough. Further reductions might have been made in the sales and stamp tax: the income exemption might have been increased further for the small wage earning class; the sales tax might have been eliminated altogether, and the tax, if possible, taken off clothing. Next to the food on the breakfast table, the most important item of expenditure for the working classes is rent, and then clothing; in some cases, clothing comes second and rent third. There is a direct tax on almost every article of clothing the working man wears, and it is a very big sales tax. The government is taking $10,000,000 in taxes out of the working class in this country by way of sales tax on clothing, and that tax is passed on to the consumer, because in the clothing industry it is not the wholesaler, not the retailer, who pays the tax, but the man who wears the suit of clothes. I am glad to hear the minister has given some intimation recently that there may be a reduction along this line this year. Of course, the finance minister, in his annual estimate of revenues, has to consider how much revenue will be necessary to administer the affaire of this country. He has to consider if there will be a crop failure, and economic conditions generally-the economic requirements of the

country. But I believe that the enlarged purchasing power of the agriculturists, resulting from several successive good crops, has had a decidedly stimulating effect on domestic trade. You will also notice, Mr. Speaker, that during the last eight months the customs revenue has been going up. In the city of Toronto the customs revenue is now over $60,000,000 a year.
Many representations have been made to the government regarding reduced taxation along several lines, notably as to:
1.	The sales tax.
2.	The corporation income tax.
3.	The personal income (ax.
4.	The various stamp taxes.
These four nuisance taxes have been a drag on business, both wholesale and retail, and generally on business; I refer to the stamp taxes on drafts, bills of exchange and many other forms of negotiable paper. This is a form of nuisance tax as to which I hope we may hear an announcement in a few days to the effect that we are to be given partial if not entire relief.
There is a great deal of discrimination also in our taxation, as is shown by the different resolutions which have been presented to the minister asking for relief. Considerable objection is taken to the income tax on corporations. Although the present administration have closed their minds against any upward revision of the tariff, I believe that the tariff laws of this country have a most direct bearing on taxation. In the United States, there is an average 35 per cent protective tariff for the protection of their own industries. Our tariff in Canada averages only from 20 to 24 per cent. If our tariff was increased up to the United States level we could eliminate the sales tax, the income tax, and all these nuisance and other taxes, by reason of the increased revenues from import business we should do in this country. Take, for instance, the toy industry in Canada to-day. There is an industry that has been destroyed owing to the failure to have a dumping clause to protect our factories from importation from various countries where the labour conditions and rate of wages are pn a very much lower level than here. We are importing cheap, shoddy, German toys, owing to the failure of the government of Canada to protect the employers of labour in Canada. The toy industry should be a native industry in this country, because we possess thirty-six basic materials that enter into the making of toys. Instead of that, however, wre are buying all our

Taxation in Canada
toys from Germany. On the sixth floor of Eaton's in Toronto at Christmas time you will find the whole floor filled with cheap, shoddy German and American toys, which are sold even to the soldiers who fought in the Great war, and to the workingmen of this country, many of whom are out of work. In Germany the manufacturer has the advantage of depreciated currency, longer hours of labour, easier labour laws, and in addition he pays no income or sales tax to Canada and shares a home market here with our Canadian manufacturer, who has to pay here sales tax, income tax and other taxes, while his foreign competitor pays none. I contend that it is unfair, unjust and inequitable. It is a burden on the industries of the country-on the employers and the employees alike. In addition to that, it is a bad advertisement for Canada. The sales tax, as well as the income tax, was imposed during the war. There were some good points about it. It was imposed when the country was dislocated by the war owing to the industrial conditions produced by that war. But to-day, with the expansion of business by the amendments to the tariff, I believe the sales tax should be abolished altogether, because the economic tariff amendments which I suggested would have the direct result of giving the country two or three times the amount which we now obtain from the sales tax. The revenue from the sales tax was as follows:
1920- 1921	 $ 38,131,448 20
1921-	1922	
61,518,751	131922-	1923	
91,202,254	131923-	1924	
100,990,076	801924-	1925	
66,707,369	96
The income tax has dropped down, as I stated before, to about $54,000,000, and from the sales tax and the customs tariff the government obtained in the following years the amounts stated below:
1918-	1919	
$158,046,333	871919-	1920	
187,524,181	771920-	1921	
179,667,683	121921-	1922	
121,487,393	901922-	1923	
133,803,370	121923-	1924	
135,122,344	761924-	1925	
120,222,453	70
The late administration imposed a certaii sales tax, the present government increased it. I hope this government will remove the sales tax burden from the industries of the country and seek other forms of new taxation. For instance, let them impose an export tax on raw materials sent to the United States. Here we have a zinc company incorporated north of Sudbury by Americans and this zinc limit
is so valuable it is worth millions to the concessionaires. This was only one company and there are others. The American millionaire has found Canada a happy hunting ground. The International Nickel Company have a gold mine. Then we have copper, platinum, lead, coal, and many other minerals which are exported in a crude and semi-crude condition out of Canada. Take the zinc company incorporated the other day with a lot of Americans at their head. They will make a fortune. A new taxation plan will take care of all this and a just and equitable federal tax imposed. The result now is that Canada is making millionaires out of a lot of Americans at the expenseof the people of Canada. There should be an export tax on all these raw materials and conservation of our resources. If Premier Bruce of Australia were in Canada he would take care of our resources in this respect; he is one of the greatest imperial statesmen we have, a radical who preserves the resources of his country for the people and for posterity. Notwithstanding what the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) stated the other day in Toronto, Mr. Bruce got the ear of the country on inter-imperial problems and interdominion economics and trade. Mr. Bruce shownd Canada the way to inter-imperial trade, and showed the people of Canada the eoonomie troubles this country is suffering from and the necessity of preferential trade within the empire if the empire is to last. How would Mr. Bruce deal with our economic problems if he were premier of Canada? Would he allow Canada to become a happy hunting ground for Americans to grab our resources and escape taxation? Would he permit them to seize our resources with all our raw material and take them to the United States and impose no taxation whatever? Would he permit the exportation of our raw materials and resources to the United States without any export tax? If Stanley Bruce were prime minister of this country he would see that the raw materials sent out of the country were taxed and he would lay down an economic policy, both federal and provincial, to develop Canada and its resources. Under the policy of the present government they cannot remove the burden of taxation from the working classes and place it on the American millionaires. Hence Canada is the happy hunting-ground for Americans in this respect.
I believe the Doherty Act should be repealed, in view of the Ontario recent vote, and the tax of $10 a gallon on liquor and spirits should be removed, if not reduced. It is not a luxury for the working classes to have a
Taxation in Canada

glass of beer. This form of taxation, $10 per gallon, should be substantially reduced. In view of the provinces now engaging an this business and having a system of public ownership of the liquor traffic for the benefit of the people, a large revenue will be derived by Ontario from the trade. If the Doherty Act were repealed and a reduction of the $10 a gallon tax, business would be increased and taxation benefited otherwise.
The sales tax was originally a war tax and should be removed as soon as the finances of the country will permit. The sales tax on clothing for men and women should be reduced. The tax cannot be collected1 equitably on such articles. The tax on food for the working classes should be reduced and relief provided. When we see this sales tax imposed on the clothing used by every working man in the country, I think the time has come to call a halt.
Last session I moved for a return, sessional paper No. 247-and the return was brought down on the 28th June-as follows:
Return to an order of the House of Commons, dated the 15th of March, 1926, for a return showing,-*
1.	Total revenue of the government from all sources for the last year of record.
2.	What portion of this cash revenue is contributed by each one of the nine provinces, and the respective amounts from each province.
The Department of Customs and Excise
brought down the following return, totalling $309,000,000:
Import duty	
$120,220,826	13Excise taxes	
89,330,987	59Excise duties	
39,013,179	96Sundry collections	
1,194,104	55Income tax	
56,248,042	82Business profits	tax.. ..	2,704,427	37
Special war revenue, part
1, section 4	 315,314	88
Total	 $309,026,883 30
Looking over the return I observe that the province of Ontario pays about 44 per cent of the taxes of the country. Ontario is an industrial province, and the working classes
are asking for some relief from the burden of taxation which I have referred to. I have a table here showing details which I will ask to put on Hansard. It reads:


STATEMENT OF REVENUES COLLECTED BY DEPARTMENTS OF CUSTOMS-EXCISE DURING FISCAL YEAR 1924-25
[Stage Direction]
-	Import Duty	Excise Taxes	Excise Duties	Sundry Collections$ cts.	$ cts.	S cts.	$ cts.Nova Scotia	2,646,110 74	1,477,172 73	34,350 02	29,790 09Prince Edward Island	136,562 45	84,095 34	39,293 93	965 42New Brunswick	4,349,055 67	1,289,113 70	220,222 69	27,743 8732,737,499 64	31,263,269 26	28,178,499 97	289,864 4856,164,009 65	42,439,224 75	8,397,527 75	276,297 67Manitoba	6,854,637 41	4,233,475 33	869,537 43	41,183 35Saskatchewan	1,249,606 05	920,838 16	49,702 14	16,908 342,593,999 44	1,993,582 68	591,438 26	10,690 38British Columbia	13,387,030 58	5,292,333 24	632,607 77	60,800 3195,516 12	24,621 08	2,211 656,798 38	313,261 32	437,648 99-	Income Tax	Business Profits	Special War Revenue Act Part 1, Section 4	Total$ cts. 809,689 36 37,835 78 754,373 89 19,679,008 30 25,531,533 50 3,477,069 32 872,028 03 1,163,911 16 3,855,447 21 67,146 27	$ cts. 28,334 55	$ cts. 7,222 75	$ cts. 5,032,670 24 298,752 92 6,665,092 71 112,946,471 53 134,478,075 41 15,661,471 04 3,162,668 70 6,405,342 03 23,429,134 91 189,495 12 757,708 69
24,516 71 695,062 06 1,526,34.5 12 137,020 52 51,812 93 48,366 00 192,969 48	66 18 103,267 82 143,136 97 48,547 68 1,773 05 3,354 11 7,946 32	
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				309,026,883 30
				
[Mr. Church. 1

Taxation in Canada
The same proportion appears in regard to other public departments, such as Finance and Insurance; the percentage is about the same. Of the revenues collected by the Department of Marine and Fisheries the province of Ontario pays $147,000 of a total of $422,000 under the head of Marine; while in the Post Office Department Ontario contributes over $11,000,000 to a total of $28,000,000, compared to $5,000,000 odd paid by the province of Quebec. In other words the province of Ontario, in this department alone, pays more than twice as much as the province of Quebec, by a million dollars odd. The percentages are, Ontario, 40 per cent, Quebec, 18 per cent, Manitoba 11 per cent, and so forth.
I do not wish to detain the House any longer, but before concluding I must pay a tribute to the fair way in which the minister has viewed this matter.
We discussed a similar resolution last year and he said he would see what could be done favouring the principle of reduction and promised that he would look into the representations made to him. He has been favourable and has been willing to meet any deputation that has waited upon him regarding taxation. After all, taxation ultimately comes out of the consumer and I would urge the minister to look very carefully into this whole subject. He has had a good many experts engaged on this work and the time has come for him to tell the House and the country what he is prepared to do. I do not ask him to give all his plans away, but I cannot too strongly impress on the minister the claim of the municipalities, on whom the burden of taxation is falling more and more, and who are looking anxiously for relief from duplicate income tax.
Something ought to be done to relieve the employers of the country and at the same time the working man from these heavy taxes. Our manufacturers have to meet competition from the various countries of the world and they should be given more relief and consideration. There should be some new method of collecting taxes from American millionaires who have grabbed off the resources of the country-from the mines, the forests, and the sea. Large quantities of our raw products are being exported, very largely to the United States, and the time has come for us to impose various forms of export taxes on our raw materials. Certainly something should be done to relieve the middle classes of the burden of the present heavy taxation, and I commend this resolution to the attention of the minister.
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Finance):: There is no more genial member of the House than my hon. friend who has just concluded (Mr. Church). He is able to argue either side of the question and this afternoon he has pleaded eloquently, as he always does, for a reduction of the revenue. Last week,
I am told, he was a member of a delegation in Toronto that waited upon the government with a request for an increased expenditure.
I think I shall have to call my hon. friend in and have a quiet talk with him. If he can give me the recipe for reducing revenues and at the same time spending money to deepen harbours and erect public buildings in the great city of Toronto he is undoubtedly a very useful man and he should not be sitting on the other side of the House.
This year, I observe, my hon. friend tells us he is speaking on behalf of the municipalities. He says that there is a duplication of taxation from which some of the municipalities are suffering, and he thinks the time has come when we should give up some of our revenues, particularly the income tax, on the ground, as he argues, that there is no longer a war. The income tax, he points out, was imposed during the war and he thinks we should now do away with it. I must remind the hon. geni'eman that while it is true that there is no longer a war-and we are all glad of the fact-the war debt yet remains and must be paid; more than that, the interest on that debt has to be met. It is therefore more difficult for us to-day who have to carry on the affairs of the country to reduce taxation than it has ever been, especially as the people were taxed less a few years ago.
My hon. friend has not brought forward the argument he presented last year in regard to the legality of the income tax paid to the federal government. The legality of that tax was questioned by a member of one of the provincial governments and the case was taken to the Privy Council. There it was decided that the federal income tax was legal, so that Sir _ Thomas White, who imposed it, was quite within his rights when he introduced that form of taxation. In introducing that tax Sir Thomas White had a very clear conception of the demands of the country at that time. He was not only aware of the expenditures which the country was then faced with, but he realized what expenditures would ensue from the war. In presenting that measure to parliament-I recall this very well, and hon. gentlemen can verify it by reference to Hansard-Sir Thomas White made it very clear that he was proposing the tax because of additional expenditures. He said he had
Taxation in Canada

hesitated to bring it in but that, seeing that the country had decided to call 100,000 more men to the colours, he realized that Canada would be involved in considerable expenditures for some time to come.
Just before discussing the taxes we have to pay, may I refer to a statement made by my hon. friend, that we had made a promise some time ago to call a conference of the treasurers of the various provinces to see whether some means could not be devised of eliminating the duplication of taxation. My hon. friend, not wilfully but altogether inadvertently, overlooked the fact that such a conference was called. He is wrong when he says that it never took place. We had a conference of all the provincial treasurers, who met in Ottawa, and we agreed upon one policy, namely, that "what we have we hold." The Minister of Finance of the federal government could not afford to lose any of his revenues, while the various provincial treasurers were in need of more funds. We agreed upon another point: it was felt that there should be a further conference to consider in what direction we could effect an economy and so get rid of a certain amount of duplication of service, for which the people were paying, as between the federal and the provincial administrations. It was agreed that that conference should be called by the premiers of the two older provinces, Ontario and Quebec, and I am still waiting for my good friends Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Taschereau to call the meeting. When that is done I will be very glad to attend it, if I am still occupying the office of Minister of Finance.
My hon. friend raises the question of who pays the expenses of carrying on the affairs of the country. There I think he is on pretty solid ground, and we can agree on that. The consumer pays, but every person is a consumer, and when my friend attempts to argue that in the last analysis only one class pays the taxes, I think he is a little wrong. I shall deal with that a little later, however. The tax paid to-day is quite different from that imposed by Sir Thomas White when he introduced the income tax measure. Since that time reductions have -been made from year to year; I will give Sir Thomas White and Sir Henry Drayton credit, because they made slight reductions, but I believe every person will give this government credit for those greater reductions which were made last year. To-day a married man has an exemption of $3,000 and if he has three children he has a possible exemption of $4,500, he will have a revenue of $4,500 before being called upon to pay one cent of a tax. Even my genial friend 
opposite now has an exemption which he did not have before; as an unmarried man he is entitled to an exemption of $1,500, but because his sister keeps house for him and he is a householder, he is entitled to the same exemption as a married man, under the act of last year. So my friend must give us credit for these concessions.
I am not going to delay the House with the statistics which were placed on the records last year, more than to say that the expenses in connection with the war are to-day greater than the amount we are collecting from what are known as special war taxes-taxes which were imposed by previous governments in war time to meet the requirements of the war; but we have made considerable reductions even in the cost of those war taxes. For instance, the interest on the debt in 1921 was over $126,000,000, and we have reduced that interest until to-day it is down to $117,000,000. In 1921 the interest on the public debt over the interest of 1914-that is the addition for war purposes, such as pensions, soldiers' civil re-establishment, soldiers' land settlement, Imperial War Graves Commission, battlefield memorials and adjustments of war claims- was $219,589,436, and by our economy in the administration of the affairs of this country we have reduced these charges until last year they totalled $163,688,411. So we have made some move toward the reduction of taxation.
My hon. friend argued that our taxes are higher to those doing business in Canada than are the taxes in the republic to our south. I am sure that if my hon. friend would give that matter closer attention he would alter his view. I have the statement of a most eminent citizen of Toronto who does as much business in the state of Massachusetts as he does in Canada, and that statement shows that it costs him more to do business, as far as taxes are concerned, in the state of Massachusetts than it does in the province of Ontario. I have another statement from a gentleman who does business both in the state of New York and in Canada, and that statement goes to show that it costs more to do business in the state of New York, as far as taxes are concerned, than in the Dominion of Canada. That is, when you add together the federal taxes, the state taxes and the civic taxes, and make the same comparison with Canada, that is the result.
Then my friend argues and quotes statistics -and we all know what statistics mean-to show that the two older provinces of Ontario and Quebec pay the larger share of the taxes;
I think he argued that they pay 80 per cent of the total taxes. You can argue that if you

Dominion Electoral Lists
take the office where the taxes are collected, but it is not fair to argue that because in the city of Montreal the revenues are so much, it is the city of Montreal only which pays those taxes. The income tax branch at Montreal covers all that part of the province of Quebec from the Ontario boundary to Three Rivers, and in Montreal are located great corporations which do business throughout Canada. I refer to the railway companies, the banks, the telephone companies and the telegraph companies, the taxes of which are all paid into that office. The city of Montreal has no right to say that only the citizens of Montreal pay those taxes, and the same argument will apply to the city of Toronto. Toronto covers not only the city itself but includes the counties of York. Peel, Grey, Muskoka, Dufferin, Durham, Ontario, Simcoe, Victoria, Halton and the Parry Sound area. I think I have only to mention this to show my hon. friend that all Canada contributes in some measure to the payment of these taxes.
My friend had almost finished his speech before he suggested one U'ay in which we might get greater revenue. No place in Canada receives more free advice just now than does the office of the Minister of Finance, and I am bound to give my friend credit for being about the first gentleman in the last two months who has offered a remedy. He has offered a remedy, although I am afraid that it would not be very effective. I have had advice for the reduction of taxation which has been estimated by some industrious newspaper man to amount to $177,000,000 in loss of revenue, but no person has suggested a remedy until this afternoon. My friend says we should put up the tariff and apply the dumping clause. But if he puts up the tariff so high that nothing will come in, where are we going to get any revenue? I am afraid we cannot quite agree, but I will be very glad to call in my hon. friend and have a talk with him. If he can show me some way in which I can meet the expenditures asked for by the city of which he was mayor for so many years and where he resides; if he can show me a way to provide for those expenditures and at the same time reduce the revenues, balance the accounts and meet the interest on the public debt, then I repeat that his place is over on these benches, and we will be very glad to see him here.
The hon. member, having brought this matter to the attention of the House, is I presume quite willing to withdraw the resolution,


Thomas Langton Church: Very well.


Hewitt Bostock: Is it the pleasure of the
House that the hon. gentleman have leave to withdraw the resolution?
Motion withdrawn.	.


DOMINION ELECTORAL LISTS
Thomas Langton Church: That, in the opinion of this House, the present election act as to voters lists is unsatisfactory and should be repealed and replaced by a national registration voters list system adapted to Canada's special circumstances by which every voter must register to secure the franchise before any federal election.
He said: In my opinion the present system of elections is not what it should be for a people numbering nine or ten million. The Canadian election machinery is the most cumbersome in the world, and I have studied many of the systems. Under the present law the names of many voters are left off the list, especially in the larger urban centres. On the other hand the registration system has been made a suceess in the United States. Anybody who wants to vote should take enough interest in the affairs of the country to go and register, and a national system of registration would be the cheapest way, it seems to me, to get the popular vote recorded. The existing electoral law of this country is so complicated that it would take a Philadelphia lawyer to interpret the act correctly. The returning officers cannot interpret it, even many county judges cannot do so; and the many election frauds which have grown out of the present election law make it the most ineffective system that obtains anywhere to my knowledge, and at times the most corrupt and costly.
Take the Peace River election which was discussed in this House last session. Under a proper election system would it have been possible for an electoral contest to have been conducted in the fraudulent manner that that one was? I am certain that it would not. I believe that the present election act should be referred to a select committee of the House so that it might be thoroughly investigated. The government should take the responsibility of nominating such a committee composed of representatives of all parties and groups in the House, and that committee should go into the election few and into the whole election machinery and suggest drastic changes. A national registration system would remedy the defects which experience has revealed in the existing law. or at any rate would go far in that connection. In this country to-day if a

Dominion Electoral Lists
man's name is left off the voters' list he is prevented from voting, he is disfranchised. Such cases are not isolated. In my own constituency two hundred and seventy-six returned soldiers who 'had fought for civilization in Flanders and France found their names omitted from the lists in one of the recent elections. That was not due to any fault of their own; someone had neglected to sign an affidavit, or something of that kind. Is it fair that such things should be allowed to take place? The present election law is most costly in its operation not only to the candidate but to the country and to the great body of voters. To-day the fact that women enjoy the franchise in Canada makes it even more indispensable that the election law should be enforced with fairness and accuracy. In large municipalities in the province of Ontario the registration system is practically in effect today because of the recent assessment to election day; elsewhere it is not carried out so often. Now, the provincial voters' lists are somewhat based upon the municipal system, but not the Dominion lists. A national system of registration would be fair to everybody, and if a person does not take the trouble to register the application of some sort of penalty would almost be justified. Such a national registration plan is followed, I believe, in the state of New York, also in other states of the republic, and in other countries successfully. In my opinion a national registration system would prove far more satisfactory than the law in force to-day. I regret very much that the party to which I belong assumed office last summer and thereby secured control of the electoral machinery. It was thought that by having that control they would secure several seats. In my opinion such control did not gain one single seat under the party system. Under the party system everybody wants to be appointed returning officer or poll clerk, and everybody wants to remove the name of somebody else from the list. The present election system, I think, has outlived its usefulness. A committee of this House should be appointed, with power to act during the recess of parliament and to carefully investigate the entire electoral machinery and that of other countries A national system of registration would certainly be best for cities and towns. There might be rural constituencies where it would prove somewhat of a hardship but such cases could be taken -care of by other provisions. The present franchise act has been weighed in the balance and found wanting. It contains too many defects, and is most cumbersome and costly in its operation. No matter whom you might have as chief electoral officer it is not possible to carry out the law efficiently. I
IMr. Church.]
am not reflecting on the present occupant of that office; the whole election machinery is absurd. The present law is costing the country far too much and is too inefficient. Furthermore, there is too much expense thrown on candidates which should be borne by the country such as notifying voters where to vote and register. If we improve the law in the direction indicated we shall have purer elections and a larger popular vote will be recorded.
For the reasons given I suggest the appointment of a special committee to overhaul the existing election law and machinery and bring in a report. We are spending a large amount of money on the present law and it is a flat failure. I doubt whether there is a riding in the whole of Canada where men and women have not been disfranchised owing to the inequality and injustice of this particular legislation. It is a relic of antiquity of other days, and we have not advanced beyond the somewhat crude system which was in force at the time of confederation. In some instances open voting was the method then followed at elections. Even this method would have prevented such frauds as occurred during the Peace River election.
I ask for a national registration voters' list system adapted to our service, taking into consideration the geographical sections of the country, the provinces and the special circumstances of the case. Those who do not take enough interest in the matter to register if necessary, should not have a vote. I believe the introduction of this system has led to a large increase in the number of voters in New York city and in the state of New York. In the last election for the governor of that state and the many minor officers, warm approval was expressed of the national registration system as against the voters' list system which had been weighed in the balance and found wanting. _


Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, the resolution of my
hon. friend is to the effect that the present election act as regards voters' lists is not satisfactory and that it should be replaced by a national registration voters' list system. I would be inclined to agree with the hon. gentleman that the present system is not quite satisfactory. From my experience in my province I know that the former system of using provincial lists which are prepared and corrected every year was much more satisfactory. Under the present system we have to have long election campaigns and this is very costly, especially in the cities.
In England I know they have lists which are always in readiness. They have officers

Dominion Electoral Lists
whose duties are to prepare and correct the lists, and when a dissolution occurs the lists are ready. They have closed lists that cannot be changed or modified after the issuing of the writs. Such a system has a good deal to commend itself even to the people of this country.
On the other hand the system of accepting the provincial lists cannot be adopted because the provincial lists are not uniform in all the provinces. In Quebec the women are not yet on the provincial list so that there would have to be some system of putting them on the lists which are used in the federal election. That matter could be looked into and I do not know whether it would not foe possible to go some distance along the line suggested by my hon. friend.
As regards the question of referring this matter to a committee, there is no such statement in the resolution, which merely asks the opinion of the House regarding a system of national registration for the voters' lists, and we had better wait until some other time to discuss this matter. The chief electoral officer has not yet forwarded to this House the report which he has to make after every general election. Doubtless he must have new suggestions to offer as the result of his experience during the recent campaign and that report will have to be considered and studied by this House. If there is a necessity for a committee-and I am sure that when the election act is being changed or modified, it will be proper to refer it to a committee for its consideration-that will be the time to submit the matter to a committee. Meanwhile I think the suggestions made by my hon. friend deserve the consideration of this House and it will be well for every member to give the benefit of his views and experience when the time comes for changing the present system.


Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I feel very much
interested in the matter which the hon. member for Toronto Northwest (Mr. Church) has brought to the attention of the House this afternoon in regard to the existing election machinery in this country. I well remember when the present Dominion Elections Act was passed in this House, I think during the session of 1920 or 1921. I remember also I had a great deal to do with the passage of that much maligned measure. If my memory serves me aright that measure was before the House for either one or two sessions and it certainly was under review by a committee of the House. Very much labour was expended on the bill.
We had this condition to face- and we must realize it because we have yet to face itthat we have in Canada nine provinces in nearly all of which there is a varying provincial franchise. There is no uniformity amongst them. We have the most varying inequalities in regard to Quebec, where under the provincial franchise women voters have not. yet been admitted to the franchise. In all the western provinces there are other variations so that you could not as a matter of fact adopt provincial lists as the basis for a Dominion franchise unless you adopted in this House the provincial franchise. If in the judgment of the House it would be well to adopt the provincial rather than the federal franchise, then provincial lists might be made available.
We did introduce new systems in that act and we thought we were taking a step in advance. Whether that was the case or not the electors of this country and the members of this House can judge. We adopted a system of registration in the cities and towns and a system of enumeration in the rural districts. We took the system of enumeration in regard to the rural districts from the law in force, I think in Saskatchewan, a law which had not prior to that time been in force in any part of eastern Canada. We were then confronted with the condition which existed in Prince Edward Island where there were no voters' lists at all. We could not adopt the provincial list in that province because there was none. Under these circumstances the committee and the House gave the country what they believed to be as workable, as practical an act as it was possible to evolve, an act which would suit every portion of the Dominion of Canada.
I am sorry to confess that in the actual working out of that act difficulties have arisen. It has proved to be expensive; it has proved in many cases to be inconvenient, and it has not met the requirements of Canada in every instance. That we all admit. It is easy enough to criticise, but I want someone to suggest a better method. The hon. member for Toronto Northwest, has suggested a method of national registration. I do not know what the term implies, and I do not understand the system. The resolution itself throws no light upon the system, and my hon. friend in * his speech offered us no intimation in regard to the working of such a system. I do not know what it is, but I believe in every country where an electoral system is in force some objection is still found to the existing system. My hon. friend the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) has referred to the system in force in Great Britain. I believe their system is as nearly
Dominion Electoral Lists

perfect as any we know of, but at almost every session of the British House there are objections made even to that system. In the first place, it is very costly. It requires a host of officials, not for the purposes of elections, but officials who are appointed practically for life-revising barristers and their clerks, and a host of supernumeraries for each riding. They have a dense population; they have not the long distances we have to contend with here, and they are able under their system to get up what is in my judgment a well-nigh perfect list, more nearly so than the lists in any other country that I know of. I would certainly welcome the adoption of such a system in this country. It was tried, you may remember, Mr. Speaker, under the government of Sir John Macdonald in 1885. The principle of revising officers was then adopted in this country, but it was found to be unworkable, cumbersome, expensive, and no improvement on the former law, and the very government that introduced that change, after trying it out in two elections, repealed it, or at all events was ready to repeal it. Well, should we be ready to adopt it again? That is the question. I am satisfied that if we did, if we worked on the English principle and were willing to stand the expense, we should have as nearly perfect a voters' list as it is possible to get.
Registration, in my judgment, is not going to help the situation any. It might avoid a little difficulty in our urban centres, but it could never be applied to our rural districts. You cannot ask a farming community in this country to go five, ten, fifteen, twenty or fifty miles for the purpose of registering prior to an election, and it would be impossible to appoint enough officials to go round and register them at their respective homes.
If anyone has any suggestion to make by way of improvement, I am sure the House will welcome it, or if a committee can devise any better means than we have now under our present elections act, then by all means let us get a committee to work and evolve a better system than we now have. We tried to get as perfect a system as possible, but I am perfectly willing to admit that it has many imperfections. If my hon. friend from Toronto Northwest (Mr. Church), who seems to have given some attention to this matter, would set himself to work and devise certain amendments designed to bring about an improvement in our present system, we would examine them with pleasure, and I am sure that any helpful suggestion would be welcomed by the government and by the House.
Motion withdrawn.

NATURAL RESOURCES-ALBERTA On the Orders of the Day:


Hugh Guthrie: Might I ask my hon. friend
the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) if he would cause to be laid upon the table of the House, if possible to-morrow, the exact question which was submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada recently in regard to what is known as the Alberta natural resources case? I am aware I can get it from the files of the Supreme Court, but it would be a great convenience if my hon. friend would lay it on the table to-morrow.


Ernest Lapointe: I shall be pleased to comply with
my hon. friend's wish in that respect tomorrow.
CARILLON POWER DEVELOPMENT On the Orders of the Day:


Hugh Guthrie: Might I also ask that there be
laid on the table of the House, at as early a date as possible, copies of all orders in council which have been passed within the last twelve months in respect to the Carillon falls power development on the Ottawa river, near Hawkesbury.


Ernest Lapointe: I shall be pleased to bring my hon. friend's request to the notice of the right hon. leader of the government, and no doubt he will give a satisfactory answer to my hon. friend.


DISSOLUTION OF LATE PARLIAMENT
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hugh Guthrie: Might I ask that there be laid
on the table of the House, at as early a date as possible, all correspondence which took place between the Right Hon. Arthur Meighen and His Excellency the Governor General, then Lord Byng, in June or July last, with reference to the dissolution of the then parliament, and all correspondence which took place between the same persons with reference to the resignation of the Right Hon. Mr. Meighen last autumn; and at the same time and in the same connection, all correspondence which took place between the present Prime Minister of Canada and His Excellency the Governor General in the month of June last in regard to the resignation of the then government or in regard to the dissolution of the then parliament.

Alberta Coal


Ernest Lapointe: I shall be pleased to transmit the
nature of my hon. friend's wishes in this regard to the right hon. leader of the government, and no doubt he will give a satisfactory answer to my hon. friend.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hugh Guthrie: There is just one other matter
I wish to mention with a view to expediting the business of the House. There are a large number of Senate bills on the order paper which cannot be proceeded with until the standing committees of the House are struck. Might I urge upon the government the propriety of seeing that these standing committees are struck as soon as possible so that the legislation may be proceeded with. The striking committee, I think, was appointed last December before the adjournment.


Ernest Lapointe: I am sorry the chief whip is not
here. I know there have been communications between representatives of the various groups in the House, and I thought that a decision had been reached. However, I think that to-morrow an answer will be given to my hon. friend in regard to that matter.
HOME BANK DEPOSITORS On the Orders of the Day:


Mr. PETER McGIBBON (Muskoka-Ontario):: I would like to ask the Minister
of Finance if it is the intention of the government to carry out the recommendations of the judges of the Exchequer court to grant another $500,000 to the depositors of the Home Bank.


James Alexander Robb: I am not sure at the moment that we have had any such recommendation from the judges of the Exchequer court, but I will look into the matter.


Peter McGibbon: It was announced in
the newspapers.
NATURAL RESOURCES-ALBERTA COAL On the Orders of the Day:


Thomas Langton Church: Last spring two urgent matters came before the House, the first with reference to the rates for the transportation of coal from Alberta. This question was to be referred to the railway commission for immediate action, but we have heard nothing of it since. Secondly, what has become of the application
to the Supreme Court of Canada in reference to the natural resources of Alberta, about which we were told a year ago in the speech from the throne legislation would be brought in? We were told that there would be also a special meeting of the Supreme court, and that parliament would then be advised in regard to the matter. It is a question not of law but of policy. What has become of these two matters? It is nearly nine months since the House dealt with them? Why the delay? WhaJt is the situation?


Ernest Lapointe: I can answer perhaps one of the
questions put by my hon. friend, with reference to the question submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada. As my hon. friend knows, since that statement was made in the House, many things have happened in this country. There has been a general election and another government has come into power, and until the present government was back in office again, according to the wish of the people of Canada, nothing further was done with regard to that reference. It is now before the Supreme court; it is pending, and I hope there will be an early decision.
Hon. CHAS. A. DUNNING (Minister of Railways and Canals):	As far as the othei^
matter is concerned, I presume my hon. friend is referring to the request which was made to the Board of Railway Commissioners to inquire into and determine what was the actual cost of transporting coal from Alberta to Ontario. The Board of Railway Commissioners have not yet reported with respect to the matter. They have been busily engaged ever since in connection with the general rates inquiry and I am not just sure just how far they have got in connection with the question of the cost of transporting coal.



TARIFF ADVISORY BOARD DUTY ON PUMPS

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):: In view of the statement
made by the Minister of Finance yesterday, will he be good enough to lay on the table the evidence of the report of the board in connection with the application by the Ames Baker Company, Limited, of Brandon, for a change in the duty on pumps, as made before the Tariff Advisory Board?


James Alexander Robb: The information will be made available.
On motion of Mr. Lapointe, the House adjourned at 5 p.m.

Governor General's Warrants
Thursday, February 10, 1927