1950-03-28

Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, all hon. members will have learned of the air disaster this morning in which the United States ambassador, the Hon. Laurence Steinhardt, lost his life.
It was my painful duty this morning, in company with the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson), to call at the chancellery, at the United States embassy and also at the residence of the United States minister, Mr. Julian Harrington, to express the sympathy of the government and of the Canadian people on the tragic death of the ambassador, of the United States minister's son and of three officers of the United States Air Force. I feel sure all hon. members would wish to join in that expression of sympathy.
I should like at this time to read into the permanent records of parliament the statement I have already given to the press concerning this terrible disaster. My statement is as follows:
All Canadians will be shocked by the news of the air disaster in which the United States ambassador, Hon. Laurence Steinhardt, lost his life.
The death of Mr. Steinhardt is a grievous loss to the foreign service of the United States in which he has had such a distinguished career. For Canada it is the loss of an understanding friend who believed deeply in the value to each other and to the world of the friendly association of our two countries, and who contributed day by day in countless ways to the strengthening of our common bonds.
The tragedy is heightened by the fact that the son of Mr. Julian F. Harrington, the United States minister in Canada, also lost his life.
The sympathy of the Canadian people will be extended ini full measure to Mrs. and Miss Steinhardt and to Mr. and Mrs. Harrington in their bereavement, and to the families of the three officers of the United States Air Force who also lost their lives in this disaster.
In the name of the government and people of Canada, I have sent a message of sympathy to the President of the United States.
Perhaps it would be appropriate to place the text of this message on the record. It is as follows:
Ottawa, March 28, 1950
Harry S. Truman,
President of the United States,
Washington, D.C.,

I was shocked to learn a few minutes ago of the tragic death this morning of the Hon. Laurence
Steinhardt. My regret will be shared by all Canadians; for in the comparatively short time Mr. Steinhardt was in this country he had won the respect and admiration of us all. I am sure that they would wish to join me in extending to you personally and to the people of the United States generally a message of sympathy in the loss of this devoted and experienced servant of his country.
Louis S. St. Laurent


Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to join with the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), personally and on behalf of those with whom I am associated, in the expressions of sadness and regret at the death of Mr. Steinhardt, and also the United States minister's son and members of the United States Air Force, and in conveying to their families the deep sympathy that we feel for them at this time.
Because of his close association with so many of us I should like to speak particularly of Mr. Steinhardt.
Death always brings sorrow and a final sense of loss. This is particularly so when someone of the great vitality and great human qualities that Mr. Steinhardt possessed is suddenly taken from us by a tragedy such as that which occurred near Ottawa this morning. Every one of us will join with the Prime Minister in the message of sympathy that has been conveyed to Mrs. Steinhardt and her daughter. It is to be hoped that for them there may be some measure of comfort in the knowledge that those of us who collectively represent all the people of Canada most wholeheartedly extend to them our deepest sympathy in the loss of a loving husband and father who had played so great a role in strengthening the ties of friendship and respect between his native land and our own.
Laurence Steinhardt was more than a great ambassador of the United States. He was a great human being. He sacrificed unusual material opportunities to serve his country through one of the most critical periods in the world's history. He was an outstanding lawyer, and until 1933 was actively associated with one of the most important and most highly respected legal firms in the United States. Before practising law he had been an accountant, and because of that special training was called upon to represent the government of the United States in many different countries in connection with the legal problems that arose out of the first world war. While giving him unique opportunities for personal advancement, this experience also trained him for the wider service of his country in the diplomatic field.

The late Hon. Laurence A. Steinhardt
Thus it was that, in his first year as President of the United States, President Roosevelt personally persuaded Mr. Steinhardt to give up his professional activity and serve the United States abroad. In 1933 he represented the United States in Sweden, where great events were under way. He remained there until 1937. From there he went to Peru, where he took part in the framing of the agreements that emerged from the Lima conference.
Then he went to Moscow, where his ability to speak many languages, and his knowledge of history and international politics, placed him at the forefront of those who were still seeking in every way possible to prevent Russia from making the fatal mistake of joining hands with nazi Germany. Those high hopes were shattered when the agreement was signed between Russia and Germany which brought on the second world war. Nevertheless he continued to work for peace in every way he could, and during the invasion of Finland by Russia he visited that area in an effort to restrain Russian aggression. In Moscow he met the Japanese foreign minister Matsuoka, both before and after his visit to Berlin, and did what he could to impress upon Japan the ultimate futility of the axis dreams of world conquest.
When the Russian government left Moscow, Mr. and Mrs. Steinhardt went to the new capital, and then later they went to Turkey where they remained from 1942 until 1945. Then they went to Prague where they saw the communist tyranny once again working in all its cruelty. In 1948, with this background of experience and service, Mr. Steinhardt came to Ottawa, at a time when the relationship between the United States and Canada had assumed such immense importance. Here he employed his truly remarkable gifts for the purpose of cementing the firm foundation of fellowship and understanding between these two democracies to which the Prime Minister referred and with which the Prime Minister is so intimately acquainted.
Great though Mr. Steinhardt's earlier achievements were, achievements which won for him the Medal of Merit, the highest United States decoration any civilian may receive, his greatest service to his country and to the world-wide cause of freedom was here in Canada during the past two years. He had great faith in Canada. In one of my last conversations with him he spent considerable time in describing the vast opportunities he saw in this country for rapid development in the years ahead. That affection for Canada and confidence in our great future undoubtedly guided the sympathetic interpretation of the Canadian point of view which he gave to Washington.

It is always a great shock to learn of the accidental death of a man of great vitality, courage, charm, and unusual ability. Nevertheless it is all too often the closing page of a life of great service. Loyalty to the supreme cause of human freedom knows no boundary. In mourning his loss at the very height of his attainments we also share a feeling of pride with his own fellow countrymen that under our free democratic system men like Laurence Steinhardt are prepared to forgo the bright prospects of personal advantage so that they may serve the cause of all mankind. Tragic though his death is, service to the things he loved has been given in full measure. Of him it may truly be said: "That life is long which answers life's great end."


Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roselown-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of those associated with me I wish to join in the universal feeling of sorrow that has been expressed at the passing of a gentleman who was not only a great citizen of his own country but a great world citizen. Those of us who had the opportunity from time to time of meeting Mr. Steinhardt were impressed by his charm, his gentleness, and his humanitarian outlook. He came to Canada as an ambassador with a background of knowledge of our country. I believe that in the days of his youth he travelled across western Canada, and years afterwards, when he was being received by Canadian ministers of the crown and other dignitaries, he said that he had received just as hearty a welcome when he knocked at the back doors of the prairie people as he received when he came here to represent his country as ambassador.
To Mrs. Steinhardt and her daughter we wish to express our deepest sympathy, and to the United States people our grief at the loss of a great ambassador. I should like to express also our sympathy to Mr. and Mrs. Julian Harrington, whom some of us also know well. The loss of their only son will be a source of great grief to them; and I am quite sure that from one end of this country to the other the death of the United States ambassador and of members of his staff under such tragic circumstances will indeed be deeply mourned.


Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that I speak for all the members of this group when I say that we were grieved to learn that this morning a plane accident had snuffed out the lives of a number of our American friends, among whom was Hon. Laurence A. Steinhardt, ambassador to Canada. I find it hard to think of words to express the sorrow we feel at the untimely passing on Canadian soil, through an accident, of so many citizens of our great and friendly neighbour to the south.

If I speak mostly of Mr, Steinhardt it is not that I feel less grief over the loss of his companions on the plane, but because he was the spokesman and mouthpiece of his country in Canada.
I knew Mr. Steinhardt, having met and talked intimately with him on a number of occasions after he came to Canada in 1948. On those occasions I felt the warmth of his pleasing personality and admired his great ability. I felt that he was a real friend of our country. He displayed a keen interest in Canada, in our development, and in all we are trying to do. We had the feeling that here was a diplomat of prime stature, having such an understanding of this country as well as of his own, and possessed of such unusual wisdom, that he could draw our two great countries together into closer co-operation in all our efforts. This I think he did.
The world is far too short of ambassadors of good will. Mr. Steinhardt was indeed one of these, and therefore his loss is all the more tragic at this time.
I wish, on behalf of the group which I represent, to express our deepest sympathy to Mrs. Steinhardt, her daughter, and the relatives of the late ambassador in their bereavement, and to the government of the United States, which has lost one of its most brilliant representatives. We must not forget those who are left to mourn each of the others who lost their lives in that most regrettable accident this morning. Our heartfelt sympathy and humble prayers go out to them also.



SUPREME COURT OF CANADA


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table two certified copies of the English version and two certified copies of the French version of a general order made by the Supreme Court of Canada amending the supreme court rules.



INCOME TAX


Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, many requests have been made to the government on behalf of farmers and fishermen that the new regulations fixing the rates of depreciation for 1949 and subsequent years should not take effect until 1950. As I previously explained to the house, suspension of these regulations would mean that farmers and fishermen would be entitled to no allowance in respect of depreciation for 1949. It has been decided, however, to amend the regulations so that farmers and
Legislation
fishermen will be entitled to claim, in respect of the year 1949, depreciation at the rate prevailing in 1948.
There have also been representations regarding the regulations covering depreciation for taxpayers other than farmers and fishermen, particularly in regard to some of the rates and to the limitation of the allowances to corporations to the amount charged in their financial statements. Because the regulations provide that taxpayers may continue to use the 1948 rates in computing their 1949 income, this matter is not of immediate urgency, but I should like to assure the house that careful consideration is being given to these matters, and that the government's decision will be announced in due course.



NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, members of the house may be interested to learn that yesterday the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom invited, through the chairman, the members of the North Atlantic council to meet in London in the early part of May. The Canadian government has accepted the invitation, and will be represented at that meeting.



TERRITORIAL LANDS ACT


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Resources and Development) moved: the first reading of Bill No. 81 (from the Senate), respecting crown lands in the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CRIMINAL CODE


Stuart Sinclair Garson: the first reading of Bill No. 82 (from the Senate), to amend the Criminal Code.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CANADIAN PACIFIC AIR LINES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Apparently there is some

Inquiries of the Ministry question whether Canadian Pacific Air Lines will be able to continue flying the route from Vancouver to the Far East by way of the Aleutians, by reason of an air field in the Aleutians being closed. Can the minister tell us what the situation is, and whether the service will be discontinued?


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport):: The Canadian authorities were informed by the United States government some time ago that the United States Air Force was contemplating withdrawal from maintenance of certain air bases in the Aleutians, since these were no longer considered necessary by the United States Air Force, and the expense of maintenance was extremely heavy. One of these, Shemya, has been used by both Canadian Pacific Air Lines, and a United States air line, Northwest Air Lines, on their service to the Orient. It is understood that United States civil aviation authorities do not consider it feasible to maintain Shemya purely for civil purposes, in view of the extremely heavy cost involved. Should Shemya no longer be available, it will probably be necessary for Canadian Pacific Air Lines to contemplate use of a mid-Paciflc route to Hong Kong and Tokyo by way of Honolulu, Midway, Wake and Guam.
The air transport board has already discussed this problem with the representatives of the United States civil aeronautics board and the United States state department, and it is expected that satisfactory arrangements can be made for use of this alternative route should the necessity arise, as seems likely.



SHIPPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Lionel Chevrier: I should like to reply to a question which was asked by the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor) in connection with a collision which took place in Halifax harbour some days ago. A preliminary inquiry took place following the collision between the Gertrude da Costa and the Island Connector in the harbour of Halifax. The master and ten members of the crew of the fishing vessel, the Gertrude da Costa, lost their lives as a result of the casualty. The loss occurred following a collision with the Island Connector, which was outbound. The fishing vessel was inbound from a fishing trip to the Newfoundland banks.
On account of the heavy loss of life it has been decided to hold a formal investigation under the provisions of the Canada

Shipping Act into the circumstances under which the casualty occurred. The Department of Justice has been requested to name a commissioner to hold the investigation, and everything possible will be done to open hearings at Halifax at the earliest convenient date.



SYDNEY MENTAL HOSPITAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Has the minister's department been informed of the destruction by fire of the mental hospital at Sydney, Nova Scotia, creating a very difficult problem in the housing of hundreds of patients in temporary quarters? If so, is there any immediate assistance that might be given to help solve the problem?


Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: I have been informed of the fire in question. As yet, however, no project has been suggested to us by the provincial government. Of course time has not permitted that to take place, but the matter will be followed closely in the light of the whole situation.



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. Diefenbalcer (Lake Centre):: should like to bring a matter to the attention of the Minister of National Revenue. On the 20th of March I asked whether the minister would produce the judgment of the income tax appeal board in the case of "Mr. C." and the Minister of National Revenue. I asked whether he would consider tabling the evidence and the reasons for judgment in that order of the appeal board. I now ask the minister whether he has given consideration to that request, and whether, in addition to delivering the judgment, he will table the evidence.


James Joseph McCann: I understand that it is not the practice to table court judgments in this house. In this case, however, the judgment and the evidence are available under the statute setting up the income tax appeal board.
I have handed to the hon. member for Lake Centre a copy of the reasons for judgment and of the minutes of judgment in this particular case. So far as the evidence is concerned,.

that is not public or available because at the request of the appellant the case was heard in camera.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister, or, if it should be referred to some other minister, perhaps he will indicate to whom my question should be addressed. Would it be possible for a statement to be made at an early day as to government policy in the matter of the five-day week for government employees?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I believe the facts will speak for themselves, Mr. Speaker, as to what is government policy. The public know what are the hours now being put in by members of the civil service, and there is not apt to be any change until there has been a decision by the government to authorize a change. As soon as that is done, the hon. member may be sure the change will be quite apparent.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is the Prime Minister aware that some employees do get the five-day week, while others do not?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: My understanding is that those who are subject to civil service regulations are not on the five-day week.



AGRICULTURAL PRICES SUPPORT ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Monday, March 27, consideration of the motion of Mr. Gardiner for the second reading of Bill No. 17, to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Argue.
Mr. P. E. Wright (Melfort):: Mr. Speaker, when the house rose at eleven o'clock last evening the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) said that if these bills were not passed by Thursday they would automatically expire. It is not the intention of this group to try to hold up this legislation. We simply wanted certain amendments made which in our opinion would make it more effective; but we have no intention of filibustering so far as these bills are concerned.
Before we adjourned last night I had read a statement by the minister which indicated that though the period from 1943 to 1945 was being used by the government as a base period, this did not necessarily mean that floor prices would be based on that period. On further questioning the minister stated
28, 1950	1183
Agricultural Prices Support Act that the best guarantee the farmers in this country had with respect to floor prices was the fact that the Liberal party was in power, and they would look after this matter. In other words we are to have in Canada, if I correctly interpret the minister's statement, political floor prices. In the Annapolis valley, for instance, where we are to have a byelection in a short time, if the farmers want to feel that their crop will be taken care of next year, according to the minister they had better vote Liberal, or else.
As an industry, agriculture wants something better than that. We do not believe floor prices for agricultural products should be at the whim of the government. We think they should at least put in the legislation some assurance as to what those floor prices will be. In our amendment we do not ask that the floor prices be set at the highest point any agricultural product reached during the past number of years. Our amendment seeks to-
-provide that floor prices should be established at such levels as to guarantee to producers a price-cost relationship not less favourable than that prevailing in the period 1944-48.
In other words all we are asking in this amendment is that the relationship of agricultural products to the wages being paid labour and the returns to manufacturing and other industries in this country, which obtained during the period from 1944 to 1948, be continued. We think that is only fair. We believe there was a reasonably fair relationship in our economy during that period. The trouble is that agriculture has not been in a position to maintain its prices. When the farmers put in their crops they have to sow sufficient to meet the needs of the consuming public, not only when we have bumper crops but during periods when our crops may not be so good. The result is that a larger acreage has to be sown if we are to have that margin of safety which I think is desirable in any economy. Having established that margin of safety, I do not believe the farmers should be penalized when we have bumper crops and, as a result, have some surpluses coming on the market. In those periods the speculative interests who handle our agricultural products from the time they leave the farm until they reach the consumer are able, by reason of these small surpluses that may exist, to depress the prices of all agricultural products, and the farmers take the loss. The result will be that sooner or later the farmers will stop producing to the extent necessary to provide this margin of safety for our economy. When that time comes it will mean that if we should become short of any particular crop we shall have to go into the export market and buy to meet

Agricultural Prices Support Act our own needs, and I do not think that is a good policy.
Under this legislation we should be providing a bridge for agriculture to carry it over difficult periods. Instead of that the government is simply providing a life preserver so that if the farmer should get into difficulty and begin to drown he can be thrown the life preserver and pulled out- maybe. Is that not political strategy? You see, a man is much more thankful to the person who throws him a life preserver, pulls him out and saves his life than he would be to the person who built a bridge which would keep him from falling into the water at all. Human nature being what it is, people often forget who built the bridge, but they seldom forget the man who rescues them when they are drowning. Apparently it is the intention of the government under this legislation to provide a life preserver in case the farmer is drowning. Then they will save him, and of course he will be thankful to the government that saved his life.
I do not think that is enough. That is not what the former prime minister indicated when this legislation was introduced. In a radio broadcast in 1943 Mr. Mackenzie King said:
I wish tonight to thank the farmers of Canada for their magnificent contribution to the battle of production. I wish again to appeal to them to continue to help hold the front line against inflation by continuing to support the price ceiling. If, to help win the war, the farmers are asked to accept a ceiling on prices, we believe they are entitled to a floor under prices to ensure them against an agricultural depression after the war. As an essential part of its post-war policy, the government intends to ask parliament at the next session to place a floor under the prices of main farm commodities.
In fulfilment of that promise, the present floor prices legislation was passed in 1944, just prior to the 1945 election. Under this legislation we have spent some $6 million to $8 million in support of agricultural prices. The method that has been used in support of those prices tends to allow the price to drop to such an extent that the farmers producing a particular product become alarmed, hold protest meetings, and, when they finally get the ear of the government, the government places a floor under the price of that product. In our opinion, that is not sufficient. We have, therefore, moved this amendment. We believe that under this amendment, if it were adopted, there would be a fair relationship maintained in Canada between agriculture, industry, labour, and all the producers of goods and services.
I am sure many of the farmers on the government side of the house realize that this amendment is necessary if this act is to be

effective in doing the job it is intended to do. I would urge upon them that they support the amendment, and see that agriculture is not left in such a position that it is dependent upon the whim of any particular political party. This is the parliament of Canada, and we should be prepared to protect our own economy.


Mr. J. J. Smith (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, there are a few remarks I should like to make on this Agricultural Prices Support Act. Many speeches have been made in this chamber, some of them good, including the one made by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue), but his was greatly exaggerated. He said that the farmers in western Canada were disappointed with the treatment received from the Department of Agriculture and this government in the matter of floor prices.
At the outset, when we have floor prices under farm commodities, I believe those floor prices must be related to some contract. I do not see how floor prices can be set unless we have some idea of the contract to which those prices are to be related. There was a wheat board, and I believe it did a good job. There are people who will argue, among them possibly some members of this house, against boards, contracts, and that sort of thing. The administration which I support has taken the middle road. There is one party in this house that wants contracts and boards for everything, and another that would prefer not to have any.
Let us look at our wheat board. I believe a consideration of that subject is relevant to this prices support act. Mention has been made of the loss suffered by the western farmers during the war. I am not in a position to speak for the eastern farmer, but I think I can speak for the western farmer. I have been one, and I am still one. Possibly if I tried I could say what a farmer ought to have for his wheat in order to make his farming pay. I farmed throughout the thirties and paid for a farm during the forties.


Percy Ellis Wright: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the wheat board does not come under this legislation at all.


John James Smith: It does not? Very well, then; I shall discuss that later. I shall deal now with the amendment which is before the house, if that is in order, sir. It calls upon the Department of Agriculture to put floor prices under farm commodities; the amendment requests a floor price which may be considered somewhat high. Why do I say that? I said before that I thought any attempt to set floor prices for farm products should be related to a contract, or to the price that may be obtainable. If that is not done,

the farmer may have to be subsidized by the rest of Canada. I do not think the western farmer wants to be subsidized by anyone. He has always been able to look after himself, and he is going to continue to do so. I do not want anyone from another part of Canada telling me that eastern Canada is carrying the western farmers. I do not want to have to swallow that.
Now, Mr. Speaker, so far as this amendment is concerned, it looks good on the surface. In my opinion, however, an examination of it will indicate that it endangers our contracts and may prevent further contracts. Let us take beef, for the moment. We have no contract for beef, and at the moment our surplus beef is going to the United States. I presume if this amendment carries it will be necessary for the Department of Agriculture to guarantee the farmer a high price for beef. Suppose the United States decided that our beef could no longer enter the United States. We would have to look for a new market for our beef. Suppose the United Kingdom decided she could use some of our beef. At the moment beef is selling for about twenty-two cents a pound live weight. Do I say it is too high? No. But we would have to look for the new market, and I agree with other hon. members in this house that Great Britain is a good market. Suppose the minister of agriculture for Great Britain invited the Minister of Agriculture for Canada to negotiate a price for that beef. The British minister of agriculture may say that twenty-two cents is too high, but he would be willing to take it at sixteen or eighteen cents. Our Minister of Agriculture would have to say that there had been an amendment to the Agricultural Prices Support Act, and he, therefore, could do nothing but ask for the twenty-two cents. That would be a difficult position.
If the C.C.F. party had been elected, and the member for Assiniboia were the minister of agriculture, I do not think he would enjoy being put in that position. If the Conservatives had been elected-I am not sure I could pick the minister of agriculture, but I think the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) would have that portfolio. He would have to say that the parliament of Canada tied him down by setting a high price. Do not let anyone say I said the price was too high. If the Minister of Agriculture were called upon for such a purpose he could possibly take some advisers with him, but he could not take all the members of parliament to relieve him of the restraint this amendment would impose.
I am here because I talk plain English and I am going to continue to do so. I want to say further that I do not think it would be good politics for me to stand up and say-
28, 1950
Agricultural Prices Support Act and I am not saying it-that the prices of agricultural products are too high, because I represent an agricultural constituency. However, the farmers in western Canada-and I speak for the people in the communities of Saskatchewan who have had crops; there may be farmers who have not had crops, and they may not be in a good position-the western farmers are not suffering and are not complaining about prices and markets today; and I say that to hon. members from eastern Canada.


An hon. Member:: Are you with us or against us?


John James Smith: I shall not have to speak too loudly if you fellows will keep quiet. I do not think I shall say how far back we might go, but we in western Canada a good while ago expected a decline in prices; and there is a good deal of credit coming to someone because we have not had a decline in prices. During the Christmas holidays I was speaking to a friend of mine; as a matter of fact he is a good friend, but he is such a socialist that he told me he would like to vote for me but he could not vote Liberal. Still he is my good friend. As I say, I was speaking to that friend, and I have some good friends in Saskatchewan who are C.C.F.'ers. He was talking about markets. He reads Hansard, and from reading Hansard for the last session of this parliament he gathered that we had no markets left and that prices had gone. He asked me about markets. I think he thought that I would give him a truthful answer. I told him that as far as I could see, we had not lost them yet; prices had not fallen too badly. He went on to indicate the figure that he thought the western farmers should have for wheat, and I may say that I agree with him. He said that any time the western farmer could get a dollar for a bushel of wheat at the elevator and get a fair crop, with other things in line with that price, he was not doing too badly.


Percy Ellis Wright: What about the other things?


John James Smith: I said that they must go with it. I will go into that right now.


Mr. Argue:: That is what the amendment says.


John James Smith: I know what your amendment says.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


John James Smith: I agree with my hon. friend that the farmer, when he seeds his crop in the spring, should know what he is going to get for a bushel of wheat. In the past that has been the big mistake in the set-up in the west. You talk about machinery. If I sow grain in the spring
1186	HOUSE OF
Agricultural Prices Support Act I will gamble with the weather. But if I know what I am going to get for a bushel of wheat I will buy my machinery accordingly. No machine agent can come along and sell me a $4,500 combine if I know that I am going to get only a certain price for wheat. I would know whether I can pay that amount of money for the combine or any other machine.
I am speaking strictly about the western farmer. The farmer in the spring sows his crop, and if he does not know what the price of wheat is, he will take a chance on buying, say, a combine or any other machinery at a big price; then when he comes to sell that grain the price may be down, and that is where he gets into trouble. The same thing applies if you buy land or anything else. I maintain that if we get a set price for wheat that will stabilize the price of everything else that the farmer buys; because the machine companies will put the price of their machinery in line with what the farmer is getting for wheat, or else they will keep it.


Percy Ellis Wright: Is that what they did in the thirties?


John James Smith: I am not talking about the thirties. In conclusion I want to put on the record a clipping from the Estevan Mercury of February 1, 1950. I do not often read from newspapers, but as it is often done in this house, I presume it is in order for me to do so.
The article is headed "Farm prices down in 1949-First decline in ten years", and reads as follows:
Ottawa.-Canadian farm prices were down in 1949, the first decline in ten years. However, the general average still remained more than 21 times higher than during the 1935-39 period. The bureau of statistics reported that farm prices of Canadian agricultural products dropped 1-3 per cent from the 1948 record high of 252-6 to 251-3. This index is based on 1935-39 equals 100.
Responsible for the over-all drop were declines in prices of grains, dairy products, potatoes, vegetables and furs. Increased prices of livestock, poultry and eggs, fruits, tobacco and maple products failed to make up the loss.
The regional picture showed that there were small increases in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. These were offset by decreases in the other provinces.
Here are the indexes for western provinces, with 1948 figures in brackets:
Manitoba, 251-9	(254-6):	Saskatchewan, 239-4
239-3); Alberta, 257-2 (256-2); and British Columbia, 244 (238).
During December there were price decreases from December, 1948, in almost all commodities. Compared with last November, however, the prices for livestock and dairy products were higher, while potatoes, poultry and eggs were down. General indexes in all provinces were down from the same month a year earlier.
The bureau reported that lower grain prices were largely a result of government authorization of the wheat board to undertake marketing of western oats and barley delivered by producers during the 1949-50 crop year.


Under this arrangement the wheat board pays to producers on delivery of these grains an initial payment only. Not included in present figures is the money which will later be paid to farmers in the form of participation payments.
The bureau gives a statistical review of farm price indexes dating back to 1935. The review shows a drop from 1938 to 1939 but yearly increases from then on, right up to 1948.
Here are the indexes for the last sixteen years:
1935-	88
1936-	96-9
1937-	119-7
1938-	105
1939-	91-8
1940-	96-8
1941-	110-2
1942-	133-1
1943-	157-8
1944-	172-4
1945-	184-2
1946-	200-8
1947-	212-5
1948-	252-6 (all-time high) 1049-251-3


An hon. Member:: Are you with us or against us?


John James Smith: I join with my friends in the opposition who have asked this government for contracts. They have said, however, that the government of the day had done nothing to get contracts. I should like any member in the opposition, or anywhere else in the house, to show me where the government of the day with regard to agricultural products have refused to sign a contract with any country in the world if they figured they were getting a fair deal for the farmer. If you can do that, I will sit down and never open my mouth again in this session. Well, no reply. It takes two to make a contract. I join with my friends in asking the government to get contracts; I cannot join with them, however, in their amendment to ask in one breath for a contract and in the other to tie that department down so that it cannot sign contracts. We know perfectly well that when a contract is made the Department of Agriculture must initiate it or must deal with the appropriate department of other countries and make that deal and the other country has something to say about the price. I am therefore not supporting the amendment.


Mr. A. C. Slewari (Yorklon):: Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to drag out this debate, as I think the sooner this matter is dealt with, either by a vote or otherwise, the better.
The other night the minister announced that the statute with which we are now dealing will run out on Thursday night. In addition to other things, the amendment proposes to throw out the statute. It proposes that this bill be not read a second time.


An hon. Member:: Not now read.


Alan Carl Stewart: Yes, not now read, which means a hoist of the bill, and a killing of the bill.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Alan Carl Stewart: Yes, it means killing of the bill.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Alan Carl Stewart: I am making my speech, and you can make yours later. I know how often we have heard from those one-and-a-half farmers in the C.C.F. during this session.


Mr. Bryce:: What kind of a farmer are you?


Alan Carl Stewart: What is that?


William Scottie Bryce: What kind of a farmer are we hearing from now?


Alan Carl Stewart: I will tell my hon. friend, if he wishes to know, that I was born in the west, before he ever saw it. In addition, let me say this, that I farmed four and a half sections of land, which I don't think he has ever done. And in addition to that I wish to say this, that when I took over that farm-


Mr. Speaker:: I must ask hon. members to address the Chair.


Alan Carl Stewart: I wish to advise you that not only did I take over the weediest farm in the district in which I now live, a farm which I was told was hopeless, but that farm now has on it six happy families, and it is cleaned up.
In addition I wish to tell my hon. friend that I raised as many as two hundred head of Hereford cattle, and sold them; and that is more than he has done. And in addition to that I was in the delegation which came here to Ottawa to ask for prices from the government. I asked for dollar wheat, Mr. Speaker, but I did not see one C.C.F. member of parliament on either of those occasions. Some of them have wiggled over since we were through that. While we did not get dollar wheat, we got ninety cent wheat at that time.
To return to a discussion of the bill before the house, let me point out that section 9 of the act provides for the setting up of a board. That section provides that the board, subject to and in accordance with the regulations made by the governor in council, shall have authority-
(a)	to prescribe from time to time, with the approval of the governor in council, prices at which the board may purchase agricultural products in the market:
(b)	to purchase at such prices any agricultural product, if such product, on inspection, meets standards as to grade and quality prescribed by or under any act of the parliament of Canada . . .
(c)	to pay to the producers of an agricultural
product directly or through such agent as the board may determine the difference between a price prescribed by the board with the approval of the governor in council .	.	.
Agricultural Prices Support Act
And then under section 10(2) there is provision for a revolving fund of $200 million of the money of the people of Canada to protect the producers. The act does not cover wheat, but it covers other farm products, under the authority of the governor in council, from time to time.
Now my hon. friends propose, in amendment, that the bill be not now read; and they go further and suggest that the government bring in a bill which would have the effect of guaranteeing to the producers a price-cost relationship. The mover of the amendment has suggested no prices; he has suggested no costs, except that certain years are taken. Those who support the amendment do not deal with any particular product.
As has been pointed out by the hon. member who preceded me, the government will have to deal with other countries, and it will have to deal with the Canadian consumer. It will have to make international deals, and otherwise; but in connection with certain products, it will have to deal chiefly with the Canadian consumer. From time to time those prices change, either up or down.
We do not know whether there will be another war; we do not know what will happen in connection with surpluses at any time. We do not know whether the British will buy more of our products. And I venture to say that if the government undertook for a term of years to accept prices which were not satisfactory during all those years, there would be another howl from members of the C.C.F. party in the House of Commons-and in no uncertain terms. The government has been fair, and so far as the farmers in my constituency are concerned, it has satisfied them.
I do not believe it is our duty when we come to the House of Commons merely to set up a whine to which the people of eastern Canada have to listen. We in the west do appreciate what the government of Canada has done. Particularly is that true in our dried-out area. We appreciate what has been done under P.F.A.A. and P.F.R.A. We believe that the farmers of Ontario, on the other hand, appreciate what the government has done in paying $20 million a year toward the freight on our coarse grains brought down here to feed their cattle and pigs. We believe they appreciate that. We are already getting certain benefits for our farmers from these actions.
When the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) spoke last night I could not make out what he was driving at. However, I noticed that when he had made his speech he was applauded by members of the Progressive Conservative party; they and their leader applauded it.

a

Agricultural Prices Support Act


Mr. Smith (Calgary West):: So did the
Minister of Agriculture, and others on the government side of the house.


Alan Carl Stewart: I do not think they did. This is what the hon. member said, as reported at page 1160 of Hansard:
I venture to make a suggestion which I think will be quite unpopular in the farming portion of the constituency in which I live. I am going to say now that I am quite content for another year.
So are we.
That may indicate how I shall vote.
I trust my friend will vote for the bill before the house.
I do think it is about time that this parliament ceased to be operated by pressure groups. The farm group is one of the most important, and the labour pressure group is the other group.
Then he went on to say this:
I am in favour of holding the prices support act, as called for in the bill. I think that if we quit playing with our economy, if we quit this patchwork business, and let our goods find their own level in world markets, the better it will be for Canada. I do not mean world markets of the kind we have established recently, for example, in coarse grains. I know that what I say now will be very unpopular with all those pools and farm organizations in western Canada, which have been operated on a basis of hatred for the Winnipeg grain exchange, hatred, selfishness-[DOT]
And then he implies at the end of his speech that he is going to vote for the subamendment. Well, there is no subamendment; but there is an amendment. He says this- and I agree with him-
Why should we tie our prices in this agricultural matter to 1944-48? The answer is that it certainly suits the producers of farm products because it was in that period that, if we did not reach the peak, we reached a very high level. . . I support the idea of the extension of the Agricultural Prices Support Act.
That is the stand of my hon. friend.


Mr. Gardiner:: He wishes to know whether the hon. member for Calgary West is going to vote for the amendment or for the bill.


Alan Carl Stewart: And I suggest that to carry out what the hon. member has so well expressed, in such eloquent language, he must support the bill before the house-because the amendment will do just the very reverse of what he was arguing.


Arthur Leroy Smith: If the amendment is defeated I will vote for the bill, of course I will.


Alan Carl Stewart: If you vote for the amendment you will kill the bill.


George Alexander Drew: Nonsense.


Alan Carl Stewart: There has been quite a bit of dispute as to the matter of fixing prices. We heard considerable criticism of the speech delivered in Brantford by the

Minister of Agriculture; but I venture to say that in making that speech, and in following it up, as he did, the Minister of Agriculture was largely responsible for selling 60 million pounds of our pork in Great Britain. They got it through at that rate. Now my friends turn round on the Minister of Agriculture and criticize him for the amount he is getting for that pork. I would point out that the taxpayers of Canada generally are subsidizing that sale of pork to the tune of $2,100,000. I believe the western farmers will appreciate that action. A total of 670 million pounds of pork is consumed in Canada, so another $23,500,000 will be paid by the consumers of Canada because of the increase in pork values the minister secured. Yet my friends argue that we are going to lose from the sale of wheat to Great Britain. Their prognostications there will again prove entirely incorrect.
There is a variety of views as to whether marketing should be conducted by the government and whether we should fix floor prices. I believe that those of us who come from western Canada are fairly unanimous that there should be floor prices for our farmers. We do not want to see the bottom drop out of prices; we want reasonable floor prices guaranteed so that there will be some stability to compensate for the sacrifices they made during the war and since in connection with prices. Some part of this burden should be borne by the general taxpayers who are not farmers.
The hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) keeps quoting the Searle Grain Company Limited, but this company outlined a plan in the issue of their publication of March 22, 1950, that agricultural products should be handled and marketed solely through the open market and the usual trade channels and that individual support prices should be fixed. This is the so-called Brannan plan. Consumers would have the benefit of purchasing at open market prices whenever such prices fell below the support prices, and farmers would receive a cheque direct from the treasury of Canada.
This plan was strongly supported by Mr. Chapman, president of the Montana farmers' union. On the other hand, Mr. Kline, president of the American farm bureau federation, vigorously opposed the Brannan plan. Then there are other gentlemen in the United States who have made other statements. Mr. Kline made another statement at Washington in which he said that he was definitely against any such plan.
On the other hand we hear certain commendation of the policy followed by the Minister of Agriculture and which apparently meets with the satisfaction of the farmers of my constituency. I should like to quote what

was said by the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture at the convention recently held in Niagara Falls, and I quote:
During the past seven or eight years, the present agricultural program has been evolved between the federation of agriculture and its member bodies on the one hand, and the Minister of Agriculture representing the dominion government on the other. Canadian farmers have greatly appreciated this cooperative arrangement and the mutual understanding and confidence which it engendered.
The understanding, however, which farmers across Canada had of this program is that it was to cover both the war and post-war periods.
It has for a period of four or five years since the war. That is the commendation of the head of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. There is in our province a gentleman who is greatly respected by farmers of all political stripes. Dr. Hedley Auld, in summarizing the matter in January of this year, said this:
Figures given to the agricultural production conference held in Ottawa in mid-December showed that the United Kingdom can buy bacon from Ireland, Denmark and Poland for a fraction less than 31 cents per pound, then 36 cents in Canada; that cheese is available from New Zealand for less than 22 cents and from Australia for 19-2 cents per pound, compared with 30 in Canada; that these countries also have butter at 34-7 and 34-5 cents respectively, whereas our price is pegged at 58 cents; that Denmark's eggs are priced at 30-8 cents per dozen-
And again:
It would seem, therefore, that Canada cannot hope to retain an important share of the British food market unless and until our prices are brought more closely into line with those of competing exporting countries and exchange problems are more satisfactorily resolved.
Meanwhile, recent Ottawa dispatches indicate that cabinet ministers are not in agreement as to how much support should be given to farm prices through the Agricultural Prices Support Act. It should be clear that food prices cannot be maintained at their present levels. To do this would require state aid to farmers on a scale without precedent. But a policy of unsupported prices would surely invite a depression which would be most unpleasant, and it is improbable that many would solicit a return to the thirties.
I think his further remarks are significant because they indicate an unbiased opinion. He continues:
Her willingness to buy Canadian bacon and other products from Canada now and to defer acceptance of a corresponding value in terms of wheat is a concession which may be very useful to us in stabilizing values of other Canadian farm products in 1950.
Incidentally, it is my understanding that if the 1946 wheat agreement had not been made when it was drawn it would have been impossible to negotiate it at any later date. And without the wheat agreement of 1946 there would have been no Anglo-Canadian agreements for meat and cheese in 1948 and 1949. And without such agreements and with so many farm products of the United States declared "surplus," the problems connected with the marketing of Canadian food surpluses could easily have arisen a year or two earlier.
Agricultural Prices Support Act
That is the opinion of an unbiased gentleman who has retired from public life. It is idle for hon. members of this house, such as the hon. member for Souris, to compare conditions in Canada with those in the United States where their home consumption is much heavier. It is idle for the Scotsman from Manitoba-I forgot his name-to contend that we should be compared with Great Britain, that they have a stabilized market over there for their farmers. Everything produced in Great Britain is consumed there and when you consume everything in your own country it is a simple thing to stabilize prices to the consumer and to everybody else.
I do not intend to speak at any great length except to say that my friends to your furthest left, the one and a half farmers, have been talking and talking in this house until some of us are getting tired listening. You would think that they had all the farmers on their side of this legislature. We have past presidents of rural municipalities, we have a number of former reeves who were in municipal life for many years, and we have farmers from Ontario and all the other provinces of Canada. On the Liberal side of the house there are more farmers than in all the rest of the house.


Mr. Homuth:: How many farmers are in the cabinet?


Alan Carl Stewart: After all, the cabinet listens to the private members. In answer to the hon. member and his leader may I say that we are not rubber stamps. I have never been told yet how to vote in this house and I have never yet heard of a Liberal who has been told how to vote. In answer to my hon. friend I want to say that if there are any rubber stamps in this house they are to be found in his party. When we were dealing with the pipe-line bill I can remember how his leader waved the old flag and wrapped himself in it and then each and every one of the Conservative party got a little flag and was waving it. No truck and trade with the Yankees.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: My hon. friend is not a rubber stamp because a rubber stamp at least makes an impression.


Alan Carl Stewart: C.C.F. representations have been made to the government and no doubt the government will listen, but I trust that the government will also listen to the representations that have been made .by the many Liberals who represent farmers in this house. We had the experiment of a socialist government in New Zealand. I was there ten or eleven years ago shortly after their Labour government was formed. I have heard from a minister of

Agricultural Prices Support Act that government every year since I have been there, and if you check the history of that government you will see that all it did for the farmers of that country was to practically crucify them. It was the farmers and the liberal-minded people of the towns and cities of New Zealand who kicked out the Labour government the other day. They decided that they had had enough of taking farm prices, putting them in the general pot, and spending them on somebody else. We do not want too much government control in Canada. We want fair prices for our farmers. Western Liberals have been fighting for that for thirty years, and we are going to try to see that we get it. If we do not get it from the government, the carpings and wailings of my friends to the left will never stir any government to give them anything.


John George Diefenbaker: shall not endeavour to follow the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Stewart)-


An hon. Member:: Nobody could.


John George Diefenbaker: -in the address he has delivered, but he interested me when he spoke of the number of farmers in the Liberal party and of the high positions they have occupied. If I did try to compete with him I might point out that the hon. member for Brant-Wentworth (Mr. Charlton) was vicepresident of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture at one time, and that the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) was president of the rural municipalities association of the province of Manitoba. Therefore they are both at least as qualified as the hon. member for Yorkton and myself to speak on this question.


Mr. Sinclair:: A couple of barefoot boys.


Mr. Sinnoit:: How many more have you got?


John George Diefenbaker: The Progressive Conservative party has consistently supported the legislation first introduced in 1944 known as an act for the support of the prices of agricultural products during the transition from war to peace. We have continued to support that legislation. Mention has been made of the amendment and the effect it will have on the legislation. I cannot follow my hon. friend in his argument as to its effect. The amendment reads:
That Bill No. 17 be not now read a second time but that it be resolved that in the opinion of this house consideration should be given to the introducing of legislation to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act so as to provide that floor prices should be established at such levels as to guarantee to producers a price-cost relationship not less favourable than that prevailing in the period 1944-48.
There would be no delay in connection with the bill. If a meeting of the agriculture

committee were convened today under the chairmanship of the hon. member for The Battlefords (Mr. Bater), with the efficiency that he brings to bear in the discharge of his responsibilities as chairman, it would not take that committee very long to arrive at a conclusion on this matter and bring the bill back into the house as directed in the amendment. For years we of the Progressive Conservative party have been advocating the establishment of parity prices. In April, 1941, I moved a resolution on one occasion in the house for the establishment of parity prices.
In his argument the hon. member for Yorkton quoted certain persons as authorities for the propositions he advanced. I am glad he did because he established in advance the authority of those from whom I intend to quote. He mentioned in particular the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Mr. Hannam. I accept him as an authority just as the hon. member for Yorkton did. In the Free Press Weekly Prairie Farmer Mn. Hannam had this to say about the agricultural situation:
. . . Canadian farmers face a worse market outlook now than farmers of any other country.
He went on to set out the supporting facts. At the moment I am not placing the responsibility. I realize quite well that when the British minister of food was in Canada in 1947 he indicated that Great Britain would continue to buy Canada's food products, but I say that Mr. Hannam has stated the position of Canadian farmers generally. He pointed out the need of the establishment of parity prices. I should like to read a supporting excerpt from the Rural Co-Operator of February 28 last:
Farmers, in their prices support recommendations, are not asking the government to maintain farm prices at peak levels.
The article goes on to quote Mr. Hannam as follows:
"In its recent brief to the federal cabinet, the Canadian federation of agriculture asked that certain farm prices be maintained at December, 1949, levels, but these were certainly not peak prices" ...	'
In quoting that excerpt, I realize that someone will say that the amendment covers the period from 1944 to 1948, and that there was in fact some decrease in farm prices during the year 1949. In any event, when the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture submitted his brief he asked for a parity price and he stated:
. . . the level of returns to farmers in 1949 was substantially lower than in the peak year of 1948 because of a 30 per cent increase in freight rates and increased feed costs. Costs are still at 1949 levels . . . farmers, who went down one step in the level of their returns in 1949, had to suffer another

and more serious step downward in 1950 with the reduced prices which resulted from loss or reduction of markets.
I shall support the amendment. I am in entire agreement with the hon. member for Yorkton in his attitude towards applied socialism; I have taken that stand in this house from the very beginning. But the amendment submitted by the C.C.F. party is not socialism; it is salvation for Canadian farmers because the situation is such that if the level of prices as fixed under the Agricultural Prices Support Act is a level that is below the costs of production then in reality such a floor level will be of no assistance to the Canadian farmer.
I realize the difficulties in fixing a floor price level because if the level is fixed too high, too great a contribution will have to be made out of the $200 million revolving fund. On the other hand, if the floor price is down in the basement, so far as price levels are concerned, then the legislation will be of no benefit whatsoever. On a matter such as this I should like to see the minister give members on his own side of the house the freedom to vote as they wish. I am not saying that any direction is given or that any member in this house is under pressure by an alleged farm bloc or any other bloc; but I do feel that this amendment represents what Canadian farmers in all parts of this country are asking for. Indeed, during the election campaign the question of price supports was discussed, and over and over the attitude of those supporting the government was stated to be that the price level should be maintained on a parity basis. I have the quotations which I could read if necessary. I intend to support this amendment.
It has been stated that this legislation must be passed before Thursday evening. No one wants it to fail, or to die by the efflux of time, but surely the house has a right to discuss this matter, even though it has been introduced within the dying days of the period during which it is in force.


Alan Carl Stewart: Could not the group with which you associate have introduced a resolution earlier in the session, and left the act alone? And can you assure the house that the Senate, through your friend Haig, will pass this?


John George Diefenbaker: What was the last part of the question?


Alan Carl Stewart: Whether the other man in the other place will pass this.


John George Diefenbaker: I do not know who the other man in the other place is.


An hon. Member:: You should.
28. 1950	1191
Agricultural Prices Support Act


John George Diefenbaker: I am not a mind-reader.
I do not enter any controversy with my hon. friend on this, and he knows that under the rules only a member of the cabinet can introduce a resolution which would result in the expenditure of money. That is why something along this line has not been introduced by a private member. That is why various other matters to which I might make reference, such as the removal of the means test for old age pensioners, have not been introduced in the same way. If private members had the right to introduce such measures that one, in any event, would have passed this house. I am sure that if private members had the right to introduce a resolution providing for establishing parity prices it would have been done, and farmer members in all parts of the house would have given it their support. I appreciate that the minister will say this is a vote of want of confidence.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not going to say anything about it. Hon. members have enough sense to vote the right way.


John George Diefenbaker: If the minister will go that far, that is fine. Having enough sense for that, will he go further and say to those on the Liberal side of the house that they may vote on this matter as they will, instead of regarding the amendment as a want of confidence?


Mr. Ross (Souris):: Follow the example of the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) in connection with coarse grains.


John George Diefenbaker: Our farmers everywhere, fearful of the situation, fearful of the prospects, fearful because of world conditions generally, are asking that they be protected against the danger of falling prices. In recent years we have learned what we did not know in the 1930's, or in 1928 or 1929. It is only within the last few years that nations everywhere have been bringing in legislation to provide against depression in farm prices.
I now bring to your attention, Mr. Speaker, a resolution which was adopted at a meeting of farmers in the county of Grey on January 26 of this year. They stressed the need for parity prices in these words:
That this body of representative Grey county farmers respectfully but emphatically urge the Canadian >
government to provide floor prices for farm products that will maintain returns to the farmer at least equal to 1949 levels until such time as other commodities, services and labour decline proportionately . . .
That was a meeting attended by farmers of all political beliefs; and they asked something more, which I believe deserves consideration by the government:
... or until such time as a royal commission has made a thorough study and report on parity reward in the various fields of service to our national well being.
1192	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Agricultural Prices Support Act
The suggestion for the setting up of such a royal commission has been made in other provinces as well, and indicates a desire on the part of the farmers to secure the best possible information on the problem. The hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Stewart) made a very good plea on behalf of western members, when he said that we appreciate What the people in other parts of Canada have done for the west. I join with him in that statement. Over the years I have said in this house that membership here for a few months or a few years will convince anyone that there is not an east and a west operating against each other, and that we in western Canada owe much to the willing, benevolent assistance that has been given by eastern members in helping meet the problems of the west.
The farm price problem is serious, and requires all the thoughtful consideration we can give it. I believe the government should give some assurance that in the establishment of floor prices parity will be given paramount emphasis. On the one hand we have surpluses, while on the other side of the equation there is a demand for greater production in order to increase the world food supply. The minister was recently at Washington attending a meeting of the international agricultural organization where, with statesmen from other parts of the world, an endeavour was made to arrive at some formula for the distribution of commodities. No final decision was reached. Having regard to the fact that food is as essential in an over-all national defence program as the production of munitions, we in this house should do all we can to maintain price levels which will assure our farmers fair and proper returns.
The world situation today demands food, and economists are pointing out that, even at the rate food production is increasing, in fifty years there will be world chaos, for production will be exceeded greatly by needs. Food is needed to meet the conditions prevailing in countries which are ripe for communism. Food is pre-eminent as an antidote to communism. We must maintain our food production factory in this country, and I believe the government should give every consideration to the acceptance of this amendment, which is in reality but a suggested improvement of the present legislation. With food prices facing continuing reductions; when Marshall funds are no longer available for the purchase of Canadian agricultural products; with surpluses of farm products piling up in the United States; the problem of disposing of Canada's farm products becomes serious and challenging.


Mr. J. H. Harrison (Meadow Lake):: I think I would be remiss in my duty, Mr. Speaker, if I did not make my position clear on this bill, especially in view of the remarks made by the member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker). He has suggested that we might be under some form of coercion, and not in a position to use our own judgment as to how we should vote on this bill. That being the case, I should like to say that, personally, I have never been told to vote in one direction or the other since I came to this house. I doubt very much if any other member on this side of the house has had any different experience.
This amendment moved by the C.C.F. party is one which I am definitely going to vote against. I shall tell you why. It is nothing more or less than a pie-in-the-sky amendment. It is quite similar to the amendment the C.C.F. party moved in connection with old age pensions, which was described by the member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher), one of their own members, as a pie-in-the-sky measure. It was for that reason he did not vote for it.


Mr. Johnston:: What do you mean by "pie-in
the-sky"?


John Hornby Harrison: All that I know, sir, is that the C.C.F. party in the province of Saskatchewan has become synonymous with measures of this kind, and they have been described in that manner. Possibly I could give you an illustration. I have before me a copy of Votes and Proceedings of the legislative assembly of Saskatchewan. As hon. members are aware, when these gentlemen bid for power in 1944 they suggested a pension of $50 per month. In this house, the C.C.F. members have suggested that we eliminate the means test.


Charles Edward Johnston: Would $50 per month be pie-in-the-sky?


John Hornby Harrison: It was at that time. It may not be considered so today, but it has not come to pass in any event. There is some difference however-


Stanley Howard Knowles: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, will I be permitted to take part in this debate, and discuss old age pensions?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Beaudoin):: I think it should be clear to all hon. members that their remarks must be directed to the bill under discussion.


John Hornby Harrison: I bow to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, but I was merely giving the gentleman an illustration for which he had asked. May I be allowed to continue on that basis, and give it as an illustration? I think it has a bearing on the question the hon. member asked.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Order.


John Hornby Harrison: Votes and Proceedings of March 21, 1950, of the province of Saskatchewan-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Order.


John Hornby Harrison: -states as follows:
The debate continuing, in amendment thereto, it was moved by Mr. Danielson, seconded by Mr. Tucker, that all the words after "that" be deleted and the following substituted therefor:
This assembly regrets the failure by the government-
That is the Saskatchewan government.
-to give due consideration to payment by the province of the supplementary-
That is the $2.50 supplementary.
-old age pension allowance without a means test.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I have no objection to this matter being discussed, if I can do it too.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Beaudoin):: I am
sorry, but I have to call the hon. member to order. He is not allowed to discuss old age pensions on this bill, nor on this amendment.
I should like him to address his remarks to the chair.


John Hornby Harrison: Perhaps I could explain my position on this act by quoting the following editorial which appeared in the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix of March 25, 1950. It reads as follows:
We must recognize at once that the floor price plan is not an income guarantee for all farmers. There is no intention in the act of setting up a system whereby every farmer in Canada will be able to sell his produce at a profit irrespective of the market demand. This is not a parity price scheme, or even a Brannan plan, as farmers have in the United States. It is rather, the establishment of a minimum price system to prevent the repetition of the sort of situation we had in the 1930's when farm prices went to ruinously low levels.
At another point, the article continues:
The government will be accountable to farmers and consumers alike for the floors it sets. This will certainly not result in any "scientific" set of floor prices, but it will probably mean in practice a reasonable compromise between the producer and the consumer at a time when the ordinary machinery of the market breaks down for any one or a number of reasons.
We avoid this way the inflexibility of the parity price system-
That is the main objection I have to the amendment advanced by the C.C.F.; it is too inflexible a system. It will bring about the same set-up as there is now in the United States, where they have these parity prices. The price set is such that it is conducive to the extra growing of products that are already in surplus.
28, 1950
Agricultural Prices Support Act
I continue to quote from the article:
This inflexible system is threatened today because it is encouraging overproduction in some lines at vast expense.to the taxpayer and the consumer.
If we set up such a system, that is exactly what would happen. We would not be able to continue it. It is doubtful if even the great country to the south of us, with all its monetary resources, will be able to continue a system of this sort. Certainly, we could not offer our farmers in the west the same sort of pie-in-the-sky system they have in the United States. It is not feasible.
The article states:
It is a question of how long this policy can survive, even in so wealthy a country as the United States. We should be in for no end of trouble in Canada if we tried a similar policy and we think a majority of farmers know a Canadian parity golden goose would soon be expendable.
The Canadian floor price plan, as announced in the house, does not offer the Canadian farmer permanent agricultural prosperity. What it does offer him, we hope, is relief from the fear that he will be wiped out as a producer in times of adversity. If we can get this distinction clearly fixed in our minds now, we shall avoid a lot of trouble and discontent when the policy may have to be invoked in the future.
That is what our friends have been very good at, stirring up trouble and discontent. Possibly that is their idea in moving this amendment. I wanted to make my position clear and I am definitely going to vote against the amendment and for the bill.


Mr. Robert Fair (Battle River):: I am not
sure whether it is safe for me to get into what is apparently a private Saskatchewan fight. There are people in the other parts of Canada who have to live off the land, however, and I think it is only right I should say a few words on this measure. When speaking on the resolution, I stated we were in favour of the prices support legislation. We have supported it from the beginning. I also staffed at that time we were quite concerned about where the floor would be set. I am glad that this amendment has been moved by the member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) because that will give us an opportunity of expressing our opinion as to where the floor should be.
I was rather amused by the argument advanced by the member for Yorkton (Mr. Stewart). When he was speaking, I could not help thinking of the old man who had been in politics all his life and was coaching a young protege the art of debating. He said, "When your argument is weak, yell as loud as you can". That is exactly what the member for Yorkton was doing. I do not think we can take much notice of the argument he placed before us. As I stated before, we are supporting the price legislation and we shall also support the amendment that has been moved by the C. C. F. organization. I do not want

Agricultural Prices Support Act to have the benefits of the price legislation given to us as indicated by the Montreal Star in which there is an article entitled "The legal way" and which describes the way the lawyers do it. The article reads as follows:
When a man gives you an orange, he simply says: "Have an orange." But when the transaction is entrusted to a lawyer, he adopts this form:
"I hereby give and convey to you, all and singular, my estate and interests, right, title, claim and advantages of and in said orange, together with all its rind, juice, pulp and pips and all rights and advantages therein with full power to bite, cut, suck and otherwise to eat the same or give the same away with or without the rind, skin, juice, pulp and pips, anything hereinbefore or hereinafter or in any other means or whatever nature or kind whatsoever to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding."
Later on, another lawyer comes along and takes it away from you.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Stare decisis.


Robert Fair: I do not want the advantages of the prices support act given to us in that manner. I am quite satisfied that the farmers of Canada are entitled to this prices support legislation. We have been told by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), who should know, and who does know, that during the war years the farmers accepted prices far below levels to which they were entitled. This price legislation is simply giving us some of the protection that we have bought at a high premium during the war years. There is no reason in the world why the farmers of Canada should not be entitled to the same protective legislation as is being given to other industrial and occupational groups. The farmer is now paying costs of production which are as high as those in any other period over the past number of years, while we see the prices of our products dropping. There is no reason in the world why some legislation should not be passed to protect the farming industry; because if the 'farmers are placed back again in the poverty line, as they have been in many years in the past, then the whole economy of Canada must suffer.


Mr. T. J. Kickham (Kings):: I shall take only a few minutes of the time of the house, Mr. Speaker. I am glad that it is the intention of the government to make the Agricultural Prices Support Act permanent, as indicated by the legislation which is now before us. I think this act has already proven its worth in supporting the price of eggs and butter. I am, however, greatly puzzled as to why the act has not been implemented with regard to our potato surplus in Prince Edward Island and in the maritime provinces. In our province-and I expect the same is true with regard to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick-we are selling our potato stock for thirty-five cents a bushel and our seed for

from forty cents to forty-five cents a bushel, which is about sixty-five cents below the cost of production. As I believe was stated by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) when he first spoke on this bill, the purpose of the act was to reimburse farmers for selling below the cost of production. When we sell potatoes for thirty-five cents and forty cents a bushel, we are selling below the cost of production to the extent of sixty-five cents or seventy cents per bushel.
There is one thing to which I wish to call the minister's attention. A few years ago- I believe it was in the year 1944 or 1945; I am subject to correction on the year but it is immaterial for the purpose of what I am going to say-through the Department of Agriculture an embargo was imposed on our shipping seed potatoes from Prince Edward Island until the minister and the government were satisfied that the requirements of all the other provinces of Canada were satisfied. The Department of Agriculture erred to the extent that when the market for seed potatoes ceased to exist in the United States we found that we had still on hand in Prince Edward Island a large surplus of seed potatoes, which we had then to convert from one hundred pound bags into seventy-five pound bags. As a result, the loss incurred by both growers and shippers was considerable. More than that, at that time we could have shipped potatoes to the United States markets for from $1.75 to $2 per bushel, while the average price in the Canadian provinces ranged from $1.25 to $1.50. In all, we took a licking of about $400 per car.
Many representations have been made to the minister in the past two or three months requesting a support price, but apparently there is not going to be any support price in the maritime provinces. I could give the number of carloadings that I just received from our director of transportation.
To digress for a moment, I wish to say that the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) has been given great credit for the supply of cars he has put into Prince Edward Island each day. I believe there was an increase of something over 1,151 ears of potatoes and turnips shipped by rail up to March 22 this year, a considerable increase over last year. For the minister of industry and natural resources and the director of transportation for Prince Edward Island, I wish to extend our most hearty thanks to the Minister of Transport.
I think that the amendment proposed by the opposition looks to be a reasonable one, for this reason. The years from 1944-48 should be a reasonable period on which to

base farm prices because I think we were then subject to ceilings. It is therefore my intention to vote for the amendment.


Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):: May I say, Mr. Speaker, that in offering a brief contribution to the debate this afternoon, I do not think there is any occasion for the representative of an urban constituency to apologize for participating in a debate of this nature. I for one have always contended that the well-being and prosperity of agriculture is a matter of the first importance to the urban dwellers of this country. There cannot be any lasting or secure prosperity for the city dweller unless the farmer of this country enjoys security and prosperity as well.
There are good reasons, it seems to me, why representatives of all constituencies, whether urban, rural or mixed, should give support to the present bill. One has only to look back over the events of recent years to find ample justification, it seems to me, for supporting the measure. The fact is undeniable that the farmers of this country in those years did not receive for their products the prices they would have brought had there not been control of the sale of their products and ceilings on their prices. Now, when a time has come when markets are shrivelling and the outlook for the Canadian agriculturist is not nearly as bright as it has been in recent years, it is only right and fair that the Canadian agriculturist should say to all Canadians: "During the war and these, post-war years I bore an especially heavy share of the load. Is it not fair that measures should be taken to equalize the distribution of the load?" We of the Progressive Conservative party had a good deal to say about this in connection with some of the contracts entered into with the United Kingdom. Much was said about it by this party in connection with the wheat agreement. We pointed out that, when the Canadian wheat farmer was called upon to market his wheat in the United Kingdom at prices then substantially below the prices his wheat would have brought in the open market, it was only right and fair that the burden of those contracts should be distributed equitably over the whole Canadian population, and not placed exclusively upon the back of the Canadian wheat farmer.
As I understand it, this measure seeks to bring to the farmers of this country a measure of equalization of burdens when, in recent years, they have been called upon to bear more than their fair share of the load.
The removal of the time limit in the bill calls to mind the full title of the statute. The
Agricultural Prices Support Act bill to which we now refer as the Agricultural Prices Support Act was, as hon. members will recall, entitled "an act for the support of the prices of agricultural products during the transition from war to peace." It may be that the time has come to reconsider the full title of the bill, because I for one have the impression that, whatever may be said about the period of transition, it may not be possible to limit measures of this kind to what may be called a purely transitional period, because the remedying of the injustices of times past or, if you like, the equalization of a load unfairly borne in times past, may not be completely adjusted within what may be strictly called the period of transition.
There is one other matter I should like to mention in what I have promised to be only a brief participation in this debate. Prices, markets, sales and contracts are all inextricably interwoven, as must be apparent to anyone listening to this debate. That leads me to comment that it was with some consternation that I read this statement which appeared in a publication of the federal Department of Agriculture's marketing service. This document is published under the authority of the Minister of Agriculture, and purports to be the "Egg and Poultry Market Report of March 10, 1950". The article is headed in big, black, bold characters, "Poland, like Eire, points the way," and bears the further heading, "Central egg export agency established to handle all egg exports". Then this publication, issued under the authority of the Minister of Agriculture, proceeds to say:
Comprising all private and co-operative exporters and carlot shippers.
A recent government report "Polish Food Exports" tells how the economic reconstruction of Poland is being built on export trade.
Sales efforts in eggs are being directed toward Germany, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Palestine as well as England.
South American countries are also being approached in their season of short supply.
A new system of country egg receiving and grading stations is being established and new cold storages erected in Poland.
Egg breaking and market poultry processing and grading are being developed along modern lines.
Remarkable the progress that can be made when an industry adopts an energetic export program.
A program so organized that the producer may also share in the increment from that trade.
And this page concludes with these words in bold type:
Developments in other countries are worth watching.
To lead is better than to follow.
I have a comment to make about this kind of publication. I am shocked to find that in a publication issued by the dominion Department of Agriculture the farmers of this country, and particularly the egg and poultry
1196

Agricultural Prices Support Act [DOT]producers, are being told that Poland is the country that leads the way, and that this country should model its pricing and marketing policies on those of Poland. I do not think that does justice to the intelligence of the farmers of Canada. Why should the methods of a country under a totalitarian regime be held up to the farmers of Canada as the kind of lead they should follow? I am shocked to find this in a publication issued under the authority of the Minister of Agriculture. I say, Mr. Speaker, that whoever is responsible for writing material of this kind, which appears in a publication issued at the expense of the taxpayers of Canada and under the authority of the minister, must have had a very undue appreciation of and liking for the totalitarian methods of the regime which prevails in Poland today.
It seems to me that Poland is not the kind of country that we should be looking to when we seek a lead in methods to be followed so as to bring justice and fair play to the Canadian farmer.


Mr. A. E. Dewar (Qu'Appelle):: Mr. Speaker, having listened to one more agricultural expert across the way I think probably I had better make a few remarks in this debate. What I shall say first will not be received any too well by hon. members on this side of the house, although it may be received favourably by hon. members opposite. I am going to support the amendment-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Austin Edwin Dewar: -but only in principle, because I feel the principle embodied in the amendment is already in the bill.
Last evening our good friend from Springfield (Mr. Sinnott) spoke about wanting to give steers a fair deal. I wish to be on record with him in seeing that those steers get a fair deal. Then the hon. member for Prince Edward-Lennox (Mr. Tustin) said that something should be done in connection with beans. Those who follow the comics, particularly Lil Abner, will recall that lately that great detective, Fearless Fosdick, has been shooting everyone who eats beans. Probably that is the reason for the fall in the price of beans.
Let me refer briefly to the British market, about which much has been said. As I said in my speech one month ago today, by the calendar, or a period of twenty-eight days, the British people are going to buy where they can buy the cheapest. The holding of the British market is something which will be decided by the people in Great Britain. They and they alone will say, because they are going to buy where they can buy the cheapest.

We in Canada must consider that, when we talk about floor prices and the prices we are going to fix for our products.
In addition to that the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell), whom I respect in many ways, has argued that Great Britain fixes the prices on all her goods. I can understand that, because only a very small fraction of the food consumed in Great Britain is produced there. Anyone who stops to think will understand that the condition over there bears no relationship whatever to the conditions we face, when it is realized that primarily we are exporters and that they are consumers. His argument that they fix prices months or years in advance has no relationship to what we should or should not get in Canada.
Another hon. member said that there has been a great increase in the farm stock population of Great Britain. He has pointed out that they have 500,000 more cattle, two million more hens and 10,000 more sheep. Perhaps the fact that Great Britain has embarked upon this program of self-sufficiency, to serve her purposes-not Canada's-is the reason why some of the less popular products in Canada are not finding their way to the British market.
Last night the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) suggested that our pools constituted a pressure group. I said in my speech of a month ago, and I am going to say it again, that I fought against the pools probably more than all other members combined. There was no greater exponent or so-called authority on open market operations than the man who is speaking at the moment. But pursuing my thoughts, pursuing my studies and realizing the drift toward statism or nationalism, where the government takes control and operates these things, I came to realize that the quicker we wakened to the value of these pool organizations and cooperatives, the quicker we would get to a sound basis of operations. No hon. member of this house, particularly one coming from western Canada, should cast reflection upon the pools. If he does he has no business sitting in this house.
I repeat that I used to be very bitter about the pools and co-operatives, but I hope the Minister of Agriculture and the government listen to what the pools have to say. They are made up of farmers who are intelligent even though some of our opponents suggest that they are asking for sky-high prices. I had the pleasure during the Christmas recess of meeting a considerable number of farmers, and I went west shortly before the house opened. Of all the people I talked with in organized groups in the small communities

there was only one who said that he wanted the price of wheat for 1950-51 to remain at the present level.
Our farmers realize the position of the consumers of Canada. The prices of hogs, cattle, bacon, eggs and other commodities are related closely to the price of wheat. They always have been and they always will be. If my hon. friends in the little groups to your left are sincere in their plea for labour and the labouring man they will not ask that prices be kept at their present high position. They will try to get them more in line.
One hon. member has said that the farmer in western Canada has been crippled. I said during the election, and I say it again, that if the farmers of western Canada have been crippled I hope that this government goes on crippling them because they have been crippled in a very fine way. If hon. members will take the trouble to look up the statistics issued by the bureau of statistics they will find that a greater percentage of farmers retire each year than any other industrial or business group in the Dominion of Canada.
I am not suggesting for a minute that the farmers should take lower prices at once, but I do suggest that the time has come when we have to level off. We have heard a lot of hogwash about the price of eggs. I came to Ottawa last fall and I think my family are in a position where we can pay 75 or 80 cents a dozen for eggs, but there must be 50,000 families in this area who cannot pay that price. The price was entirely out of line. At the same time, when the control was taken off the price got out of line again. I suggested, and I think rightly, that our government use their heads and let this thing kick around a bit. We do not want to price commodities out of the consumer's hands; we want the man on the street, the man on salary, to be able to afford to buy and enjoy some eggs.
As I said when I opened my remarks, I support the amendment, but in principle only. Therefore when I vote I am going to vote against the amendment, and when the bill comes to a vote I am going to vote for the bill.


Mr. A. J. Brooks (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to take much time but I would like to say that I intend to vote for the amendment. I am not like the hon. member who has just taken his seat who says he has certain principles but who intends to vote against them.


Austin Edwin Dewar: 
Alfred Johnson Brooks: I am not an expert like the hon. member who has just sat down, but I am interested in agriculture because I represent one of the best agricultural constituencies in the maritime provinces. I am very much in favour of the prices support act as I hope it will be amended.
We have heard a great deal in this house about wheat. I was interested in hearing the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Stewart) speak this afternoon about wheat. I have been here for fifteen years and during that period, I venture to say, in the discussions on agriculture in this house the question of wheat has taken up ninety per cent of the time. Wheat is very important to the economy of this country and I am not surprised that considerable time is taken up in discussing it.
Canada has spent a great many dollars to support the wheat farmers in the west, despite what the wheat farmers in this house may say. Anyone who will go back over the records of the past fifteen years will find that to be a fact. My constituency is largely a dairying constituency and prices support for our products will be welcome indeed. The Saint John river valley is fast becoming an apple producing section and we are very proud of our apple production. I hope that this industry will receive all the encouragement that is necessary.
I was interested in the remarks of the hon. member for Kings (Mr. Kickham), who indicates that he is ready to vote according to what he considers to be his principles. He stood up in the house this afternoon and said that he thought this amendment was good for the farmers of Prince Edward Island. It is good for the potato producers of Prince Edward Island and for the farmers of all the maritime provinces. I hope that other Liberal members from the maritime provinces will follow the example of the hon. member for Kings and vote in support of this amendment and in support of their constituents.
There is some doubt as to just what is the situation with regard to potatoes in my province and in Prince Edward Island. A short time ago Mr. Duffie of New Brunswick arrived in Ottawa to consult with the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) and Mr. J. G. Taggart, head of the agricultural prices support board. When that gentleman left Ottawa he was under certain impressions which he had obtained from the minister. If the minister would not mind paying attention for a minute I should like to ask him a few questions. The Saint John Telegraph-Journal of March 21, in dealing with Mr. 1198	HOUSE OF
Agricultural Prices Support Act Duffle's report to the Grand Falls, New Brunswick, potato growers, had this to say:
As explained by Mr. Duffie, the co-operative would enter contracts with individual growers at planting time to purchase their potatoes at a set price. The co-operative would also enter into a contract with the federal government providing for what amounts to a floor price for the potatoes sold by the members to the co-operative. The co-operative would also set up a selling agency, which could be an existing organization, a new organization or a provincial marketing board.
The grower would know at planting time what the minimum price would be for his crop and could get advances on his crop.
According to the statement of Mr. Duffie after talking with the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), the grower would know at planting time what the minimum price would be for his crop.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not sure whether the hon. member was in the house the other night when the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton (Mr. Hatfield) raised the question and read the same article, I believe. I pointed out to him that what Mr. Duffie discussed with me was the act of 1939 and how it could be applied. That is exactly what he is dealing with there, the terms of the act of 1939.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The article says that it was discussed with the Minister of Agriculture and Mr. Taggart, the head of the agricultural prices support board.


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Taggart is the deputy minister of agriculture, and he is not the head of the agricultural prices support board. The head of it is Mr. Shaw.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I think we will have to send somebody else in place of Mr. Duffie to consult with the minister because either Mr. Duffie is wrong or the minister is wrong. Anyway, he gave the impression to the potato growers of New Brunswick that, as stated here:
The grower would know at planting time what the minimum price would be for his crop and could get advances on his crop. The government would determine the minimum price, in consultation with the co-operative organization, and the minimum would not exceed 80 per cent of the previous three years' sale price.
That is so much in line with the amendment that has been moved in the house that I am satisfied it is at least what the potato producers of the maritime provinces expect, and what they believe they were told by the Minister of Agriculture when this delegation-


James Garfield Gardiner: If I may be permitted to interrupt, I presume the hon. member wants to get the matter clear. The legislation passed in 1939 is the co-operative marketing act.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I understand that.


James Garfield Gardiner: Under it a co-operative may be formed. That co-operative appoints its


officials, and then they may come here and get support not exceeding 80 per cent of the average price of the preceding three years. They can announce lo their growers from that time the initial payment is so and so, based upon whatever the arrangement is. Then they can go ahead and plant their potatoes, and they know that is the least amount they are going to receive. That is all in the act of 1939. There is no necessity for any amendment to put it under this legislation.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Now that a co-operative has been formed in New Brunswick, I understand that the farmers may expect a guarantee of 80 per cent of the price that they have received during the past three years.


James Garfield Gardiner: No; just as Mr. Duffie says, they can expect an amount not to exceed 80 per cent, whatever is arranged for at the time.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I am just quoting the report in the Saint John Telegraph-Journal of March 21 as to what Mr. Duffie had to say on his return from Ottawa. As I said, I do not intend to take very much time. I should like to ask the minister whether he has received a resolution from the New Brunswick provincial government asking for support on potatoes for the balance of this season.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think I have, and if I have not there was a delegation headed by the minister of agriculture of that province which made that representation.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I should also like to ask the minister what he intends to do about it.


James Garfield Gardiner: As a matter of fact, I have asked the two provincial governments what they intend to do.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I see. It is just a case of passing the buck from one to the other. In the Saint John Telegraph-Journal of March 27 there is a headline reading:
United States moves to cut import of potatoes from Canada in next year.
I quote that simply to show the uncertainty of the United States market so far as potato producers in the maritime provinces are concerned. Our market can be cut off almost immediately as it has been in the past. We have been allowed to ship in certain quantities of potatoes at a certain duty, and then the market is suddenly cut off. I believe that shipments this year have been greater because of the support prices in the United States, but this situation is unsatisfactory to the United States; and, as in the case of all other products which the United States purchases from us, when they have a surplus of their own and they do not want our Canadian products they immediately take steps to cut them off. This is an indication that probably next year we

will not be able to sell many potatoes in that market. I am not going to take any more time. I am strongly in favour of the amendment. As I said a few moments ago, I do not see how any Liberal member from the maritime provinces, having the interests of the potato growers at heart, can do anything else but support the amendment.
(Translation) :


Mr. Jean Lesage (Monlmagny-L'Islei):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my approval of the bill now under consideration. I know that it is the answer to the wish of the many farm organizations in my constituency which have forwarded to me some resolutions requesting that the government continue to support the prices of farm products. The people of the province of Quebec approve this attitude with regard to staple products.
I have carefully considered the amendment proposed by the member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue), but I cannot endorse his argument nor the principle of his amendment.
I was amazed to hear certain members of the Conservative party stating that they supported this amendment as I am under the impression that the application of the principle of this amendment would put our agricultural economy in a strait-jacket. By such legislation the government would be hindered in setting floor prices and prevented from making weekly or even daily adjustments, if necessary, that might become essential to Canada's economy and that are obviously in the best interests of the farmers.
While on the surface the amendment proposed by the hon. member for Assiniboia may seem to protect the farmer, I have reason to fear that if the principle underlying the proposed amendment were applied, results would be quite different and in the end the Canadian farmer would be adversely affected.
On those grounds, I intend to vote against the amendment and in favour of the bill. (Text) :


Mr. A. Earl Caiherwood (Haldimand):: Mr. Speaker, since this legislation was introduced last week there has been considerable discussion as to the merits of the bill, and a number of suggestions have been made as to how it may effectively serve agriculture. I am very glad that all hon. members who have taken part in the debate have spoken in favour of the bill as it is generally applied. I am also very glad that many more members have spoken in favour of the amendment, because it is entirely in accord with the views I hold, and I believe it is in accord with the views of a great many members of the house.
Up to the present time the press in Canada has not been very favourably disposed toward price support legislation, but recently I
Agricultural Prices Support Act noticed that two widely read publications have given their support to the idea. I am very glad to see this, because I believe all sound-thinking citizens of Canada should support good legislation of this kind.
It has been suggested that the large surpluses in the United States have been built up by price supports generally, and to a large extent that may be true. But large surpluses have a way of disappearing almost overnight, when a drought or something of that kind comes along, and large supplies could be beneficial to a country [DOT] instead of being a liability, as they are at the present time. So far Canada has contributed very little under this price support program, which has been in effect since 1944. According to Fortune magazine it has cost the Canadian people only fifteen cents per capita per year for this price support legislation. Compare that with the cost of $25 per capita per year for the support of industry in Canada, and it does not seem a very large sum to pay in order to keep agriculture on an even keel. I feel that when this amendment is put into effect, as I know the minister will put it into effect, it will be of great benefit to our people.
I also believe that if the government had acted promptly when egg prices tumbled so drastically last December, the poultry industry would not have had to sacrifice so many of their flocks. The consumer may have to pay dearly for that next fall.
It has been said many times already in this House of Commons, but I do not think it can be emphasized too strongly, that during the war our farmers made great sacrifices in order to maintain production and keep down prices. That was without parallel anywhere else in the world. Now simple justice demands that those sacrifices be rewarded by the fulfilment of the pledge made at that time not only by the government but by the whole parliament of Canada.
I do not intend to speak at length, and would like to conclude by reading a resolution passed by the farmers of Haldimand county, the riding I represent, on January 27 of this year. I believe the minister has a copy of it, so I need not read the preamble which has already been brought to the attention of the house:
Therefore be it resolved that the Haldimand county farmers assembled in open session respectfully and emphatically urge the Canadian government to provide floor prices for farm products that will maintain returns to the farmer at least equal to 1949 levels until such time as other commodities, services and labour decline proportionately.
The second resolution is:
. . . 'be it resolved that we ask that all hogs be purchased at 30 cents, basis grade A, f.o.b. at the packing plants, Toronto.
1200	HOUSE OF
Agricultural Prices Support Act
When this legislation is passed, great responsibility will be placed in the hands of the minister. We hope and trust that in exercising it he will always have in mind the great sacrifices the farmers made during the war, to which I referred earlier. I believe he will; and if he does he will have the support of the farm people of Canada.


Mr. Angus Maclnnis (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I had no intention of taking part in this debate, which has continued for a fairly long period, but last night the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) made some statements which I thought should be answered. I was tempted to speak then, but decided not to. This afternoon the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Dewar) also made some statements which I think justify me in speaking on this question, though I represent a purely urban constituency.
The hon. member for Qu'Appelle made the statement that industrial workers wanted to bring down the prices of agricultural products so that they could buy them cheaper on the market. I do not know of any organization of industrial workers in Canada that has said at any time the farmers were getting too much for their products.


Austin Edwin Dewar: I think it is only common sense that eighty or eighty-five cents a dozen for eggs is too much for any worker to pay, no matter who he is.


Angus MacInnis: That is just the kind of thinking, or lack of thinking, that causes misunderstanding between farmers and industrial workers. People who see eggs at eighty cents a dozen take it that the farmer is getting eighty cents a dozen. The industrial worker protests against high prices, but he realizes that the farmer does not get those prices, that the increase takes place after the farmer disposes of his product.


Austin Edwin Dewar: Would you say that on the market in Ottawa, a secondary market, someone else gets the mark-up? Yet that is what I paid for eggs there.


Angus MacInnis: That sort of argument
reminds me of the arguments that used to be advanced by the opponents of the C.C.F. when we were first organized. They said that as a political party we were bound to fail because we were trying to represent the farmers and the workers, and that no single party could represent those interests because they were diametrically opposed. Of course they forgot they had been representing, or were supposed to be representing, those interests themselves ever since Canada was a nation. It was only when the C.C.F. came into being
IMr. Catherwood. ]

that they found the interests of those groups were diametrically opposed, so they could not be represented by any single party.
I claim that their interests are not opposed at all, that the farmer is essential to the industrial worker and the industrial worker is essential to the farmer. As a matter of fact much of the work that used to be done on the farms now is done in the cities. If the farmer did not have machinery to use on his farm he would not have any surplus to dispose of. Consequently the operation of producing wheat or eggs or beef today is not just something that takes place on the farm. It is a social operation involving the labour of thousands of people who never see a farm, perhaps; who would not know a grain of wheat from a grain of barley, or a Holstein cow from a Polled Angus.
When the hon. member for Calgary West spoke he said something to the effect that he wished this parliament would cease to be moved by pressure groups; I did not look up his exact words in Hansard. If this government or this parliament is moved by pressure groups, we have to realize that in this country we have pressure groups; and if we want to go into it further the next thing we must find out is how these pressure groups come about and how they operate. If today the farmer finds that he must come to the government to protect his interests in the disposal of his products, it is because, if the government did not intervene, the interests of the farmer would not be protected. If each farmer acts as an individual on his own behalf, he cannot today contend with the large aggregations of business that deal in large amounts, and under circumstances in which the individual is helpless. Over a period of years the farmer has realized that. He has seen the value of organization in industry and labour, and has decided he will have to organize as well. In doing that, he will have to come to the government for assistance. I think it is well that he should have to come to the government, because if this were to be a struggle between the various sections of the community, without the government acting as a referee, as it were, then the situation would be hopeless indeed.
One of the things that I have noticed in regard to government policy in this matter is that the government is trying to legislate merely for today, without any realization that there will be a tomorrow. They seem to hope that next year conditions will be such that the farmers will not need this legislation.


James Garfield Gardiner: They won't have it if hon. members do not quit talking.


Angus MacInnis: I do not believe that sort of policy is going to work. Legislation is passed for one year, and then when we are faced with the same problem next year, perhaps in a more intensified form, legislation is again requested. It would be much better if we were to realize that from now on, unless we have another war that consumes all surpluses, the farmer is bound to have surpluses. If he is going to benefit at all from increased production, then his products will have to be marketed in an orderly manner. Today only governments can carry out that kind of marketing organization.
I am going to support the principle of this bill, Mr. Speaker, and I am going to support the principle of the amendment by voting for the amendment, not by voting against it, a habit that is becoming somewhat general on the other side of the house.


James Garfield Gardiner: May I just interrupt to explain again that this bill has to be through by Thursday night-not only through this house, but it has to go to the Senate, and, if there are any changes, come back here for approval. It has to be passed by midnight Thursday. I was hoping a vote could be taken tonight, and I did not want to sit after six o'clock to do that.
I do not want to plead sick, but I should have been in the hospital for the past three days. I do not want to have to come back here tonight to put this bill through. After all, the amendment only continues the act in force. There are no changes in it, and I understood all the members wanted it continued. There was another matter I wanted to discuss, but I did not think it was necessary to take time to discuss it now. It may become necessary to do so, however, if certain attitudes are taken and certain statements made. I should like to get this measure through.


George Alexander Drew: It is my desire to see this measure dealt with, and I hope the vote may be taken well before six o'clock. I do feel however, in view of certain things that have been said, that I should state the reasons why I propose to support the amendment that is before the house. I should like also to point out certain considerations that I think should be in the minds of the members when they are voting on the amendment.
First of all I do think I should mention the statement that was made only a short time ago by an hon. member that he supported the amendment in principle, but that he intended to vote against it. I would point out that on second reading of any bill it is the principle
28, 1950	1201
Agricultural Prices Support Act that is in issue. The detail is dealt with in committee. If a member supports the principle enunciated, either in the bill or in the amendment, it is the duty of the member to support what he accepts as a matter of principle, and reserve the right to deal with any detail when it comes before the committee.


Austin Edwin Dewar: I suggested, did I not, that I was in favour of the principle of the bill, and therefore I supported it, but not the amendment?


George Alexander Drew: I hope I can realize my desire to finish my remarks before six o'clock so that a vote may be taken. What we have before us is a continuation of the Agricultural Prices Support Act. It is necessary, in view of the fact that certain members, quite properly, send out copies of Hansard, that I should not let one or two remarkable statements that were made this afternoon go completely unchallenged. This is particularly true of the remarks of the member for Yorkton (Mr. Stewart). He said that if a member voted for the amendment, he killed the bill. Such a statement, of course, is so remote from reality it is difficult to deal with it in terms no stronger than that.
The fact is that the amendment itself asserts the proposition that the bill should remain in force, but that legislation should be introduced to give expression to the idea set forth in the amendment. The amendment itself would be meaningless if the bill were not to stand. Whether one agrees with the amendment or does not agree with it, every hon. member will recognize that the amendment simply says:	We want the bill continued;
but in addition we say there should be a further amendment setting out the differences which we assert. That is what the amendment says. The principle which the amendment asserts is that there shall be a continuation of the price level, not necessarily at the level which existed between 1944 and 1948, but a level which will bear the same relationship to costs as was the case throughout the period 1944 to 1948. That does not fix prices at a point beyond reasonable levels at all. Under this amendment, if there is a tapering off in costs generally; if there is a tapering off in the cost of production, then the price at which the product is sold will taper off accordingly.
I am not suggesting that this proposal is in itself sufficiently comprehensive to embrace the working out of details; nor is it suggested that it is. It should not be necessary for me to suggest in this house that I do not believe in what are described as socialist doctrines. Nevertheless I certainly intend, now and on

Agricultural Prices Support Act any other occasion, to support any measure that is put forward from any part of this house which I believe carries out purposes I think should be carried out. So far as this bill is concerned, there is nothing doctrinaire about it. It is simply an assertion of a principle which has been put before the farmers of Canada by the Minister of Agriculture himself. When I say that, I refer back to a number of statements made by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) with regard to the reasons why the farmers of Canada did not have the opportunity to avail themselves of world prices which were well above Canadian prices during the years from 1944 to 1948. Last spring the Minister of Agriculture said, and the same general proposition was repeated on a number of occasions-I am quoting from the Windsor Daily Star of February 10, 1949:
Canadian farmers are entitled to prices which would justify their wartime sacrifices.
In that he was referring to the fact that Canadian farmers did not receive the higher level of world prices, and particularly the prices that were being received for certain commodities in the United States. Then he went on to say:
Because there have been declines in the United States, people here are suggesting that food prices should drop to that level, forgetting that prices there rose during the war to a peak never experienced here.
What the minister was pointing out on that occasion was that prices had been held down here and that, because of the fact that farmers had accepted those lower prices, our prices should not be allowed to drop but should be carried forward into the years ahead at a corresponding level. As I understand it, that is exactly the purpose that is intended in this amendment. I think it is carrying out what the Minister of Agriculture said was the reason for those wartime sacrifices on the part of our farmers. Then I should like to add this quotation, although it gets slightly outside the particular proposition. The Minister of Agriculture said:
The more closely we associate ourselves with them (the British) along trade lines, the brighter it is likely to be for the future of our country.
To that statement I subscribe. To come back to this general proposition, the Minister of Agriculture made the position clear, and I do not suggest for a moment that he has ever departed from that position. The farmers got good prices, according to his statement, but they did not get quite as high prices as they could have obtained if we had not placed a definite level on farm prices; but they are going to get better prices in the years ahead than they would otherwise have obtained because this is going to be a continuing level. This amendment simply says,


"We accept the principle of price' supports asserted in the Agricultural Prices Support Act, and we suggest that you carry out the undertaking to the farmers that the level be carried forward, as you yourself suggested, and that you relate the sale price to the cost of production on the same relative basis." While I do not think that this is by any manner of means adequate as a full working formula, nor do I suggest that on the longterm basis this meets the situation, I am supporting this amendment because it asserts the very proposition which we say the Minister of Agriculture has put forward, and which we say should be carried out.
In mentioning this bill, I would point out that the Agricultural Prices Support Act was intended to be not simply an instrument of government; it was intended to create producers' agencies and advisory committees. While mentioning the amendment, I believe that this board should be one really made up of producers, and the chairman should be a producer, not a civil servant who is a member of the Department of Agriculture. That is no reflection on the individual, on the way he approaches the problems, or on his desire to do a job.


James Garfield Gardiner: May I be permitted to say a word just here?


George Alexander Drew: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not sure that my hon. friend was here when this matter was discussed before. That question was submitted to the farm federation, and the board of the farm federation resolved that they preferred to have the chairman and eight other representatives on a board of sixteen which is advisory to the support board instead of having the chairmanship of the board. They agreed to that themselves and asked for it. That is the way it has been done.


George Alexander Drew: I do not want to extend the time, but I understand that the advisory committee provided for by section 9, subsection (1) (j), has not actually been set up,


James Garfield Gardiner: Oh yes, it has. It is the same advisory committee that acted on prices right through, as advisory to the prices board. They are going to meet again as a matter of fact, at the end of April.


George Alexander Drew: Is that a general advisory committee, to assist the board in an advisory capacity?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; and with Mr. Hannam as the chairman.


George Alexander Drew: I am not going to extend that argument. I am simply going back to this. I am putting forward the proposition that the act was intended to create a board that

was an independent agency of government, created it is true by statute, and that there should be not only an advisory committee but advisory committees dealing with particular subjects, to assist the board in its deliberations. I think that structure should be carried forward because it is essential, if satisfactory results are to be achieved, to have a board made up of- experienced producers and then to have committees of people specializing in various particular types of production advising the board in regard to price levels. I merely make that observation with regard to the act itself, which is supported in principle by the amendment that is before us.
This board is of concern not merely to the farmers of Canada but to everybody in Canada because, as has been asserted already, the maintenance of adequate levels of farm prices is something that is of concern to every Canadian. If the agricultural economy of this country is threatened, then the whole of the economy of the country will be threatened at the same time.
I repeat that in supporting this amendment I am doing so because I believe it carries forward the very undertaking that was given to the farmers at the time they willingly accepted prices that were lower than world prices, with the assurance that this would give them a continuing level in the years ahead. I believe that this should be done at this time; but it could be done simply by introducing a further amendment to this same act, which could be dealt with easily within the time limit that we have. In voting for this amendment, I am voting to support the act in principle. In fact, voting for the amendment does support the act in principle. But in voting for this amendment I do so in the hope that the government will consider the introduction of some positive declaration of this kind as to the level at which prices will be kept. I repeat that this is only an expedient, that it does not meet the over-all requirement of wider markets unless there is to be a threat to the whole price structure within Canada; and that while this Agricultural Prices Support Act is an essential device to meet the present situation, we still must And those wider markets so that we shall have not only adequate price levels but also adequate demand for the things we produce. It will not be satisfactory if we simply have a price level that is adequate unless we are able to sell what we can produce on a continuing level of production. Therefore I urge support of the amendment by members on all sides of the house; and I hope, Mr. Speaker, that, in view * of what the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) has said, you will permit the time to lapse, and take a vote on the amendment at this time.
1203
Agricultural Prices Support Act


Mr. Fulton:: Is the minister in a position to make a statement with regard to support for British Columbia apples?


James Garfield Gardiner: No; I am not in a position to make a statement on British Columbia apples at the present time.


James Arthur Ross: The minister was going 'o answer a question that I had asked.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to ask the minister when we can expect to have this matter settled. I am not anxious to hold up this bill. If the minister will give us as much information as he can I shall be satisfied, but if not I shall have to prolong the discussion.


James Garfield Gardiner: The matter is under discussion and no matter what is done about this bill the decision will be the same. The people concerned know what the facts are and I do not think they are in any way concerned.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I happen to know that they are concerned.


James Garfield Gardiner: I shall report the decision to the house just as soon as it is made.


James Arthur Ross: The other day the Minister of Agriculture said that he would give me an answer about oleomargarine manufacturers putting the dairy people out of business.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am afraid if I were to go into that in detail it might cause some discussion. All I will say at the moment is that we have about 21 million pounds of butter left at the present time. I have a short announcement which I probably should make in conjunction with my answer to the question. The Minister of Agriculture announced today that the agricultural prices support board is authorized to continue the purchase of butter on the basis of 58 cents delivered Montreal for one additional month, that is, until the 30th day of April. It is further announced that there is no change in the present selling price of government-held butter nor any change in the policy to protect purchasers of government-held butter as previously announced. The matter will continue as it is for one more month.
As to the other question that has been raised, some reference was made to it at the dairy council's meetings in the last two weeks, and I made some reference to it in the meeting at Saskatoon. The matter to which reference was made was that we have had a production of oleomargarine of a little less than 3 million pounds a month during the past year, and it is continuing along at about that rate. In the month of February for some reason the producers of oleomargarine put out over 8 million pounds. The dairy people have taken strong exception to that, and we take some exception to it largely because of the fact that we think it is putting an uncalled-for amount of margarine on the market at a time when it is essential that we market the sunplus of Canadian butter. That is all that is involved in what has been said up to date. In addition to that, the only thing I can say is that the government put through a vote of $50,000 to advertise butter, and in the press across the country from time to time within the last few weeks you may have noticed these advertisements that have been inserted to help the sale of butter.


James Arthur Ross: That is certainly not a sufficient answer. The statement of the minister extending the purchase price for one month is simply in order that the dairy producers can sell their new butter there and the old butter will be disposed of through the trade. I think that is all that means. I raised this question the other day and pointed out

that it was not satisfactory to the dairy producers, that they wanted to know whether they should remain in business. I do not want to delay the passage of the bill. I can question the minister on his estimates, and I may say that I want a better answer.


James Garfield Gardiner: I have a full explanation, if you will leave it until my estimates are before the house.


James Arthur Ross: On the question of oleomargarine, an answer made yesterday to a question on the order paper stated that some 73 million pounds of oleomargarine were manufactured in the year 1949. That is altogether different from the answer the minister has just given me as to the manufacture of oleomargarine during the past year, namely, some 3 million pounds a month.


James Garfield Gardiner: I will be very much surprised if there is that much.


James Arthur Ross: That is the answer on Hansard yesterday.


James Garfield Gardiner: Sometimes these answers are a little difficult to understand.


James Arthur Ross: That is very true. I have found that out myself in receiving from the minister answers that appeared to be a little difficult to understand.


James Garfield Gardiner: For example, I asked for
information to be brought to me last night- I have it in front of me-as to what weight of bacon had been exported to Great Britain in J anuary. The figure I received was 40,930,000 pounds. I knew that did not give me what the house was asking for or what I was asking for. I said, "Where did that come from?" I was told that 38 million pounds of it came from months immediately preceding the end of last year. This was what was shipped; it was not what was taken delivery of. On receiving the information as to what was taken delivery of I find that it is less than 5 million pounds down to the present time since the beginning of the year. Therefore sometimes you have to get an explanation of these answers in order to understand exactly what they mean.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, there is no use in members showing impatience. We are dealing with an extremely important matter. There is no question of misunderstanding in this particular case, no matter what it might be in other cases. In response to a question on the order paper a reply was given yesterday. The question reads:
1.	How many pounds of butter were produced in Canada in the calendar year 1949?
2.	During the same period, how many pounds of margarine were manufactured?
Agricultural Prices Support Act
There cannot be the slightest doubt that the question asks how many pounds of margarine were manufactured in Canada in the calendar year 1949. The answer given is 73,958,000. There can be no misunderstanding of that which would explain the difference between that figure and the estimate of 3 million pounds a month.


James Garfield Gardiner: Mr. Chairman, I will have to have the matter investigated myself. I am sorry I did not check this question before it was answered in the house. I have had the answer given to me a dozen times as to 1949, and it is 35 million pounds, unless everything has changed since. Somebody must have been storing it away underground or somewhere else, because up until the end of the year the figures indicated 35 million pounds. It was indicated in the press within the last two weeks that the highest production of oleomargarine ever experienced in Canada was in February, and it was a little over 8 million pounds. It would take 8 million pounds every month in the year in order to produce the figure that is given in yesterday's Hansard. There is something wrong with it.


George Alexander Drew: I think every hon. member is anxious to expedite proceedings, but they cannot be expedited beyond a point that is in keeping with our obligations as members. I know that every hon. member will be in sympathy with the view that the minister should not be kept here any longer at this time than is necessary. We will all agree he should do something about his cold.


James Garfield Gardiner: This has nothing to do with the bill.


George Alexander Drew: No, but it is a point that has been raised in relation to it.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is not properly raised. It can be discussed better on my estimates than now because it does not belong here at all.


George Alexander Drew: In order that the discussion may not be extended on this particular point, I suggest that the minister undertake to have his parliamentary assistant examine the matter, and that tomorrow or later in the week if it takes longer a statement be given to the house. If that is done we can pass this legislation now.


Mr. Charlton:: I have no desire to continue the debate any longer, but I have a few questions which I think the minister should answer. If he wishes to do so he can answer them tomorrow or any other time at all. How much of the $200 million has been used in each of the calendar years since 1944? What products have been covered? What is the amount of each product covered, and what is the amount of each product purchased under 55946-781

The Budget-Mr. Abbott the act? How much of the butter that has been purchased is not up to the grade that it was when it was put in storage?


James Garfield Gardiner: We will get all that for you.


John Alpheus Charlton: Will the minister say he will answer those questions?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, I will.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated last week, I hope I may have unanimous consent to move that the house go into committee of ways and means to consider certain resolutions, and that the hour for private bills be deferred until the completion of what I have to say and the customary brief remarks of my hon. friend the financial critic of the opposition.


George Alexander Drew: I do not wish to raise any question about the procedure, Mr. Speaker, but I suggest that the position simply be that by consent the minister proceed at this time.


Douglas Charles Abbott: 
months an adverse balance of trade of nearly $100 million a year ago has been reduced to an adverse balance of only $15 million.
In the same four months our exports to the United Kingdom declined by $20 million, and our imports from the United Kingdom were down by $3 million. Our overseas exports as a whole, however, were down by more than $100 million in these four months, and our overseas imports down by $12 million.
In a world where so many other factors are changing, one cannot isolate the effects of currency changes in any precise way, but I think that those which took place last fall should play a beneficial role in helping to correct the unbalance in the trading relationships between North America and the rest of the world. I should emphasize, however, that currency changes alone and of themselves are no cure for basic problems of maladjustment. They can do little more than give time in which the more fundamental measures can be put to work. However, so far as Canada is concerned, it already seems clear that the action we took in September last has, under the conditions presently prevailing, improved our trading position.
As the house is aware, exports of gold are not included in our merchandise trade figures. Gold production, however, has recently been showing a steady and welcome increase each year, due to the combined stimulus of an improved supply of suitable labour, the emergency assistance payments and more recently the devaluation of the Canadian dollar. Last year total production amounted to $148 million and most of that served to increase our exchange reserves.
Apart from merchandise trade and gold production, there are of course several other factors which enter into our international balance of payments on current and capital account, including tourist expenditures here and abroad, interest and dividend payments and receipts, freight charges and earnings, and various types of capital inflow and outflow. It is the combined effect of all these factors which account for the net change in our reserves of gold and United States dollars during the course of a year. I do not wish to anticipate the report of the foreign exchange control board for 1949, which will be available in the very near future and will contain a detailed analysis of our balance of payments during the past year and of the factors accounting for the change in our reserve position. All I need say here is that our surplus on international current account according to preliminary estimates amounted to about $193

million in 1949, a decline from the $450 million surplus reported in 1948; and that in the capital account the features of note were total advances of $120 million to the United Kingdom under the 1946 loan and a fairly substantial inflow of capital from the United States for direct investment, chiefly in connection with oil developments in western Canada. The end result of both current and capital transactions was a net increase of $119 million in our exchange reserves, bringing them to a total of $1,117-1 million on December 31 last, as I reported early in January.
This represents a very substantial increase from the low point of $461 million to which they had fallen in December, 1947,-a point so far below a safe margin that we had to secure approval from parliament for special emergency powers to control imports. These special measures were effective, and by the end of 1948 our reserves had recovered to $998 million. In the light of this improvement we were able to make extensive relaxations in our import restrictions, one result of which was that our rate of accumulation of reserves in 1949 was more moderate. However, with the improvement of $119 million that did occur, I was able to announce early in February two further groups of relaxations to take effect April 1 and July 1 respectively. When these are in effect I estimate that we will have covered about half the road toward complete removal of the emergency import controls.
In the meantime our reserves have shown a further substantial increase. I shall be publishing the March 31 reserve figure sometime next week, but as we are now so close to the end of the month, I think I should depart from our usual practice of reporting the size of our reserves only after the end of each quarter and advise the house that at the close of business on Saturday last they had reached the figure of $1,204-2 million. This represents an increase during the present quarter of about $87 million. I should add, however, that a considerable part of the recent increase is accounted for by a rise in Canadian balances held by other governments. To the extent that these balances are abnormally high and will be subsequently reduced it means that some of our exports in coming months will be paid for out of these balances and will not bring in new receipts of exchange. To this extent our reserves at their current level include the proceeds of some future earnings which have in effect been received in advance. Moreover, the second quarter of the year is the season for heavy transfers of earnings on United States investments in Canada. Hon. members who have studied our monthly reserve figures will recall that last year our
The Budget-Mr. Abbott reserves dropped by $90 million during April and May. Unless some unforeseen developments occur, I expect that our reserves may show a similar decline during the next two or three months. However, I would not, of course, venture to make any prediction in respect to the probable net change in our reserves for the new fiscal year as a whole.
As is customary on these occasions, I shall table at the conclusion of my remarks and ask to have printed as an appendix to today's Hansard the usual white paper which puts into convenient form all the more important economic and financial statistics. Accompanying these tables will be found brief explanatory notes and comments. It is not my intention to burden the house by reciting many of these facts and figures. I shall try only to give a broad and general picture. I do, however, urge hon. members to study the white paper carefully.
The latest estimate published by the dominion bureau of statistics over the week end shows Canadian farm cash income in 1949 to have been almost identical with the all-time record reached in 1948, which in turn was twenty-five per cent above 1947. Lower returns on dairy products, poultry products and furs were offset by increased returns on grains and livestock. Earlier estimates of net farm income for 1949, which are given in the white paper, show a moderate decline from 1948. The production of the fisheries was well maintained. Despite export marketing difficulties for some types of fish, returns to fishermen in 1949 were satisfactory, domestic demand being particularly good throughout the year. In those lines of production where our farmers and fishermen rely primarily on overseas markets the outlook for 1950 is less certain, but I would like to remind hon. members that our markets on this side of the Atlantic have increased greatly in recent years, and can, I think, be still further developed, especially for high quality products.
Employment in Canada has continued at a high level. The trend of industrial employment continued upward during 1949 until August or September; since then it has been moderately downward. The latest available figures for industrial employment, which are for January, show a decline of one per cent from a year ago. This, however, is a general average, and conceals a number of divergent trends in the components of the general index. For example, employment in logging and in the agricultural implement industry is down much more than the average; but in mining, in construction work, and in the trade and service occupations it is considerably higher than a year ago.
1210	HOUSE OF
The Budget-Mr. Abbott
Total labour income, in spite of the one per cent fall in employment, has continued to increase, and its monthly rate at the end of the year was about five per cent above the same months a year earlier. Average weekly wages rose about three per cent during the year, while the cost of living advanced barely one per cent.
While the decline in employment as a whole has been small, the increase in unemploy-m nt has been greater, due, of course, to the fact that the total labour force continues to grow. The outlook for 1950 seems to be that the volume of employment will increase moderately, but it is possible that it may not catch up with growth in, total labour supply.
Total unemployment, even at its seasonal peak, has not been large, judged by normal and usual conditions in this country. It has, however, been uneven in its regional incidence.
The largest single element in the past winter's unemployment has been the sharp decline in woods operations associated with the policy of the principal pulp and paper companies in reducing their heavy pulpwood inventories. Other pools of unemployment have been created by decline of particular export markets.
The marketing prospects for our pulp and paper industry appear to be good, and if these are maintained I would expect the woods operations next winter to be at a normal level. We shall continue to give all the help we can in finding markets for such other commodities as may from time to time find their markets upset.
I want to make it clear, however, that the central government cannot and should not attempt to assume responsibility for all these regional problems. In my mind the proper role of the central government in our federal state is fourfold. First, through its fiscal and g neral policies it should endeavour to create a favourable climate for healthy economic expansion and development. Second, it should have careful regard in planning its own operations for the best timing and the best placing of its capital and developmental expenditures. Third, it should recognize a special responsibility for the promotion and development of our basic primary industries and other industries of a national significance. Fourth, it should be ready to co-operate actively with provincial governments, and through the provincial governments with municipalities, in meeting regional problems that threaten nation-wide economic repercussions.
There have been times in the past when differences of view between the federal and provincial governments have received a kind


of publicity which has led the general public to overlook, or at least to underestimate, the very large amount of practical day-to-day cooperation between the two levels of government. There is a great deal of this working together, and we are ready, in all appropriate circumstances, to extend this friendly collaboration.
With particular reference to the current situation I should remind the house that in preparing our estimates for construction projects we have deliberately been severe in cutting down requests for new construction, because in most parts of Canada building labour is fully employed on private projects. But where we have evidence that building labour will be available we have applied less severe tests to departmental requests for new construction.
The amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act recently enacted will not only relieve distress but will sustain purchasing power, and thus the general level of business activity, in many of the regions where difficulties were encountered this winter.
The consensus of informed views about the outlook for 1950 is that employment, output and price levels in both Canada and the United States will show no great change from 1949. The balance of probabilities for Canada indicates a moderate increase in the domestic and United States demand for our products, offset in part by a reduction in overseas demands, with prices tending slightly downward, and employment slightly upward.
A minister of finance must always remind the house that forecasts of this nature are beset with uncertainties. But under our parliamentary system, where both programs of expenditure and programs of revenue must be presented and approved in advance for a specified twelve months period, such estimates of the future have to be made. To some extent our expenditures, and to a much greater extent our revenues, will fluctuate with expanding or contracting business activity and with rising or falling prices.
However difficult, forecasts must be made. My forecast and my fiscal program for 195051 are based on the expectation of sustained high levels of production and employment, and can be summed up simply in an estimate that the gross national product, which is in fact the economic tax base, will be about one or two per cent higher in 1950 than in 1949.
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTS: 1949-50
In turning to review our revenue and expenditure for the fiscal year now closing and to forecast revenue and expenditure for next year, may I again call the attention of

non. members to the detailed accounts provided in the white paper to which I have referred.
A year ago I forecast for the current fiscal year expenditure of $2,390 million and revenue, after tax changes, of $2,477 million, leaving a prospective surplus of $87 million. In re-introducing the budget measures on October 20 last I revised the expenditure figure to $2,460 million, including in it in this case the Newfoundland debt we had taken over, and I revised upwards the forecast of revenue, setting it at $2,545 million, after taking into account the small additional tax changes then proposed. This left practically unchanged my earlier forecast of the budgetary surplus. We have not yet reached the end of our year, and on the expenditure side in particular it is always difficult to estimate the payments to be made during the closing weeks. It now appears, however, that actual expenditures for the year will be about $2,438 million-about one per cent less than our last forecast-and revenue about $2,549 million-just a shade more than our October estimate. On this basis our budgetary surplus should be about $111 million. It is possible, however, that the actual out-turn when all the accounts are closed may differ slightly from this, but not by very much. In operations of the magnitude and complexity of the government's financial activities, an error amounting to only about one per cent of our expenditure appears to me to reflect exceedingly accurate estimating.
On the revenue side, the notable feature is still the remarkable buoyancy in our direct taxes, notwithstanding the successive reductions in rates that have been made. Direct taxes accounted for half our total revenue, and a large part of the indirect taxes that provide forty per cent of our revenue is levied upon things the purchase of which is usually some evidence of ability, as well as willingness, to pay.
Our non-tax revenue continues high. The post office is paying its way, when we include the wartime increase made in letter rates, and I hope that we can continue to cover the growing cost of postal services by charges for them. It supplies some free services to other departments, of course, and service of some kinds below estimated cost, but on the other hand the post office is not charged for its office accommodation nor for certain services such as those of our accounting and disbursing officers. In due course I would hope we can arrange that it will be charged with all proper expenses of its operations, that it will charge other departments for mail services, and that it will be able to show a modest surplus on a commercial basis of accounting.
The Budget-Mr. Abbott
We have continued this year to benefit from some abnormal post-war special receipts and credits, though now on a relatively modest scale, the total of this category being about $60 million. The chief components of this figure are $18 million from the sale of surplus crown assets, $16 million recovered on war contract settlements, and about $'9 million in payments by European governments in settlement for supplies provided by the military authorities to the civil populations at the end of the war. We can still expect some receipts next year under these headings, but on a diminishing scale.
On the expenditure side, the most notable features have been the increased expenditures for social security on the one hand and national security on the other. The increase in social security-chiefly family allowances and old age pensions-was about $62 million; and the increase in national defence and defence research was $110 million. Newfoundland, too, added materially to our expenditures-as was evident from the $55 million provided in special supplementary estimates to extend our services to Newfoundland, and a non-recurring charge of $62 million to cover the assumption of the major portion of the former Newfoundland debt. There was another large non-recurring item in our expenditures represented by the net charge to our premium, discount and exchange account resulting from the revaluation of currencies and representing the decreased Canadian dollar value of our sterling obligations, the increased Canadian dollar value of our United States dollar obligations, and the increased Canadian dollar value of our holdings of gold and United States dollar balances.
Offsetting these major increases in expenditures that I have noted were a number of reductions in those items which arose out of the war, notably certain types of noncontinuing payments to veterans, payments of subsidies of various kinds, and various administrative costs for temporary post-war organizations.
In addition to these major changes in our expenditures this year as compared with previous years, there was a wide variety of minor increases representing, on the one hand, higher costs due to the rise in salary, wage and price levels, and, on the other, expansion in various government services. I will not attempt at this stage to comment in any detail upon these, but the combined effect of these factors can be noted in the detailed statements of expenditures given in the white paper.
As usual, I should call the attention of the house not only to our budgetary surplus but also to the non-cash items in our

The Budget-Mr. Abbott revenue and expenditure and to the nonincome or extra-budgetary receipts and disbursements, apart from security transactions, that must be taken into account in order to appraise our over-all cash position. In the past year we have had more than the usual amount of budgetary charges which did not involve cash expenditures, and consequently when we adjust our budgetary surplus for purely accounting items-such as the assumption of the Newfoundland debt, the revaluation of our assets and liabilities which are expressed in other currencies and the addition to our general reserve against active assets

we find that we have a cash surplus of $287 million as compared with the budgetary surplus of $111 million. To this we should add other receipts that do not constitute revenue, such as the increases in the trust accounts for the payment of annuities and pensions, and the increases in various other accounts on our books that we cannot treat as revenue. We must also take into account the repayments of loans and advances that have previously been made. These various receipts have added another $200 million to our cash. On the other hand, we must take into account heavy disbursements this year that do not appear on our books as expenditures. The largest of these has been the advances to the foreign exchange control board to acquire gold or United States dollars, which have amounted to $160 million. We have also disbursed $104 million in loans to the United Kingdom and other governments abroad, after taking into account repayments that we have received from such governments on other loans. We have also made substantial loans to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and under the Veterans Land Act for housing and settlement purposes. Adding these and various small additional items of a similar character, we get a total of cash disbursements other than budgetary expenditures of $420 million. This leaves a cash surplus of $67 million, apart from security transactions. This year the net sales of securities out of our securities investment account, the account through which we employ our surplus cash balances, have totalled $430 million. Adding this to the $67 million cash surplus that I have just mentioned, we have a total of $497 million available to reduce outstanding public debt. Actually we used $486 million for this purpose, the remaining $11 million being our estimated increase in cash balances at the end of the year.



FINANCING OPERATIONS

[Stage Direction]
In my budget address of October 20 last I outlined most of the major transactions in what has been a notable record of financing
	i |
during the present fiscal year, and here I need only finish that outline and summarize the results for the year as a whole.
At that time I referred to the campaign just beginning for the sale of the fourth series of Canada savings bonds. That campaign proved highly successful; to date approximately one million buyers have purchased a total of $304 million of this fourth series. I wish again to pay my tribute to the splendid work which has been done both by voluntary and professional workers in promoting the sale of these bonds.
On March 1 this year three separate transactions took place. An issue of $550 million of J per cent six months treasury notes was sold at par to the Bank of Canada to refund a similar issue maturing on that date. On the same date a $325 million issue sold in 1948 and held very largely by the banking system became due and was refunded by an issue of $325 million 3-year 1J per cent bonds sold at 99-30 to yield 1-74 per cent per annum. Also on March 1 a new issue of $100 million of six months deposit certificates bearing interest at f of one per cent per annum was sold to the chartered banks at par.
The results of our financial operations and of certain other factors on our funded debt for the fiscal year as a whole may be summarized as follows:
1.	Our funded debt payable in sterling increased during the year by a net amount of $52-6 million as a result of the assumption of certain Newfoundland sterling indebtedness in accordance with the terms of union offset in part by the effect of the revaluation of sterling.
2.	Our direct funded debt payable in United States funds increased by $100 million because of the sale of a new issue in New York to retire C.N.R. and national harbours board obligations which were guaranteed by the government of Canada-a flotation incidentally, which, as hon. members will recall, set a new record for Canada's credit in the United States market. The Canadian dollar equivalent of our funded debt payable in United States funds increased a further $39-8 million due to the revaluation of the Canadian dollar.
3.	Finally, in regard to our funded debt payable in Canada, the amount of our obligations, including refundable taxes, which matured or were called during the year was no less than $3,137-4 million. We met $2,213-3 million of this amount by refunding or conversion into new issues, $338 * 2 million from the proceeds of new borrowing in the form of Canada savings bonds and deposit

certificates, and $430 million from the proceeds of sales of securities from securities investment account. Another $100 million in Canadian funds, not included in the cash surplus referred t'o above, was available from the proceeds of our issue in New York. The remaining cash required, $55-9 million, came from our cash surplus.
While I am on this subject, perhaps I may be permitted to deal with our probable financing requirements for the new fiscal year. As will be apparent from what I have to say later, I expect that we shall be able again next year to make some modest reduction in our funded debt from available cash resources but this reduction will certainly be much smaller than that effected this year. However, during the year there will become due or payable in Canada funded debt in the aggregate principal amount of $2,414-1 million.
Yesterday I made a public announcement to the effect that the government proposed to call for prior redemption on June 15, 1950, the first victory loan 3 per cent bonds which mature on June 15, 1951, and also on June 1, 1950, an issue of 3 per cent bonds sold in 1935 which mature on June 1, 1955. The amount required to pay off these called issues is approximately $745 million, and our cash resources will not, of course, be adequate for that purpose without a refunding loan. For that reason a new issue will be announced shortly before the time for payment of the called issues. It is expected that the new issue will include some longer term bonds suitable for general public investment as well as a substantial amount of short term bonds. This operation will result in a further reduction in the cost of interest on the public debt. Perhaps I should not let this occasion pass without again reminding all those who bought bonds during the war in such large numbers to examine their holdings and if they find they have any first victory loan bonds, make sure to turn them in on the call date, June 15 next, and thereby avoid any loss of interest.

[Stage Direction]
My forecast of our prospective revenue and expenditure for the new fiscal year is based on the expectations I noted earlier-that in general our national employment and income will be sustained at approximately the present level and that there will be a slight fall in average prices, more than offset by a slight increase in the volume of our production. Should conditions be better than this-as they could be if everything goes well-my forecast will be more than realized. Should economic conditions deteriorate, as they
The Budget-Mr. Abbott could, our revenue will fall off and our expenditure increase, as compared with the figures I am now putting forward.
In the light of what I have said, I expect that our present tax laws and other sources of revenue would produce in the next fiscal year a total revenue of about $2,430 million. For the convenience of hon. members and others, I have had prepared the usual table, comparing present forecasts with the figure for the year just closing, and I ask leave that this table be printed in Hansard at this point.
Forecast of Revenue (Before tax changes)
Fiscal year Fiscal year 1950-51	1949-50
	(Forecast)	(Actual-
	preliminary)	
	(In millions	of dollars'
Customs import duties 	$225 * 0	$229-0Excise duties 	2130	215-5Sales taxes (net)	400-0	404-1Other excise taxes 	
Income taxes	153-0	163-9Individuals 	530-0	611-5Corporations 	580-0	586-5Interest, dividends, etc 	46-0	45-5Excess profits taxes 	-2-5Succession duties 	29-0	28-5Miscellaneous taxes 	4-0	4-0Total tax revenue 	2180-0	2286-0Non-tax revenue 	200-0	203-0Total ordinary revenue ...	2380-0	2489-0Special receipts and credits	50-0	59-6Grand total revenue 	2430-0	2548-6
I should like to emphasize that our tax structure now is such that it is very sensitive to changes in employment and incomes, and relatively modest changes in these can have a more than proportionate effect upon our revenue.
The government became aware several months ago of these revenue prospects and of the desirability of keeping our expenditures this next year within the total revenue that we could foresee in the economic conditions I have described. We decided that we should plan to do this, and that, except in the event of a deterioration of economic conditions or an unexpected emergency, we should hold our expenditure in the coming year down to approximately $2,400 million. Consequently the treasury board, at the cabinet's direction, made substantial reductions in the estimates submitted by various departments, particularly those involving construction or the expansion of activities not of an urgent or highly productive nature. As a result, the main estimates, laid before the house on February 24 were held down to a total of about $2,309 million, despite the increase in costs of
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Mr. Abbott social security and defence and the expenditures required for federal services in Newfoundland. Moreover, we propose to continue this same policy in considering supplementary estimates, unless a major change in the economic outlook occurs. However, we must anticipate some supplementary and further supplementary estimates, including substantial amounts for the 1950 deficits of the Canadian National Railways and Trans-Canada Air Lines. In addition, I would expect to make some provision in our accounts for reserves against our active assets and for contingent benefits under the Veterans Land Act. On the other hand we may expect some short-fall of expenditures below the limits provided in appropriation votes, but this is likely to be lower than in recent years, due to the outlook for more stable economic conditions and to the pressure put on the departments to keep estimates down to the minimum practicable amounts. All in all, I think we can reasonably expect to keep our expenditures in this new fiscal year to a total of about $2,410 million. On this basis our budget surplus should amount to around $20 million.
In so far as our prospective cash position is concerned, we must take into account noncash items in revenue and expenditure and other cash receipts and disbursements. After adjusting our probable revenue and expenditure for non-cash items I believe we can expect a cash surplus somewhat higher than the budgetary surplus. To this we should add cash receipts in annuity, pension, and similar trust funds, and various deferred credits and suspense accounts. Taking all these items together we should have something in excess of $200 million dollars in cash over and above that required for cash expenditures.
Against this we must set our disbursements other than budgetary expenditure and redemption of our own securities. We shall probably require something over $100 million for housing loans and investments, including the married quarters program for the armed services, and nearly $30 million for Veterans Land Act loans. There will, I expect, be other minor loans and investments. There remains to be drawn $85 million under the United Kingdom loan agreement, but drawings on this loan will be offset in part by repayments on loans previously made to the United Kingdom and other governments abroad. On the whole, I would expect that our total cash disbursements would about balance with our total cash requirements for all purposes-apart from the sale, purchase, or redemption of our own securities, and apart from possible advances to or repayments by the foreign exchange control board because of changes in the size of our exchange
[Stage Direction]

reserves. As I have already indicated, it is impossible to forecast with any assurance whether our exchange reserves will increase or decrease by a significant amount and therefore whether we shall need to advance further Canadian funds to buy exchange, or can expect repayments on advances outstanding. On the whole I would not expect at present a movement in either direction large enough to affect our cash requirements to any important degree.

[Stage Direction]
Our efforts to hold expenditures this coming year to the level I have described, despite the increases necessary for the social security legislation of last year and for defence, have caused me to realize that we must now expect for some time to have budgets as large as this one-that we must cope somehow with a continuing level of expenditure of $2,400 million, even in the absence of large scale economic difficulties or widespread unemployment. Our special post-war demobilization and transitional expenditures ait now almost all behind us; we can expect a tapering off of some of the remaining payments for the veterans program and some of the other items which we have labelled "Terminable Services" in the estimates, but these we must expect to be offset by increases in other services required in normal times, particularly those on the development of natural resources. In years when economic conditions are adverse, we must expect not only lower revenues but higher expenditures to assist in overcoming these economic difficulties and to maintain satisfactory levels of employment and income. In good years we can hope to avoid such special expenditures and have buoyant revenues-but I doubt if the public or this House of Commons will really wish government services or activities to be reduced in years of prosperity to the degree necessary to get our expenditures much below this level of $2,400 million. If we get a substantial improvement in the international situation we may expect a reduction in defence costs that will materially lighten the burden on the budget, but it would be a bold man who would predict this with any confidence now.
Our union with Newfoundland has been warmly welcomed in every part of the country, and I am confident that the mutual advantages of this union will be demonstrated with increasing force as each year passes. But I think it is fair to remind the house that during the past year and over the next few years the accession of Newfoundland to Canada has imposed and will continue to impose a considerable net burden on the federal treasury. We share with our fellow citizens in Newfoundland a great confidence in their future, but in the meantime the social.

and developmental costs to be borne or shared by the central government will involve large net financial outlays.
Payments to provinces for statutory subsidies and compensation under the tax rental agreements totalled $104 million in the current fiscal year, and for the remaining term of these agreements the annual payments to the provinces concerned will be even larger than this year, whether or not any downturn in economic activity should occur in the next year or two. As already announced, there will be another conference with the provinces this fall, and whatever may be the eventual outcome of that conference, I think it is fair to assume that its decisions will not result in a lessening of the net burden on the federal budget.
Naturally we hope to reduce expenditures by improved efficiency in operation and by economies in administration. We have been making good progress in this direction in recent years in many of our departments- quietly but effectively. Since it has been accompanied in many cases by an expansion in the work of the department or unit concerned, it is frequently not evident from the figures. We are pressing ahead further with this work, and building up a corps of efficient operating and administrative officers. But we should not delude ourselves with the belief that we can significantly alter the scale of the budget in this way. Our civilian payroll is only about $310 million a year out of total expenditures of $2,400 million, or about 12 cents out of every dollar spent. The other 88 cents goes either for transfer payments or is paid for goods and outside services. It is only by reducing government activities or social security payments that any major reductions can be made.

[Stage Direction]
This is an important and serious conclusion. We should realize how this situation has come about. Mainly it has been by reason of war and the danger of future war. Our huge debt service is almost entirely a legacy of war. We have a heavy continuing charge for pensions and other provision for war veterans, and expenditures on defence now total $425 million. All told, then, we must provide something over a billion dollars a year because of past wars or the need to prevent future war. This huge outlay from which we get no tangible return is unfortunate-but let us remember that this, in addition to the blood and treasure expended in the past, is the price we pay for the personal freedom, the civil liberties, the democratic politics and the economic prosperity that we enjoy as part of the western world.
The second major category of expenditure that has brought us to budgets of this size is
The Budget-Mr. Abbott social security payments-old age pensions, family allowances, and unemployment insurance, as well as other smaller items. For these three huge programs we are having to provide $457 million next year. I need hardly point out that this house and those parties to which its members belong stoutly uphold the need for old age pensions on at least the present scale and we must, of course, make adequate pro-vi~ion for the unemployed.
Our family allowances, though costly because of the huge numbers involved, are among the most constructive forms of social security; for they provide improved opportunities for health and education for the children of our country. We can expect in future years to gain material benefits from the better citizens this program makes possible.
Apart from these costs of defence and social security, there is a great variety of services provided to business and the public, on which we spend hundreds of millions each year but which are demanded just as are the services of business itself-the post office, the canals, the airports and airways, the wharves and harbours and river works, the aids to navigation, the technical services to agriculture and the fisheries, the foreign trade services, to assist our exporters and importers, the statistical services, the employment service, and others of a like character. Money spent on these provides services which the public use every day, whether they pay for them directly, as in the case of the post office, or indirectly, as in the case of most others.
Finally, I think it is important for the house to realize how much is being done to improve our productive resources in the future. Our health program, for example, for which we provide now over $40 million a year, is not only improving significantly the treatment of the sick, but making real strides in helping o reduce the amount of disease and illness. That will reflect itself in due course in our national production. We are now spending large sums in discovering, developing, improving and conserving our natural resources-through such departments as Agriculture, Fisheries, Mines and Technical Surveys and Resources and Development. This is valuable, sensible work that will increase our national income just as surely and effectively as much private business expenditure will. The same is true also of the extensive work in the field of scientific research, which has been greatly increased in scale and of which we may, I think, be justly proud.
I shall not try to enumerate all the classes of activities. I have said nothing, for example, of such an important one as our housing program. The point I wish to emphasize is that the public, the responsible political
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Mr. Abbott parties, and this parliament have all willed the ends to which these efforts are directed, and it is here in the budget that we must provide the means. Unless we are prepared to reduce the scope or scale of government activities, we must now expect $2,400 million budgets in future years.
Nor can we escape the tax implications of this conclusion. We must have a tax system that will at least balance the budget in good years, in. those times when private expenditures and exports will sustain our employment and incomes at high levels; for otherwise we should slide quickly into inflation at such times and pile up our national debt more quickly than we add to the economic and financial capacity of the nation to carry it.
The conclusion then which I reach is that no minister of finance in the foreseeable future will have an easier task than I have, namely, that of covering about $2,400 million of expenditure. In considering proposals for further major increases in our expenditures of a continuing nature, we must be ready to balance them with increased taxes. We can afford some modest increases in expenditures from year to year, or alternatively modest reductions in taxation, as our productivity and national income grow, but this dividend of progress is gradual and modest in size in relation to the ambitious plans that are so much in the air these days. What is important, I believe, is that we should now realize clearly that there is no prospective surplus from which proposed new programs of expenditure can be met. If the expenditure is worthwhile, it should be provided for by new or increased taxes or charges or by reducing some other services or activities of lower priority.

[Stage Direction]
Given the conditions I have outlined, of continuing prosperity in which the positive and negative factors are rather evenly balanced, the wise and prudent fiscal policy calls for a balanced budget, or a budget which provides for no more than a modest surplus for the retirement of debt.
Last year I budgeted for a surplus of $87 million, and it now appears that we shall have a surplus of about $111 million. For the coming year I have already estimated expenditures at $2,410 million and revenues at existing tax rates of $2,430 million. That would leave us with a prospective surplus before tax changes of only $20 million. This leads me to
[Stage Direction]

conclude that no major changes in taxation would be wise this year. I am, therefore, proposing no important changes, but, as occurs each year, experience or changing circumstances require us to make a number of minor or technical changes in the tax laws, to remove anomalies, to secure greater equity, to clarify obscure points, or to meet special circumstances. In only two or three instances will there by any significant revenue implications in my proposals.
First, with regard to taxes on commodities, I propose that purchases by certain defined classes of institutions caring for orphans, the aged and the incapacitated be exempt from the sales tax effective July 1, 1950. The loss of revenue resulting from this change will not be large, but the saving in costs to these institutions will, I believe, be welcomed by those responsible for maintaining them. We have for many years exempted hospitals from the sales tax, and the institutions I have referred to are in many respects analogous to hospitals.
There is at present an extra five per cent tax on toilet soaps. For reasons which I shall not elaborate, chief among them the difficulty of drawing a clear line between toilet and laundry soaps, this tax has been very difficult to administer, and I am proposing that it be repealed effective midnight tonight. The loss of revenue will be about $600,000 in a full year.
The only other commodity tax change that I propose is the removal, effective midnight tonight, of the sales tax on ice cream, on drinks prepared from fresh milk and on prepared whipping cream. We have received strong representations from the dairy interests that the removal of this tax will give encouragement to the consumption of ice cream and dairy drinks at a time when sales of certain other milk products are declining. The loss of revenue in this item will be about $2 million in a full year.
The bill amending the Excise Tax Act giving effect to the above proposals will contain a number of other unimportant technical changes in the law.
As usual I wish to give public notice that no claims for refund arising out of the excise tax changes in respect of goods on which tax has been paid or is payable will be entertained by my colleague the Minister of National Revenue.
With regard to the Income Tax Act, no changes are being recommended in the rate

structure. However, I am proposing certain amendments which will be of specialized but fairly widespread interest.
Last year we made some changes in the corporate tax structure, including a reduction to 10 per cent in the tax on the first $10,000 of profit of corporations. This tax abatement was intended to allow the small businessman to retain a larger proportion of his profits for growth. It was necessary, in order to confine the benefits to those who were intended to receive it, to allow only one corporation in a group of related corporations to secure the lower rate. At the time of the last budget and since, I have received many representations on this point, and I have given careful study to the suggestions which have been made for a less rigid limitation. Under the law as introduced last year companies are related if one controls another or is controlled by another, or if they are subject to common control. It is proposed that these provisions be relaxed in order to relieve particularly the cases where there is a substantial minority interest in the corporation. Under the new proposal, mere control will not be the criterion. I think it will achieve our original intention if some higher percentage of ownership is adopted in defining what we mean by related companies. It is proposed that companies shall not be deemed to be related companies unless there is related ownership of common stock to the extent of 70 per cent or more. This, I believe, will allow a wider group to obtain the preferred rate on the first $10,000 of profit, and will take care of most of the reasonable complaints against the law as passed last year.
Last year parliament approved a new system for depreciation allowances. Following considerable discussion in the house it was agreed to allow farmers and fishermen to continue under the old system. I expressed the opinion at that time that farmers would probably be better off under the new system than under the old. Apparently after having studied the new system many farmers are now inclined to agree with that view. Accordingly it is proposed to give farmers and fishermen the option of adopting the new system. It will, of course, have to be provided that once a taxpayer elects to adopt the new system it will not be permissible to revert to the old system.
The special write-off privilege for exploration and prospecting expenses in the oil and mining industries should, we suggest, be extended by adding a further year to the present periods provided in the law. It is
The Budget-Mr. Abbott also proposed to repeal the provision in our law which imposes a corporation tax on the income received by a trustee for holders of oil royalties.
During the past year there has been considerable uncertainty in the mining industry with regard to the position of prospectors and those who are engaged in developing our mineral resources. From the early forties onward, it has been the practice to interpret the law as not subjecting to tax gains made by bona fide prospectors and developers in discovering and proving up mining properties. As the house knows, our Income Tax Act was completely rewritten, and the new act has been in force since the beginning of 1949. The new act contains no clear-cut authority for the practice which has been followed during the past decade. The position under the law of these important groups should be clarified, and we are proposing this year to introduce an amendment which should allay the fears of many who have in recent months been concerned about this matter.
Perhaps I might also take this opportunity, in view of recent public interest in the question, to assure the house that it is not the policy of the government to tax capital gains. Under any income tax law there is always a very difficult problem in drawing a line between gains which are profits from carrying on a trade or business and those which are not. To my knowledge no tax legislation has ever been passed in any country that has removed all doubts on this score. In England, where our basis of income tax had its origin, the matter has been settled almost entirely by the courts, taking into account the facts in each individual case. Much as I would like to introduce greater certainty, I do not believe that it can be done satisfactorily by legislation. We now have a readily available income tax appeal board that has been set up to determine questions of this sort. I might add that, in order to facilitate the appeal procedure, it is now proposed to allow members of the board to hear cases individually, and also to allow the taxpayer, if he wishes, to go direct to the exchequer court instead of being required to proceed first to the tax appeal board.
In the budget of last March I announced that I had been considering further legislation to deal with the position of closely-held companies where their growth had been financed out of retained profits. I now have definite proposals which will be placed before the house for consideration. The new sections are bound to be complicated, and I hesitate
1218	HOUSE OF
The Budget-Mr. Abbott to attempt to summarize them. I should, however, mention a few of the main features, with the warning that what I say cannot cover all the provisions which will have to be in the law.
Generally speaking, I propose to deal with the surpluses accumulated up to the end of 1949 in much the same way as surpluses up to the end of 1939 were dealt with in accordance with the recommendations of the Ives commission. This earlier legislation provided for a tax payable by the corporation, graduated, however, according to amounts receivable by individual shareholders. In the legislation now proposed, closely-held corporations may elect to pay a tax on undistributed income on hand at a flat rate of 15 per cent. This change will remove many of the troublesome problems encountered under the earlier legislation.
If the proposed legislation did no more than take care of past surpluses, a new problem with respect to the future would immediately start developing. I think it desirable, therefore, that the present legislation should provide a comprehensive solution to the problem as a whole rather than merely deal in ad hoc fashion with the past.
The Ives commission made a recommendation in respect of surpluses accruing after 1939 under which a proportion of annual profits might be retained by closely-held companies and be entirely free from personal income tax upon subsequent distribution. We have been giving a great deal of thought to this proposal but we feel that we cannot go quite as far as that recommendation. Under the proposals which we are recommending, a closely-held company may, to the extent that it pays out earnings in dividends, earn the right to capitalize an equivalent amount upon payment of a special tax of 15 per cent. It appeals to me as sensible to encourage these family corporations to pay reasonable dividends while at the same time making it possible for them to retain profits essential for growth and expansion without imposing on shareholders an almost impossible potential tax burden.
There will be proposed a number of other amendments of a technical character, but I need not burden the house with an attempt to explain them at this stage.

[Stage Direction]
When I presented the budget last October, 1 said that plans were under way for another set of multilateral trade negotiations under the general agreement on tariffs and trade. The concluding work on these plans is at present
	.
[Stage Direction]
nearing completion in Geneva, where the countries participating in the general agreement are holding their fourth session. It has now been decided to hold the third round of tariff negotiations in Torquay, England, beginning September 28 of this year, and it is anticipated that some forty countries will take part. The proposed Torquay negotiations are a further step in the post-war program of international co-operation to reduce tariffs and remove other barriers which stand in the way of a freer flow of international trade. The original Geneva agreement of 1947 was widened last year at the Annecy conference to include ten additional countries. The main purpose of the Torquay conference will be to increase the value of the general agreement by expanding it to include more countries, to cover a broader range of commodities, and, in addition, to provide further tariff concessions on products previously negotiated. It is intended that at the conclusion of the Torquay conference all the tariff concessions resulting from the new negotiations, together with the original Geneva and Annecy tariff concessions, will be incorporated in a new set of tariff schedules which will run until January, 1954.
Canada will have an opportunity at Torquay to negotiate for further tariff reductions with the United States, the other participants in the Geneva and Annecy agreements, and also with a number of new countries. While the United States will, on this occasion, still be governed by the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act which empowers the president to reduce tariffs by not more than 50 per cent of the 1945 rates, there is a considerable number of important items on which further concessions may be made.
I believe that in the present conditions of unbalanced world trade, the success of the Torquay conference will depend largely on the leadership given by the United States. If the United States is prepared to make significant tariff reductions, I am confident that these coming trade talks will make an important contribution to the restoration of a saner trading world. We in Canada are not unmindful of our own responsibility, and I can say that we will take this opportunity to consider appropriate adjustments in our customs tariff which should contribute to a better balance in our trade with the United States, the sterling area and western Europe.
In view of the important tariff negotiations which are scheduled to commence in a few months' time, the budget resolutions relating to the Customs Tariff which I am

tabling contain very few changes in so far as customs duties are concerned, but in order to facilitate the compilation of a new consolidation of the Customs Tariff, several hundred items have been renumbered and rearranged covering products in respect of which changes have been made in recent years as a result of tariff negotiations at Geneva and Annecy. These items which are shown in resolution 3 continue rates of duty that have been in effect for several years, except in the case of tin plate, on which the British preferential tariff is being increased from free to 15 per cent ad valorem. During the negotiations at Geneva in 1947 the elimination of this British preference, coupled with a reduction in the most-favoured-nation rate from 17J to 15 per cent, was agreed to by the British and ourselves as an essential part of the bargain by which we obtained very important concessions in the United States tariff, and at that time Canada gave an undertaking to make this increase effective as soon as the necessary legislation could be. enacted. It is proposed that resolution 3 go into effect on June 1, 1950.
My other tariff proposals, which for the reason mentioned are of only minor significance, are included in resolution 2. The tariff is being reduced on dates for packaging and on compounds imported mainly from the United Kingdom for the manufacture of phonograph records. The other changes are mainly for the purpose of facilitating administration and the elimination of obsolete phraseology. Somewhat related to this latter category is an amendment being proposed in connection with the tariff item covering biological products. For some years the administrative authorities have held that penicillin and similar antibiotics were dutiable as chemicals. An importer appealed this ruling and his appeal was allowed by the tariff board. The decision of that board is now before the exchequer court. The whole field is one in which there have been important technological and industrial developments in recent years, and there is a need for investigation of all the pertinent facts and clarification of the tariff situation. What we are now proposing therefore is to insert in the tariff an appropriate definition of biological products to maintain the existing practice, and then refer the whole question of biological products to the tariff board for thorough investigation and considered recommendation. The tariff changes in resolution 2 which cover about twenty-five items will go into effect tomorrow.
The Budget-Mr. Abbott
I should add that the amendments being made to the Customs Tariff in these budget resolutions will not affect in any way the carrying out of the provisions and intent of the Emergency Exchange Conservation Act.

[Stage Direction]
I may now summarize the effects of the proposed tax changes on the balance of revenues and expenditures. The various tax reductions which I have proposed should not in all involve a loss of revenue of more than $3 million. The revenue from the new tax available to closely-held companies in respect of accumulated earnings cannot be predicted, because we cannot tell how many of these companies will elect to take advantage of the new provisions in the next fiscal year. The revenue we receive could be quite large. I believe that it will at least be sufficient to offset the reductions just mentioned.
This, then, leaves our expected expenditures at $2,410 million, our expected revenues at $2,430 million, and our expected surplus for the coming year at $20 million.

[Stage Direction]
There is little that I need add, Mr. Speaker, by way of conclusion. Canada is in a prosperous state of economic health. There are difficulties and uncertainties ahead of us; but when in our history have we been without difficulties and uncertainties? During the past year Canada has demonstrated the soundness and the resilience of her economy.
My hon. friends opposite have been discovering imminent crises and catastrophes almost every month for the past two years or more, and almost every month our trade has increased, our employment has increased, and new resources are discovered or developed. We all know, of course, that our geography and the nature of many of our basic resources make us vulnerable to sudden economic changes in the countries with which we do the greater part of our trade. But I suggest to all my hon. friends opposite that the calamities they fear are not imminent, and that if at some future time we have to face serious difficulties we shall find that we have never been better equipped and prepared to resolve them.
I wish now to table the budget resolutions:

[Stage Direction]
Resolved that it is expedient to amend the Income Tax Act and to provide, amongst other things:-
1.	That for the 1949 and subsequent taxation years, the provision under which the 10 per cent tax rate on the first $10,000 of income of a corporation
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Resolutions applies only to one of several related companies be amended so that the test of relationship of companies shall be ownership of 70 per cent or more of all the issued common shares of capital stock of the corporation instead of mere control.
2.	That in order to permit a private company to pay tax on undistributed income so that it may capitalize the undistributed income, the company may elect
(a)	to pay a tax of 15 per cent on undistributed income held by the corporation at the end of the 1949 taxation year and
'b; to pay a tax of 15 per cent on undistributed income earned thereafter equal to the dividends distributed from time 1o time by the corporation during the period when the undistributed income was earned.
3.	That for the 1949 and subsequent taxation years, there shall not be included in computing income amounts received in consideration for mining properties by prospectors who have prospected, explored or developed the properties, or by persons who have financed prospectors to do so, other than persons who carry on the business of dealing with the public in shares or securities or who dispose of the shares after carrying on a campaign to sell them to the public.
4.	That special deductions from income to taxpayers whose principal business is the production, refining, or marketing of petroleum or petroleum products or the exploring or drilling for oil or natural gas or mining or exploring for minerals, be allowed for expenses incurred in the 1953 operations on the same basis as for expenses in the operations in the years 1949 to 1952.
5.	That special deductions from income and taxes to taxpayers whose principal business is production, refining or marketing of petroleum or drilling for petroleum be allowed for expenses incurred in respect of deep-test oil wells in 1951 operations on the same basis as for similar expenses in 1950 operations.
6.	That for the 1950 and subsequent taxation years, section 73 of the Income Tax Act, which imposes a tax on income from oil royalty rights held by a trustee as if the trustee was a corporation, be repealed.
7.	That for the 1950 and subsequent taxation years, section 18 of the Income Tax Act, under which lease-option or hire purchase or like agreements relating to movable property are deemed to be agreements for sale and the payments to be purchase price and the purchaser to be the owner for purposes of depreciation, be extended to apply to all property except real or immovable property used in the business of farming.
8.	That a non-resident be exempt from the 15 per cent tax on dividends received by non-residents in respect of dividends received by him from a company resident in Canada that derives substantially all of its income, directly or indirectly, from the operation of public utilities in the country in which the non-resident resides.
9.	That individuals who were resident in Newfoundland on March 31, 1949, may, for the purposes of computing tax payable by them, elect to report their actual incomes for the whole year 1949 instead of that for the period after March 31, 1949, which is now adjusted to an amount that would correspond to his income for the whole year for the purpose of computing the tax.

[Stage Direction]
Resolved that it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend The Excise Tax Act and to provide, amongst other things:-
1.	That the excise tax of 5 per cent on toilet soap be repealed effective on and after March 29, 1950.

2.	That the sales tax on the following articles be repealed effective on and after March 29, 1950-ice cream; drinks prepared from fresh milk; prepared whipping cream.
3.	That the sales tax on the following articles and materials be repealed effective on and after July 1, 1950: Articles and materials for the sole use of any bona fide public institution, certified to be such by the Department of National Health and Welfare in accordance with regulations approved by the governor in council, whose principal purpose is to provide permanent or semipermanent shelter and care in residence for children or for aged, infirm or incapacitated persons, and that is in receipt annually of aid for their maintenance from the government of Canada or of a province when those articles or materials are purchased in good faith by that public institution for its own use and not for resale.

[Stage Direction]
1. Resolved, that it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Customs Tariff, being Chapter forty-four of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927, as amended, as follows:-
(a)	By repealing subsection four of section five and substituting the following:-
"4. The said discount shall not apply in the case in which the duty does not exceed fifteen per centum ad valorem, or, in the case of a specific duty or a specific and ad valorem duty combined in which the computed rate does not exceed fifteen per centum ad valorem, or where the rate of customs duty under the British Preferential Tariff is the same as the rate of customs duty under the Most-Favoured-Nation Tariff, or to goods admitted into Canada which have the benefit of reductions provided for in the Canada-West Indies Trade Agreement, 1926."
(b)	By repealing section fourteen and substituting the following:-
"14. (1) The ad valorem rate of duty set forth in Tariff Items 84, 85, 87, 92, 94 or 95 in Schedule A applies to goods specified in the Item imported at any time except during a period in which an order of the Minister under subsection two has applied the rate of specific duty set forth in the Item in lieu of the ad valorem rate of duty in which case the rate of specific duty set forth in the Item applies to goods imported during that period.
(2)	The Minister may order that the rate of specific duty set out in a Tariff Item mentioned in subsection one shall apply to goods specified in the Item in lieu of the rate of ad valorem duty set forth therein for such period during each fiscal year as may be fixed by the Minister not exceeding the number of weeks mentioned in the Item: Provided, that, in the case of sub-items (b), (d), (e), (f), (g), or (i), of Tariff Item 87, the Minister may order that the rate of specific duty shall apply during two separate periods in a fiscal year but the number of weeks in the two periods shall not exceed the number specified in that sub-item.
(3)	The Minister may exclude from an order made under subsection two, either at the time of making the order or at any time thereafter, goods to which the order would otherwise apply imported through ports in a specified region or part of Canada during the whole or any part of the period mentioned in the order in which case the ad valorem rate of duty applies to the goods so imported."
(c)	By repealing subsection three of section sixteen and substituting the following:-	#
"16. (3) All such goods imported into Canada after the date of the coming into force of any such

order of the Governor In Council which do not comply with the requirements of such order shall not be released from Customs possession until they have been so marked, stamped, branded or labelled under customs supervision at the expense of the importer."
2. Resolved, that Schedule A to the Customs Tariff be amended by striking thereout tariff items 16, 17,
The Budget-Resolutions
28b, 77, 99e, 101b, 206a, 208v, 209d, 446h, 480a, 520c, 558b (a) and (b), 558d (a) and (b), 605a, 607, 696a, 705, 705a, 709 (a) and (b), 779 and 779a, the several enumerations of goods respectively and the several rates of duties of customs, if any, set opposite each of the said items, and by inserting the following items, enumerations and rates of duty in said Schedule A:-

					Rates in Effect Prior to		
					Rates Proposed in this Budget		
		British	Most-				
							
Tariti	-	Preferential	Favoured-	General	Most-	Item	Tariff	Nation	Tariff	British	Favoured-	GeneralTariff	Preferential	Nation	TariffTariff	Tariff	16	Eggs in the shell	per dozen	2 cts.	3j cts.	10 cts.	2 cts.	cts.	10 cts. or countervailing duty.17	Cheese	per pound	3 cts.	3| cts.	7 cts.	3 cts.	3£ cts.	7 cts. (weight of packages up to two pounds included).77	Beans, viz.:-Tonquin, crude only; locust beans; locust beans, roasted or ground; locust bean meal..	Free	Free	Free	Free;	Free;	Free;15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.99e	(1) Dates, dried, pitted, when in packages or containers weighing not less than ten pounds each.	.	per pound	Free	Free	1 ct.	1 ct.	1J cts.	2\ cts.(2) Dates, n.o.p	per pound When in packages weighing two pounds each, or	1 ct.	1} cts.	2J cts.	1 ct.	1} cts.	2\ cts.less, the weight of such packages to be included in the weight for duty.	206a	(1) Serums, antitoxins, viruses, toxins, toxoids, vaccines and allergenic products, n.o.p., for parenteral administration in the diagnosis or treatment of	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free(2) Biological products, animal or vegetable,	n.o.p., for parenteral administration in the diagnosis or treatment of diseases of animals or poultry, when imported under permit of the Veterinary Director	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free208v	Methyl ethyl ketone, n.o.p., and isopropyl acetate...	Free	25 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	25 p.c.	25 p.c.209d	Potash, chlorate of, not further prepared than ground	Free	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	20 p.c.216g	Compounds, of which the chief organic component is	shellac, imported by manufacturers of phonograph records for use exclusively in the manufacture of	Free	5 p.c.	25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.220c	Gasoline anti-oxidants for use in the production of	gasoline	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.
w
w
o
o
o
[Stage Direction]


o
w
The Budget-Customs Tariff
284b
Gypsum tile.
446h
Stampings of metal, or assemblies thereof, for use in the manufacture of bath tubs	
453a Metal parts, n.o.p., in any degree of manufacture but not coated, plated nor covered in any manner, for use exclusively in the manufacture of spectacle cases and jewellery boxes	
480a Invalid wheel chairs, with or without motive power; parts of the foregoing, including motive power and parts thereof	
520c
Linters of short fibres of cotton, bleached, when imported by manufacturers of paper, for use exclusively in the manufacture of blotting or other grade of paper, in their own factories	
558b
Rovings, yarns and warps wholly of synthetic textile fibres or filaments, not more advanced than singles, not colouied, with not more than seven turns to the inch, under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe:-
(a) Produced from cellulose acetate	
Provided that, in no case, shall the duty under the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff be less than	per pound
(b) N.o.p	
Provided that, in no case, shall the duty under the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff be less than	per poujid
558d
Rovings, yarns and warps wholly or in part of synthetic textile fibres or filaments, n.o.p., including threads, cords or twist for sewing, embroidering or other purposes, not to contain silk; yarns of synthetic textile fibres or filaments wholly or partially covered with metallic strip, one pound of which shall contain not less than 10,000 yards; under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe:-
(a)	Produced wholly from cellulose acetate....
Provided that, in no case, shall the duty under
the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff be less than	per pound
(b)	N.o.p	
Provided that, in no case, shall the duty under
the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff be less than	per pound
15 p.c. Free
10 p.c. Free
Free
5 p.c. 20 p.c.
7| P-c. 25 p.c.
20 p.c.	25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c.12^ p.c.	35 p.c.	10 p.c.;	12J p.c.;	35 p.c.'10 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.10 p.c.	15 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	15 p.c.10 p.c.	12J p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	12f p.c25 p.c.	35 p.c.	5 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.24 cts.	28 cts.	24 cts.	28 cts.25 p.c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.24 cts.	28 cts.	24 cts.	28 cts.25 p.c.	35 p.c.	p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.24 cts.	28 cts.	24 cts.	28 cts.25 p.c.	35 p.c.	25 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.24 cts.	28 cts.	24 cts.	28 cts.
s
>
o
[Stage Direction]


cn
o
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Abbott.]
Tariff
Item
British
Preferential
Tariff
605a Genuine pig leathers, n.o.p., and genuine Morocco
leathers; so-called roller leathers	
607 Leather, n.o.p., when imported by manufacturers of gloves or leather clothing, for use exclusively in manufacturing gloves or leather clothing in their own factories	
Free
Free
696a
Moving picture films, sound or silent, separate sound film track, slides and slide films, positive or negative; sound discs, records and transcriptions; models, static and moving; wall charts, maps and posters; when certified by the Government or by a recognized representative authority of the Government of the country of production or by an appropriate representative of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization as being of an international educational, scientific or cultural character; subject to such regulations as the Minister may prescribe	
Free
Settlers' effects, viz.:-Wearing apparel, books, usual and reasonable household furniture and other household effects; instruments and tools of trade, occupation or employment, guns, musical instruments, domestic sewing machines, typewriters, bicycles, carts, wagons and other highway vehicles, agricultural implements and live stock for the farm, not to include live stock or articles for sale, or for use as a contractor's outfit, nor vehicles nor implements moved by mechanical power, nor machinery for use in any manufacturing establishment; all the foregoing if actually owned abroad by the settler for at least six months before his removal to Canada, and subject to regulations prescribed by the Minister	
Free
Provided that the six months' ownership requirement as specified in this Item shall not apply in the case of bona fide brides' trousseaux and wedding presents.
General
Tariff
Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget
British
Preferential
Tariff
Most-
Favoured-	General
Nation	Tariff
Tariff
27* p.c.
Free
20 p.c.
27* p.c.
10 p.c.
Free
7* p.c.
10 p.c.
Free
Free
(various)
Free	Free
(various)	(various)
[Stage Direction]

s
5S
Free
Free
Free
Free
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Provided further that any dutiable article entered as settlers' effects may not be so enterec unless brought by the settler on his first arrival and shall not be sold or otherwise disposed of without payment of duty until after twelve months actual use in Canada.	
Settlers' effects, viz.:-Machines and implements for agricultural purposes, moved by mechanical power and motor vehicles valued at not more than fifteen hundred dollars, and boats for fishing purposes, i] actually owned abroad by the settler for at least six months before his removal to Canada, and subject to regulations prescribed by the Minister oi National Revenue.	
Provided that in respect to motor vehicles valued in excess of fifteen hundred dollars duty shall be payable only on the amount in excess of fifteen hundred dollars.	
Provided further that the said machines, vehicles, implements and boats may not be so entered unless brought by the settler on his first arrival, and shall not be sold or otherwise disposed of without payment of duty until after twelve months' actual use in Canada		
(a) Goods, including containers or coverings filled or empty, the growth, produce or manufacture of Canada, after having been exported therefrom...	Free
(b) Goods, including containers or coverings filled or empty, which have once been entered for consumption in Canada and have been exported therefrom 		Free
All the foregoing under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe.	
Provided that the goods are returned within five years from the time of exportation without having been advanced in value or improved in condition by any process of manufacture or other means, or combined with any other article abroad;	
Provided also that any such goods on which a refund of duty or allowance of drawback has been made shall not be admitted to entry under this tern except upon payment of duties equal to the -efrnd or drawback allowed;	
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free;
Free
Free
Free
Free;
17i p.e.
Free; 27J p.o.
s
>
a
o
[Stage Direction]
Free
Free
to
Cn
Free
Free
Free
Free
to
co
cn
The Budget-Customs Tariff

709 -Con.	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	Tariff Item	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most-Favoured-N at ion Tariff	General TariffProvided further that any of such goods manufactured in bond or under excise regulations in Canada and exported shall not be admitted to entry except upon payment of the Customs or Excise duties to which they would have been liable had they not been exported from Canada;	Provided further that where the Minister is satisfied that a quantity of containers in a usable condition has previously been exported from Canada he may by regulation permit the importation free of customs duty of a like quantity of similar containers which are not the growth, produce or manufacture of Canada	
3
o
a
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
3. Resolved, that Schedule A to the Customs Tariff be amended by 8a, 13, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 28a, 29, 29a, 30, 31, 39a, 39b, 41, 45, 47, 62, 62a, (b) (i) and (ii) (c) (1) and (ii) (d) and (e), 83(a) (b) and (c). 84, (o) and (p), 89(a) (b) (c) and (d), 92 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) and (c), 106d, 108, 109, 109a, 109b, 110, 111, 114, 120(a) (b) (c) and (d), 163a, 167, 178 (i) and (ii), 178a, 178b, 179, 184a, 184b (i) and (ii), 184c', 254, 254a, 262, 264, 264a, 266, 273, 273a, 276, 276a, 276b, 277, 277a, 278, 278a, 368, 383(b), 384 (a) and (b), 402b, 414, 414a, 414c, 429(g), 430b (I) and (II), 523, 523(b), 5231, 523n, 524a, 532, 549, 549a, 549b, 553, 554e, 568b, 569 (i), 597, 597a, 598, 598a, 604 , 605 , 607 Pt. 2, 607a, 611a, 616 (i) (ii) and (iii), several enumerations of goods respectively and the several rates of duties the following items, enumerations and rates of duty in said Schedule A:
striking thereout tariff items 5(a)	(b)	and	(c),	7(a)	(b) and (c)	866a, 74, 75, 76, 76a, 76b, 76c, 76d, 79b, 79c, 79d, 81(a) (b) and (c), 82(a) 85, 87 (a)	(b)	(c)	(d)	(e)	(f)	(g)	(h)	(i)	(j)	(k)	(1)	(m)	(n)and (l), 93, 94, 95 , 99c, 100, 100a, 105, 105b, 105c, 105d, 105e, 106(a) (b) 123, 123a, 141, 152, 152a, 152b, 152c, 154, 156, 160(a) and (b), 161, 162 163 184d, 199b, 207 , 207a, 207b, 208i (i) and (ii), 208j, 208t, 232, 232a 247a' 278b, 278c, 278d, 284 , 305 , 306, 307 , 326 (i) and (ii), 353, 353a, 366, 366a 366b 434, 440m (i) and (ii), 440g, 446g, 450, 451b (i) and (ii), 518, 519, 520 522c' 569 (ii), 569 (iii), 569 (iv), 569 (v), 569a (i), 569a (ii), 571, 571a (i) and (ii)' 619a, 624a (i) (ii) and (iii), 654,	655,	656	and	710(b) and (bb)	the
of customs, if any, set opposite each of the said items, and by inserting
Tariff Item	-	
5	Animals, living, n.o.p.:-	
	(a) Cattle		per pound
	(b) Sheep, lambs and goats		. per head
	(c)	Silver or black foxes	 (d)	N.o.p		
7	Meats, fresh, n.o.p.:-	
	(a) Beef and veal		per pound
	(b) Edible offal of beef and veal		per pound
	but not	less than
	(c) Lamb and mutton		per pound
	(d) Pork		per pound
	(e) N.o.p		per pound
8	Canned beef			
8a	Canned pork		
8b	Canned hams		
8c	PAtOs de foie gras, foies gras, preserved,	in tins or
	otherwise; lark p&t6s		
8d	Animal liver paste		
8e		
8f	Canned poultry or game, n.o.p		
8g	Extracts of meat and fluid beef, not medicated		
British	Most-	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	Preferential Tariff	Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Pavoured- Nation Tariff	General TariffFree Free Free Free	11 cts. $2.00 20 p.c. 71 p.c.	3 cts. $3.00 25 p.c. 25 p.c.	Free Free Free Free	11 cts. $2.00 20 p.c. 71 p.c.	3 cts. $3.00 25 p.c. 25 p.c.3	cts. \\ cts. 7| p.c. 4	cts. lj cts. 2 cts.	3 cts. U cts. 7| p.c. 6 cts. 1\ cts. 2| cts.	8 cts. 8 cts. 8 cts. 5 cts. 5 cts.	3	cts. 1£ cts. 71 p.c. 4	cts. 1} cts. 2 cts.	3 cts. 1| cts. 71 p.c. 6 cts. lj cts. 2\ cts.	8 cts. 8 cts. 8 cts. 5 cts. 5 cts.15 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	30 p c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	22j p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	221 p.c.	35 p.c.10 p.c.	10 p.c.	35 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.10 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	10 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.
>
a
to
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff Item	-	British Preferential Tariff13	Lard and animal stearine of all kinds, n.o.p.per pound	1| cts.13a	Lard compound and similar substances; cottolene	1£ cts.per pound	15a	Honey-comb foundations, of wax	15 p.c.20c 22	FreePreparations of cocoa or chocolate in powder form....	22J p.c.23	Preparations of cocoa or chocolate, n.o.p., and confectionery, coated with or containing chocolate, the weight of the wrappings and cartons to be included	10 p.c.in the weight for duty	and, per pound	2j cts.26	Coffee, roasted or ground	per pound	3 cts.26a	Imitations of and substitutes for roasted or ground	coffee, including acorn nuts	per pound	3 cts.28	Coffee, green, n.o.p	per pound	Free28a	When in packages weighing five pounds, each, or less, the weight of such packages to be included in the weight for duty.	Free30	Pepper, unground	Free30a	Cloves, unground	Free30b	Cinnamon, unground	Free30c	Ginger, unground	Free30d	Spices, unground, n.o.p	Free30e	Chilli pepper, unground	Free
Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff2 cts.	1} cts.	1| cts.	2 cts.2 cts.	\\ cts.	lj cts.	2 cts.20 p.c.	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.35 p.c.	221 p.c.	221 p.c.	35 p.c. or 3 cts. per lb. whichever is higher.35 p.c.	10 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.21 cts.	2\ cts.	2\ cts.	2£ cts.5 cts.	3 cts. or	5 cts. or	5 cts. or3 cts. and	5 cts. and	5 cts. and/	71 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.5 cts.	3 cts.	5 cts.	5 cts.5 cts.	Free	2 cts.	5 cts. or 5 cts. and 10 p.c.8 cts.	Free or	2 cts. or	8 cts. or4 cts.	6 cts.	10 cts.121 p.c.	Free	5 p.c.	121 p.c.121 p c.	Free	10 p.c.	121 P-o.121 p.c.	Free	121 p.c.	121 P-c-121 p.c.	Free	125 p.c.	121 P-c.121 p.c.	Free	121 p.c.	121 P-c.121 p.c.	Free	5 p.c.	121 p.c.
o
[Stage Direction]
o
o
2
o
[Stage Direction]


The Budget-Customs Tariff
55946-79J
31a
39a
39b
39f
45
45a
47a
47b
47c
47d
47e
62
66a
73a
73b
Chilli pepper, ground	and
per pound
Ginger and spices, ground, n.o.p	per pound
and
Starch or flour of sago, cassava, or rice.. . .per pound
Rice meal, rice feed, rice polish, rice bran, rice shorts
per pound
Arrowroot	per pound
Salt, n.o.p., in bags, barrels and other coverings per one hundred pounds
Milk foods, n.o.p	
Prepared cereal foods, in packages not exceeding twenty-five pounds weight each	
Castor beans, n.o.p	per	poundSoya beans, n.o.p	per	poundLima and Madagascar beans, dried	per	poundRed kidney beans, dried	per	poundCalabar beans	per	poundBeans, n.o.p	per	poundHominy grits, corn grits, hominy feeds, and brewers' corn grits	Rice, uncleaned, unhulled or paddy	Biscuits, sweetened or unsweetened, valued at not less than 20 cents per pound, said value to be based on the net weight and to include the value of the usual retail package	Cotton seed	,,	Broom corn seed, when in packages weighing more than one pound each	
Seeds, as hereunder, when in packages weighing more
than one pound each:-
(a)	Parsley and parsnip	per pound
(b)	Beet, not including sugar beet....per pound
(c)	Mangel and turnip	per pound
5 p.c.
3 cts. 7b p.c.
| ct.
i ct. Free
Free 20 p.c.
20 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
10 p.c. Free
Free
P'ree
Free
Free
Free
Free
7$ p.c.
3 cts.
10	p.c.
11	cts.
1 ct.
lj cts.
3J cts. 20 p.c.
20 p.c. Free Free b ct.
1	ct. Free lj cts.
10 p.c. Free
20 p.c. Free
Free
2	cts. 2 cts. 2 cts.
10 p.c. 3 cts.	5 p.c.	7i p.c.	10 p.c. 3 cts.3 cts.	3 cts.	3 cts.	3 cts.10 p.c.	7i p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.li cts.	i ct.	li cts.	li cts.li cts.	i ct.	1 ct.	li cts.li cts.	Free	li cts.	li cts.7i cts.	Free	3i cts.	7i cts.27i p.c.	20 p.c.	20 p.c.	27i p.c.27i p.c.	20 p.c.	20 p.c.	27i p.c.2 cts.	Free	Free	2 cts.2 cts.	Free	Free	2 cts.2 cts.	Free	i ct.	2 cts.2 cts.	Free	1 ct.	2 cts.2 cts.	Free	Free	2 cts.2 cts.	Free	li cts.	2 cts.25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.Free	Free	Free	Free30 p.c.	Frw	20 p.c.	30 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	Free	10 p.c.15 p.c.	Free	Free	15 p.c.5 cts.	Free	2 cts.	5 cts.5 cts.	Free	2 cts.	5 cts.5 cts.	Free	2 cts.	5 cts.
s
>
o
a
The Budget-Customs Tariff

to
[Stage Direction]
British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	ariff tem	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff75	Seeds, as hereunder, when in packages weighing more than one pound each:- (a) Radish, leek, lettuce, carrot, borecole or kale	per pound	Free	2 cts.	10 cts.	Free	2 cts.	10 cts.(b) Cabbage and cucumber	per pound	Free	4 cts.	10 cts.	Free	4 cts.	10 cts.76	Seeds, as hereunder, when in packages weighing more than one pound each:- (a) Tomato and pepper	per pound	Free	cts.	25 cts.	Free	71 cts.	25 cts.(b) Cauliflower	per pound	Free	12£ cts.	25 cts.	Free	\2\ cts.	25 cts.(c) Onion	per pound	Free	15 cts.	25 cts.	Free	15 cts.	25 cts.76d	Root, garden and other seeds, n.o.p., when in package weighing more than one pound each... .per pound	Free	21 cts.	10 cts.	Free	21 cts.	10 cts.76e	Seeds, viz.:-Field, root, garden and other seeds, when in packages weighing one pound each, or less	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.7 l	Annatto seed and mushroom spawn	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free76g	Seeds, viz.:-Canary, mustard, celery and sunflower, when in packages weighing more than one pound each imported for use exclusively in manufacturing or blending operations	5 p.c.	7, p.c.	10 p.c.	5 p.c.	71 p.c.	10 p.c.79b	Orchids, natural, cut, whether in designs or bouquets or not	' [DOT]	Free	25 p.c.	40 p.c.	Free	25 p.c.	40 p.c.79c	Flowers and foliage, natural, cut, whether in designs or bouquets or not, n.o.p	Free	12| p.c.	40 p.c.	Free	121 P.o.	40 p.c.79d	Trees, being seedling stock for grafting, viz.:- Apple, plum, pear, peach and other fruit trees, and buds and scions for grafting such trees; peach pits for planting purposes	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	FreeMulberry trees, cuttings, roots and buds, for seri-cultural purposes	Free	Free	30 p.c.	Free	Free	30 p.c.Trees, n.o.p., viz.:- (a) Apple:- September 15 to October 5, inclusive	each	Free	3 cts.	3 cts.	Free	3 cts.	3 cts.October 6 to September 14, inclusive	each	Free	6 cts.	1 7\ cts.	Free	6 cts.	71 cts.
<3
w
[Stage Direction]
o
o
o
s
[Stage Direction]
o
m
The Budget-Customs Tariff
-Con.
(b) Plum and cherry:-
September 15 to October 5, inclusive.each
October 6 to September 14, inclusive.each
(c)	Pear, apricot and quince	each(d)	Peach, including June buds	each
82a
82b
82c
82d
Grape vines, gooseberry	and	currant	bushes or
roots	each
Raspberry, loganberry	and	blackberry	bushes or
roots	each
Rhubarb roots	each
Asparagus roots	each
82e
Strawberry plants
each
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Fiee
3 cts. 8 cts.
8 cts.
5 cts.
2 cts.
1 ct.
| ct.
* ct. i ct.
82f
Rosebushes, n.o.p
each
1* cts.
82g_
1.
[Stage Direction]
82h
Nut trees, including grafted stock, and buds and scions for grafting nut trees	
Trees, shrubs, vines, plants, roots and cuttings, for propagation or growing purposes, n.o.p	
Free
12* p.c.
Potatoes, as hereunder defined:-
(a)	In their natural state:-
August 1 to June 14, inclusive	
per one hundred pounds
June 15 to July 31, inclusive	
per one hundred pounds
(b)	Dried, desiccated, or dehydrated_____per pound
Free
Free
Free
(c) Sweet potatoes and yams, in their natural state	per one hundred pounds
Free
Onions, in their natural state, the weight of the packages to be included in the weight for duty:-
(a) Onion sets and shallots	
Free
3 cts. Free 12* p.c.
Fi ee 37* cts. Free
Free 15 p.c.
(b) Onions, n.o.p.
per pound
Free
1 ct. or 10 p.c.
Free	3 cts.	3 cts.Free	8 cts.	9 cts.Free	8 cts.	9 cts.Free	5 cts.	6 cts.Free	2 cts.	2\ cts.Free	1 ct.	1 ct.Free	1 ct.	1 ct.Free	J ct.	i ct.Free	1 ct.	i ct.1} cts.	3 cts.	7 cts.Free	Free	30 p.c.12* p.c.	12£ p.c.	30 p.c.Free	Free	75 cts.Free	37i cts.	(countervailing) 75 cts.Free	Free	(countervailing) 2| cts.Free	Free	15 cts.Free	15 p.c.	30 p.c. but not less than 1 ct. per pound.Free	1 ct. or	30 p.c. but not10 p.c.	less than J ct. per pound.
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff Item	-	British Preferential Tariff
	Provided that, when the onions specified in sub-item (b) of Item 84 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 40 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	
85	(a) Mushrooms, fresh, the weight of the packages to be included in the wreight for duty.. .per pound	Free
	Provided that, when the mushrooms specified in sub-item (a) of Item 85 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of three and one-half cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 52 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of three and one-half cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	
	(b) Mushrooms, dried or otherwise preserved		Free
	(c) Truffles, fresh, dried or otherwise preserved...	Free
87	Vegetables, fresh, in their natural state, the weight of the packages to be included in the weight for duty:- (a) Asparagus	per pound	Free
	Provided that, when the asparagus specified in sub-item (a) of Item 87 is imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of three and one-half cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 8 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of three and one-half cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	
General
Tariff
3$ cts. or 10 p.c.
30 p.c.
30 p.c.
3$ cts. or 10 p.c.
Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
British Preferential Tariff	Most-Fa voured-Nation Tariff	General TariffFree	3£ cts. or 10 p.c.	30 p.c. but not less than 10 cts. per pound.Free Free	15 p.c. 10 p.c.	30 p.c. but not less than 10 cts. per pound. 30 p.c. but not less than 10 cts. per pound.Free	3J cts. or 10 p.c.	30 p.c. but not less than 3 cts. per pound from Apr. 15, to May 31.
to
[Stage Direction]
to
[Stage Direction]
in
[Stage Direction]


o
o
s
g
o
in
The Budget-Customs Tariff﻿(b) Beans, green	per pound Provided that, when the beans specified in sub-item (b) of Item 87 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one and one-half cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 14 weeks and the number of weeks during which the specific duty may be maintained in force may be divided into two separate periods, the combined duration of which shall not exceed 14 weeks; and Provided that, whenever the specific duty of one and one-half cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	Free	1J cts. or 10 p.c.(c) Brussels sprouts	Free	10 p.c.(d) Cabbage	per pound	Free	9/10 ct. or 10 p.c.Provided that, when the cabbage specified in sub-item (d) of Item 87 is imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of nine-tenths of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 26 weeks and the number of weeks during which the specific duty may be maintained in force may be divided into two separate periods, the combined duration of which shall not exceed 26 weeks; and Provided that, whenever the specific duty of nine-tenths of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	(e) Carrots and beets, n.o.p	per pound Provided that, when the carrots and beets specified in sub-item (e) of Item 87 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 26 weeks and the number of weeks during which the specific duty may be maintained in force may be divided into two separate periods, the combined duration of which shall not exceed 26 weeks; and Provided that, whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	Free	1 ct. or 10 p.c.
1J cts. or 10 p.c.
30 p.c.
9/10 ct. or 10 p.c.
1 ct. or 10 p.c.
Free	li cts. or 10 p.c.	30 p.c.Free	10 p.c.	30 p.c.Free	9/10 ct. or	30 p.c. but not10 p.c.	less than 1 ct. per pound from June 15 to Jan. 31.Free	1 ct. or	30 p.c. but not10 p.c.	less than 1 ct. per pound from June 1, to Feb. 28.
>
o
[Stage Direction]
to
[Stage Direction]
to
tn
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff
Item
-Con.
(!) Cauliflower
British
Preferential
Tariff
per pound
Free
Provided that, when the cauliflower specified in sub-item (!) of Item 87 is imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of three-quarters of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 20 weeks and the number of weeks during which the specific duty may be maintained in force may be divided into two separate periods, the combined duration of which shall not exceed 20 weeks; and
Provided that, whenever the specific duty of three-quarters of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
Most-
Favoured-
Nation
Tariff
ct. or 10 p.c.
General
Tariff
	Most-
British	Favoured-
Preferential	Nation
Tariff	Tariff
ct. or 10 p.c.
Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget
Free
i ct. or 10 p.c.
General
Tariff
30 p.c. but not less than 2 cts. per pound from May 15, to Oct. 31.
(g) Celery	per pound
Provided that, when the celery specified in sub-item (g) of Item 87 is imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 24 weeks and the number of weeks during which the specific duty may be maintained in force may be divided into two separate periods, the combined duration of which shall not exceed 24 weeks; and Provided that, whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
Free
1 ct. or 10 p.c.
1 ct. or 10 p.c.
Free
1 ct. or 10 p.c.
30 p.c.
but not less than 2 cts. per pound from July 1, to Feb. 28.
(h) Cucumbers	per pound
Provided that, when the cucumbers specified in sub-item (h) of Item 87 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of two and one-quarter cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 12 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of two and one-quarter cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
Free
2j cts. or 2} cts. or 10 p.c.	10 p.c.
Free
2} cts. or 10 p.c.
30 p.c.
but not less than 1 ct. per pound from June 1, to Oct. 31.
[Stage Direction]
w
[Stage Direction]

o
o
3
o
sa
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
(i) Lettuce	per pound	Free
Provided that, when the lettuce specified in sub-item (i) of Item 87 is imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 18 weeks and the number of weeks during which the specific duty may be maintained in force may be divided into two separate periods, the combined duration of which shall not exceed 18 weeks; and Provided that, whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	
(j) Parsley		
	Free
Provided that, when the peas specified in sub-item (k) of item 87 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of two cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 12 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of two cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	
(1) Rhubarb	per pound	Free
Provided that, when the rhubarb specified in sub-item (l) of Item 87 is imported Under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one-half cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 10 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one-half cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	
	Free
	
1 ct. or	Free	1 ct. or
10 p.c.		10 p.c.
30 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.2 cts. or	Free	2 cts. or10 p.c.	10 p.c.£ ct. or	Free	1 ct. or10 p.c.	10 p.c. 130 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.
30 p.c.
but not less than 1J cts. per pound from April 1, to Oct. 31.
30 p.c. 30 p.c.
30 p.c.
but not less than 1 ct. per pound from Mar. 1, to May 31.
30 p.c.
but not less than 1 ct. per pound from May 1, to Oct. 31.
>
a
to
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff

British Preferential Tariff	Most-Fa voured-Nation Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	Tariff Item	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff87 -Con	(n) Tomatoes	per pound Provided that, when the tomatoes specified in sub-item (n) of Item 87 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one and one-half cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 32 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one and one-half cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	Free	\\ cts. or 10 p.c.	li cts. or 10 p.c.	Free	li cts. or 10 p.c.	30 p.c. but not less than 3 cts. per pound.(o)	Watercress	
(p)	Whitloof or endive, artichokes, horseradish	Free	10 p.c.	30 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	30 p.c.and okra	Free	Free	30 p.c.	Free	Free	30 p.c.(q) Eggplant	Free	Free	30 p.c.	Free	Free	30 p.c. but not less than 2 cts. per pound from May 15, to Oct. 31.89	(r) N.o.p	
Vegetables, prepared, in air-tight cans or other airtight containers, the weight of the containers to be include in the weight for duty:-	Free	10 p.c.	30 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	30 p.c.(a) Beans, baked or otherwise prepared.per pound	Free	li cts.	3 cts.	Free	li cts.	3 cts.(b) Corn	per pound	Free	li cts.	3 cts.	Free	li cts.	3 cts.(c) Tomatoes	per pound	Free	2 cts.	3 cts.	Free	2 cts.	3 cts.(d) Peas	per pound	Free	li cts.	3 cts.	Free	\\ cts.	3 cts.(e) N.o.p	Free	15 p.c.	30 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	30 p.c.90f 92	Vegetable colourings and flavourings	
Fruits, fresh, in their natural state, the weight oi the packages to be included in the weight for duty:-	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.e.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.(a) Apricots	per pound	Free	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	Free	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	20 p.c. but not less than 1 ct. per pound from June 15 to Aug. 15.
o
o
s
o
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Provided that, when the apricots specified in sub-item (a) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 10 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
(b) Cherries	per pound
Provided that, when the cherries specified in sub-item (b) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of two cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 7 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of two cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
(c) Cranberries	per pound
Provided that, when the cranberries specified in sub-item (c) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 12 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
(d) Peaches	per pound
Provided that, when the peaches specified in sub-item (d) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one am 1 one-half cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 9 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one and one-half cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
Free
Free
Free
2 cts. or	2 cts. or	Free	2 cts. or10 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.1 ct. or	1 ct. or	Free	1 ct. or10 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.1£ cts. or	1J cts. or	Free	li cts. or10 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.
20 p.c.
but not less than 2 cts. per pound.
20'p.e.
but not'less than 2} cts. per pound.
20 p.e.
but not less than 1J cts. per pound from July 20 to Oct. 1.
s
o
[Stage Direction]
§
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff
Item
-Con.
(e) Pears.
British
Preferential
Tariff
per pound.
Free
Provided that, when the pears specified in sub-item (e) of Item 92 are imported under the Most^Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 15 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
(f) Plums and prunes
per pound
Free
Provided that, when the plums and prunes specified in sub-item (f) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 10 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
(g) Strawberries
per pound
Free
Provided that, when the strawberries specified in sub-item (g) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one and three-fifth cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 6 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one and three-fifth cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.
(h) Raspberries and loganberries
per pound
Free
Provided that, when the raspberries and loganberries specified in sub-item (h) of Item 92 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of two cents per
		Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff1 ct. or 10 p.c.	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	Free	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	20 p.c. but not less than 2 ct. per pound from Aug. 1 to Dec. 31.1 ct. or 10 p.c.	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	Free	1 ct. or 10 p.c.	20 p.c. but not less than i ct. per pound from July 15 to Oct. 31.1-3/5 cts. or 10 p.c.	1-3/5 cts. or 10 p.c.	Free	1-3/5 cts. or 10 p.c.	20 p.c. but not less than 3 cts. per pound from June 1 to July 31.2 cts. or 10 p.c.	2 cts. or 10 p.c.	Free	2 cts. or 10 p.c.	20 p.c. but not less than 3 cts. per pound from June 1 to July 31.
td
[Stage Direction]
s
o
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 6 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of two cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply. (i) Berries, edible, n.o.p		
(j) Quinces and nectarines		
Apples, fresh, in their natural state, the weight of the packages to be included in the weight for duty:- May 20 to July 12, inclusive		
July 13 to May 19, inclusive	per pound	FreeGrapes, fresh, in their natural state, the weight of the packages to be included in the weight for duty:- (a)	Vitis Vinifera species	per pound (b)	Vitis Labrusca species	per pound	Free FreeProvided that, when the grapes specified in sub-item (b) of Item 94 are imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one cent per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 15 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one cent per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	Cantaloupes and musk melons, the weight of the packages to be included in the weight for duty	FreeProvided that, when imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff the specific duty of one and one-quarter cents per pound shall not be maintained in force in any twelve months ending March 31 for a period in excess of 8 weeks, and whenever the specific duty of one and one-quarter cents per pound is not levied the ad valorem duty of 10 per centum shall apply.	Raisins	per pound When in packages weighing two pounds each, or less, the weight of such packages 19 be included in the weight for duty.	Free
10 p.c. 10 p.c.
Free l ct.
Free 1 ct. or 10 p.c.
11 cts. or 10 p.c.
3 cts.
20 p.c.
20 p.c.
20 p.c. 20 p.c.
2 cts.
1 ct. or 10 p.c.
1} cts. or 10 p.c.
4 cts.
Free	10 p.c.
Free	10 p.c.
Free	Free
Free	i ct.
Free	Free
Free	1 ct. or
	10 p.c.
Free	U cts. or
	10 p.c.
Free	3 cts.
20 p.c.
but not less than 2 cts. perpound. 20 p.c.
but not less than 1 ct. per pound.
20 p.c.
but not less than 3/5 ct. per pound. 20 p.c.
but not less than 3/5 ct. perpound.
2 cts. 2 cts.
20 p.c.
but not less than li cts. per pound from July 20 to Oct. 31.
4 cts.
[Stage Direction]
>
sa
to
[Stage Direction]
<0
The Budget-Customs Tariff
IMr. Abbott.]
Tariff
Item
99h
Dried currants	per pound
When in packages weighing two pounds each, or less, the weight of such packages to be included in the weight for duty.
Grapefruit	per pound
Fruit pulp, with sugar or not, n.o.p, and fruit3, crushed	per pound
105b
105c
105d
105s
105f
105g
105h
105i
108
Olives, ripe, in brine	
Olives, sulphured or in brine, not bottled	
Cherries, sulphured or in brine, not bottled	
Fruits and nuts, pickled or preserved in salt, brine, oil, or any other manner, n.o.p	
Jellies, jams, marmalades, preserves, fruit butters and condensed mincemeats	per pound
Fruits and peels, crystallized, glae6, candied or drained; cherries and other fruits of creme de menthe, maraschino or other flavour	
Oranges, grapefruit, or lemons, sliced or in the form of pulp, with or without the addition of preservatives.
Fruits, frozen	per pound
Fruits, prepared, in air-tight cans or other air-tight containers, the weight of the containers to be included in the weight for duty:-
(a)	Peaches	per	pound(b)	Apricots	and pears	per	pound(c ) Pineapples	per	pound(d) N.o.p	per	poundHoney in the comb or otherwise, and imitations thereof	per pound!
British
Preferential
Tariff
Free
Free
1| cts. Free 10 p.c. 10 p.c.
20 p.c. 1J cts. 20 p.c.
Free H cts.
2 cts. 2 cts. 1 ct.
1 ct.
lj cts.
Most-F avoured-Nation Tariff	General Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff4 Ct9.	4 cts.	Free	4 cts.	4 cts.Free	1 ct.	Free	Free	1 ct.2 cts.	3 cts.	li cts.	2 cts.	3 cts.Free	30 p.c.	Free	Free	30 p.c.17J p.c.	30 p.c.	10 p.c.	175 p.c.	30 p.c.175 P-c.	30 p.c.	10 p.c.	175 P-c.	30 p.c.25 p.c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.3} cts.	5 cts.	15 cts.	35 cts.	5 cts.275 P-c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	275 P-c.	35 p.c.20 p.c.	35 p.c.	Free;	20 p.c.;	35 p.c.;20 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.2 cts.	3 cts.	li cts.	2 cts.	3 cts.25 cts.	5 cts.	2 cts.	25 cts.	5 cts.2 cts.	5 cts.	2 cts.	2 cts.	5 cts.2 cts.	5 cts.	1 ct.	2 cts.	5 cts.1 ct.	5 cts.	1 ct.	1 ct.	5 cts.li cts.	3 cts.	15 cts.	15 cts.	3 cts.
cn
[Stage Direction]

3
o
2!
cn
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Nuts of all kinds, n.o.p., shelled or not,
109a
114
118b
118e
120
141
per pound
Peanuts, green, in the shell or not further processed than shelled	per pound
Cocoanuts	per one hundred....
Palm kernels	per pound
Lobsters, fresh	
drabs and clams, in sealed containers	
Shrimps in sealed containers	
*Sardines, sprats or pilchards, packed in oil or otherwise, in sealed tin containers, the weight of the tin container to be included in the weight for duty:-
fa ) When weighing over twenty ounces and not over thirty-six ounces each	per	box
(b)	When weighing over twelve ounces and not over
twenty ounces each	per	box
(c)	When weighing over eight ounces and not over
twelve ounces each	per	box
(d)	When weighing eight ounces each or less.. per box
Anchovies, packed in oil or otherwise, in sealed tin containers, the weight of the tin container to be included in the weight for duty:-
(a)	When weighing over twenty ounces and not over
thirty-six ounces each	per	box
(b)	When weighing over twelve ounces and not over
twenty ounces each	per	box
(c)	When weighing over eight ounces and not over
twelve ounces each	per	box
(i) When weighing eight ounces each or less per box
Fish, prepared or preserved, n.o.p.:-
(a)	Kippered herring in sealed containers	
(b)	Lobsters	
(c)	Shell fish, n.o.p., including oysters, n.o.p.
(d)	Salmon	
(e)	All other fish, n.o.p	
Sugar candy and confectionery, n.o.p., 'including sweetened gums, candied popcorn, candied nuts, flavouring powders, custard powders, jelly powders, sweetmeats, sweetened breads, cakes, pies, puddings and all other confections containing sugar...
and,per pound
1 ct.
Free
Free
Free Free 17J P-c. 15 p.c.
31 cts.
21 cts.
2 cts.
11 cts.
3j cts. 21 cts.
2 cts. 11 cts.
171 P-c 171 P-c 171 P-c 171 P-c 171 p.c
15 p.c.
1 ct.	3 cts.	1 ct.	1 ct.	2 cts.; 4 cts.Free	1 ct.	Free	Free	1 ct.50 cts.	75 cts.	Free	50 cts. [	Is *0 1-HFree	4 cts.	Free	Free	4 cts.Free	25 p.c.	Free	Free	25 p.c.40 p.c.	40 p.c.	171 P-c-	40 p.c.	40 p.c.15'p.c.	40 p.c.	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	40 p.c.3} cts.	6 cts.	31 cts.	3} cts.	6 cts.3 cts.	41 cts.	21 cts.	3 cts.	4} cts.2 cts.	31 cts.	2 cts.	2 cts.	3} cts.1$ cts.	21 cts.	11 cts.	1} cts.	2} cts.3} cts.	6 cts.	31 cts.	3} cts.	6 cts.3 cts.	41 cts.	21 cts.	3 cts.	4} cts.2 cts.	31 cts.	2 cts.	2 cts.	3} cts.1J cts.	21 cts.	11 cts.	1} cts.	2} cts.171 P-c.	30 p.c	17} p.c.	17} p.c.	30 p.c.221 P-c-	30 p.c.	171 P-c.	22} p.c.	30 p.c.221 p.c.	30 p.c.	17} p.c.	22} p.c.	30 p.c.271 P-c.	30 p.c.	175 p.c.	27} p.c.	30 p.c.221 P-c.	30 p.c.	17} p.c.	22} p.c.	30 p.c.25 p.c.	35 p.c. 1 ct.	15 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c. } ct.
s
>
w
o
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff Item	-	British Preferential Tariff
152	Fruit juices and fruit syrups, n.o.p., viz.:-	
	(a) Lime juice		10 p.c.
	(b) Orange juice			Free
	(c) Lemon juice		10 p.c.
	(d) Passion fruit juice		10 p c.
	(e) Pineapple juice		10 p.c.
	(}) Grapefruit juice		Free
	! (o) Blended orange and grapefruit juice		Free
	' (h) Fruit juices, n.o.p		10 p.c.
	; (i) Fruit syrups, n.o.p		10 p.c.
153a	Cflrape juice in containers of more than one gallon capacity each:- Testing not more than 1-074 specific gravity at 60	
	degrees temperature	per gallon And in addition thereto, for each increment of 0-01	20 cts.
	in specific gravity above 1 [DOT] 074		3 cts.
153b	Ifapaine		Free
154	Mineral and medicinal waters, natural, under regula-	
	' tions prescribed by the Minister		Free
156	i (a) Whisky	per gallon of the strength of proof	$4.50(b) Gin, n.o.p	per gallon of the strength of proof	$4.50(c) Rum, n.o.p.. per gallon of the strength of proof	$4.50(d) Brandy	per gallon of the strength of proof	$4.00(?) Liqueurs	per gallon of the strength of proof ff) Ethyl alcohol or the substance commonly known as alcohol, hydrated oxide of ethyl or j spirits of wine, n.o.p.; spirituous or alcoholic liquors, n.o.p.; amyl alcohol or fusel oil, or any substance known as potato spirits or potato oil; absinthe, arrack or palm spirit, artificial brandy and imitations of brandy, n.o.p.; cordials of all kinds, n.o.p.; mescal, pulque, rum shrub, schiedam and other schnapps; tafia, and alcoholic bitters or beverages, n.o.p.; and wines, n.o.p., containing	$4.50more than forty per cent of proof spirit	$5.00Most-Fa voured-Nation Tariff	General Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.15 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free;	15 p.c.;	25 p.c.;10 p.c.	15 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.25 cts.	25 cts.	20 cts.	25 cts.	25 cts.3 cts.	3 cts.	3 cts.	3 cts.	3 cts.5 p.c.	m p.c.	Free	5 p.c.	17* P.c.Free	Free	Free;	Free;	Free;$5.00	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.$10.00	$4.50	$5.00	$10'.00$5.00	$10.00	$4.50	$5.00	$10.00$0.00	$10.00	$4.50	$6.00	$10.00$4.00	$10.00	$4.00	$4.00	$10.00$4.50	$10.00	$4.50	$4.50	$10.00$10.00	$10.00	$5.00	$10.00	$10.00
to
.e.
to
[Stage Direction]
►1
o
o
3
o
ss
The Budget-Customs Tariff
157d
Provided, (1) that when the goods specified ini Item 156 are of greater or less strength than the! strength of proof, the measurement thereof and the amount of duty payable thereon shall be increased or decreased in proportion for any greater or less strength than the strength of proof.
Provided, (2) that bottles and flasks and packages of. gin, rum, whisky and brandy of all kinds, and imitations thereof, shall bo held to contain the following quantities (subject to the provisions for addition or deduction in respect of the degree of strength) viz.:-
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing not more than three-fourths of a gallon per dozen, as three-fourths of a gallon per dozen;
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing more than three-fourths of a gallon but not more than one gallon per dozen, as one gallon per dozen;
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing more than one gallon but not more than one and one-half , gallon per dozen, as one and one-half gallon per dozen;
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing more than one and one-half gallon but not more than two gallons per dozen, as two gallons per dozen;
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing more than two gallons but not more than two and four-fifths gallons per dozen, as two and four-fifths gallons per dozen;
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing more than two and four-fifths gallons but not more than three gallons per dozen, as three gallons per dozen;
Bottles, flasks and packages, containing more than three gallons but not more than three and one-fifth gallons per dozen, as three and one-fifth gallons per dozen.
Provided, (3) that bottles or phials of liquors for special purposes, such as samples not for sale to the trade, may be entered for duty according to actual measurement, under regulations prescribed by the Minister.
Angostura bitters

per gallon of the strength of proof
Nitrous ethor, sweet spirits of nitre and aromatic
spirits of ammonia	per gallon
and
[Stage Direction]
30 p.c.
[Stage Direction]
$3.00 30 p.c.
[Stage Direction]
$3.00 30 p.c.
[Stage Direction]
$3.00 30 p.c.
[Stage Direction]
$3.00 30 p.c.
s
>
td
o
[Stage Direction]
30 p.c.
to
*[DOT]
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
*. Abbott.]
Tariff
Item
British
Preferential
Tariff
Alcoholic perfumes:-
(a)	When in bottles or flasks containing not more
than four ounces each	
(b)	When in bottles, flasks or other packages, containing more than four ounces each	per gallon
and
30 p.c. $5.00
Perfumed spirits, bay rum, cologne and lavender waters, lotions, hair, tooth and skin washes, and other toilet preparations containing spirits of any kind:-
(a) When in bottles or flasks containing not more than four ounces each	
30 p.c.
(b) When in bottles, flasks or other packages, containing more than four ounces each	per gallon
and
[Stage Direction]
(a)	Vermouth, aperitif and cordial wines, containing thirty-two per cent or loss of proof spirit, whether imported in wood or in bottles... per gallon 20 cts.
and
Provided, that six quart bottles or twelve pint bottles shall be held to contain a gallon for duty purposes under this item.
(b)	Vermouth, aperitif and cordial wines, containing more than thirty-two per cent of proof spirit and not more than forty per cent of proof
spirit	 80 p.c.
(c) Medicinal or medicated wines, n.o.p., including ginger wine, containing not more than forty per cent of proof spirit	 80 p.c.
(1) Wines of the fresh grape of all kinds, not sparkling, imported in barrels or in bottles, for sacramental purposes, containing not more than twentysix per cent of proof spirit	per gallon 20 cts.
and
General Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff90 p.c.	30 p.c.	30 p.c.	90 p.c.S5.00	$5.00	$5.00	$5.0040 p.c.	30 p.c.	40 p.c.90 p.c.	30 p.c.	45 p.c.	90 p.c.$5.00	$5.00	$5.00	$5.0040 p.c.	30 p.c.	40 p.c.55 cts.	20 cts.	20 cts.	80 p.c.30 p.c.	1	ad val.80 p.c.	80 p.c.	80 p.c. i	80 p.c.80 p.c.	80 p.c.	80 p.c.	80 p.c.55 cts.	20 cts.	20 cts.	55 cts.30 p.c.	1 30 p.c.1244	HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Budget-Customs Tariff
163a
167a
172a
(2)	Wines of all kinds, n.o.p., including orange,
lemon, strawberry, raspberry, elder and currant wines, containing twenty-four per cent or less of proof spirit, whether imported in wood or in bottles	per gallon
and
(3)	Wines of all kinds, n.o.p., including orange, lemon, strawberry, raspberry, elder and currant wines, containing more than twenty-four per cent but not more than twenty-six per cent of proof spirit, whether imported in wood or in bottles.... 	per gallon
and
And in addition thereto, for each degree of strength in excess of twenty-six per cent of proof spirit until the strength reaches forty per cent of proof spirit	
Provided, that six quart bottles or twelve pint bottles shall be held to contain a gallon for duty purposes under this Item.
(1)	Prune wine, not sparkling, when containing not more than twenty-six per cent of proof spirit 	per gallon
and
(2)	Prune wine, not sparkling, when containing more than twenty-six per cent of proof spirit .and not more than thirty-eight per cent of proof spirit 	per gallon
and
And in addition thereto, for each degree of strength in excess of twenty-six per cent of proof spirit until the strength reaches thirty-eight per cent of proof spirit	
Provided, that six quart bottles or twelve pint bottles shall be held to contain a gallon for duty purposes under this Item.
Malt, whole, crushed or ground, n.o.p., upon entry for warehouse subject to excise regulations - per pound
Malt flour, n.o.p., upon entry for warehouse subject to excise regulations	per pound
Tourist literature issued by national or state governments or departments thereof, boards of trade, chambers of commerce, municipal and automobile associations, and similar organizations	
20 cts.
55 cts. 3 cts.
25 cts. 25 cts.
1/3 ct. 1/3 ct.
Free
20 cts.
55 cts. 30 p.c.
55 cts.
3 cts.
55 cts.
55 cts.
3 cts.
1/3 ct. 1/2 ct.
55 cts.	20 cts.	20 cts.
30 p.c.		
55 cts.	55 cts.	55 cts.
30 p.c.		
3 cts.	3 cts.	3 cts.55 cts.	25 cts.	55 cts.30 p.c.	55 cts.	25 cts.	55 cts.30 p.c.	3 cts.	3 cts.3/4 ct.	1/3 ct.	1/3 ct.3/4 ct.	1/3 ct.	£ ct.Free	Free	Free 1
55 cts. 30 p.c.
3 cts.
55 cts. 30 p.c.
55 cts. 30 p.c.
3 cts.
J ct.
£ ct.
Free
>
*
o
sc
Free
The Budget-Customs Tariff
[Mr. Abbott.)
			Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff		Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
Tariff Item	Preferential Tariff	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff172b	Prayer books, missals, psalters, religious pictures and mottoes, not to include frames	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free178	Advertising and printed matter, viz.:-Advertising pamphlets, advertising show cards, illustrated advertising periodicals; price books, catalogues and price lists; advertising almanacs and calendars; patent medicine or other advertising circulars, fly sheets or pamphlets; advertising chromos, chromotypes, oleographs or like work produced by any process other than hand painting or drawing, and having any advertisement or advertising matter printed, lithographed or stamped thereon, or attached thereto, including advertising bills, folders and posters, or other similar artistic work, lithographed, printed or stamped on paper or cardboard for business or advertisement purposes, n.o.p. per pound	5 cts.	10 eta.	15 eta.	5 cts.	10 cts.	15 cts.but not less than	25 p.c.	35 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.(a)	Provided that goods specified in this Item shall be exempt from customs duty when produced in countries entitled to the British Preferential Tariff and relating exclusively to products or services of such British countries, but not relating to Canadian products or services. (b)	Provided that on goods specified in this Item when forwarded to Canada by mail, duties may be prepaid by customs duty stamps, under regulations by the Minister, at the rate specified in the Item, except that on each separate package weighing not more than one ounce, the duty shall be each	1 ct.	2 cts.	2 cts.	1 ct.	2 cts.	2 cts.(c) Provided that bona fide trade catalogues and price lists not specially designed to advertise the sale of goods by any person in Canada, when sent into Canada in single copies addressed to merchants therein, and not exceeding one copy to any merchant for his own use, but not for distribution, shall be exempt from customs duty under all Tariffs.	
co
[Stage Direction]
o
*1
o
o
s
o
5S
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
184a
199b
206d
206e
206f
206g
206h
207a
(d) Provided that advertising and printed matter, whether imported by mail or otherwise, when in individual packages valued at not more than $1.00 each and when not imported for sale or in a manner designed to evade payment of customs duties, shall be exempt from customs duty when produced in countries entitled to the British Preferential or the Most-Favoured-Nation Tariff.
Labels for cigar boxes, fruits, vegetables, meats, fish, confectionery or other goods or wares; shipping, price or other tags, tickets or labels, and railroad or other tickets, whether lithographed or printed, or partly printed, n.o.p	
Provided, that tickets issued by railway systems in the British Commonwealth, (not including railway systems operating in Canada), shall be exempt from customs duty, when produced in countries entitled to the benefits of the British Preferential Tariff.
Periodical publications, unbound or paper bound, printed and issued at regular intervals, not less frequently than four times a year, and bearing dates of issue	
Containers wholly or partially manufactured from fibreboard or paperboard	per pound
Provided, that in no case shall the rate of duty under the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff be less than	
Animal glands and animal glandular organs, and extracts thereof, wet or dry, (whether alcoholic or not), wrhen imported by manufacturers of pharmaceutical or medicinal preparations for use exclusively in the manufacture of such preparations in their own factories	
Animal bile, in liquid or paste form, not further processed than concentrated, for use in the manufacture of bile acids	
Dried blood, n.o.p	
Blood albumen	
Dried blood, soluble	
Bicarbonate of soda	
Butyl alcohol, n.o.p	
17^ p.c.
Free 4/5 ct.
Free
Free 5 p.c. Free Free Free Free
221 p.c.
Free 4/5 ct.
20 p.c.
Free
Free 71 p.c. 10 p.c. Free 121 p.c. * 20 p.c.
35 p.c.	171 P-c.	221 P-c.25 p.c.	Free	Free1£ cts.	4/5 ct.	4/5 ct.35 p.c.	20 p.c.Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free10 p.c.	5 p.c.	71 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.Free	Free	Free25 p.c.	Free	121 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	20 p.c.
35 p.c.
25 p.c.; Various 11 cts.
35 p.c.
Free
Free 10 p.c. 10 p.c. Free 25 p.c. 25 p.c.
s
>
to
o
[Stage Direction]
to
[Stage Direction]


Cn
The Budget-Customs Tariff

British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	Tariff Item	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff208i	Nitrate of ammonia, when imported for use in the	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c.manufacture of nitrous oxide	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c.	208j 208t	Nitrate of ammonia, n.o.p. and sal ammoniac	
All chemicals and drugs, n.o.p., of a kind not produced	Free	25 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	25 p.c.	25 p.c.in Canada	Free	15 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	25 p.c.210g	Potassic nitrate of soda, n.o.p	Free	Free	25 p.c.	Free	Free	25 p.c.225b 231c	Carnauba wax	
Gelatin capsules, empty, when imported for use exclusively in the manufacture or compounding of	Free	Free	10 p.c.	Free	Free	10 p.c.medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations	Free	5 p.c.	7$ p.c.	Free	5 p.c.	7$ p.c.232	15 p.c.	22$ p.c.	25 p.c.	15 p.c.	22$ p.c.	25 p.c.and, per pound	2 cts.	5 cts.	5 cts.	2 cts.	5 cts.	5 cts.232a 247a	Gelatine, n.o.p	
and, per pound (1) Artists' and school children's colours; fitted	15 p.c.	22$ p.c.	25 p.c. 5 cts.	15 p.c.	22$ p.c.	25 p.c. 5 cts.boxes containing the same	
(2) Artists' brushes; pastels, of a value of one cent per stick, or over; artists' canvas, coated and	Free	15 p.c.	30 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	30 p.c.254	prepared for oil painting	
Gums, viz.:- (1) Copal, damar, benzoin, Pontianac, nattaku-ching, barberry, elemi, gedda, Senegal, tragacanth,	Free	22$ p.c.	30 p.c.	Free	22$ p.c.	30 p.c.mastic and sandarac	Free	Free	15 p.c.	tree	Free	15 p.c.(2)	Amber and Arabic	
(3)	Australian and kauri; lac, crude, seed, button,	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Freestick and shell; ambergris	
(4) Gums and blends consisting wholly or in	Free	10 p.c.	15 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	15 p.c.chief part of gums, n.o.p	Free	Free	15 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	15 p.c.259c	Castor oil	*	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free 25 p.c.
n
o
o
o
2
o
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
263a
263a 264 264a 264c 266	Coal-tar benzol, when imported by refiners of crude petroleum, for use exclusively in blending with gasoline wholly produced in Canada	 Essential oils, natural, viz.:-Geranium, rose, ylang-ylang, lemon, bergamot, orange, mandarin, citron-ella, clove and lemon grass	 Essential oils, natural and synthetic, n.o.p.; essential oils, natural and synthetic, containing other non alcoholic material, n.o.p., for use in the manufacture of products or preparations for medicinal, flavouring, toilet, or other purposes, under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe.	 Menthol, natural or synthetic		10 p.c. Free Free Free
266a		
266b	Oiticica oil	per pound	Free273	Asphalt or asphaltum, solid	Free273a	Asphalt or asphaltum, n.o.p	F ree273b	Asphaltum oil for use only for paving purposes	Free273c	Carbolic or heavy oil	Free276a	(1) Cotton seed oil, crude, when imported to be	refined for edible purposes	
(2) Crude cotton seed oil, when imported by manufacturers of cotton seed meal and refined cotton seed oil, for use exclusively in the manu-	Freefacture of such commodities, in their own factories	Free(3) Cotton seed oil for canning fish	Free(4) Cotton seed oil, n.o.p	12£ p.c.176b	(1) Palm and palm kernel oil, crude, when im-	ported to be refined for edible purposes	
(2) Palm and palm kernel oil, unbleached or	Freebleached, not edible	
(3) Palm and palm kernel oil, not edible, for	Freemanufacturing soap	Free(4) Palm and palm kernel oil, n.o.p	15 p.c.
10 p.c. Free
71 p.c. Free Free Free Free 10 p.c. 10 p.c. Free 10 p.c.
10 p.c.
10 p.c. Free 17} p.c.
10 p.c.
10 p.c.
10 p.c. 20 p.c.
25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.o.7i p.c.	Free	Free	71 p.c.71 p.c.	Free	71 p.c.	71 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	Free	10 p.c.Free	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	Free2* cts.	Free	Free	21 cts; 25 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.Free	Free	Free	Free10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.Free	Free	Free	Free17* p.c.	121 P-c.	171 p.c.	171 p.c10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.
>
ta
[Stage Direction]
C/l
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff Item	-	British Preferential Tariff
276c	(1) Cocoanut oil, crude, when imported to be	
	refined for edible purposes		Free
	(2) Cocoanut oil, not edible, for manufacturing	
		
	(3) Cocoanut oil, not edible, when imported for	
	use in the manufacture of refined coaoanut oil		Free
	(4) Cocoanut oil, n.o.p		12J p.c.
276d	(1) Peanut oil, crude, when imported to be refined	
	for edible purposes		Free
	(2) Peanut oil for manufacturing soap or for	
		
	(3) Peanut oil, n.o.p		15 p.c.
276e	(1) Olive oil for manufacturing soap		Free
	(2) Olive oil for manufacturing tobacco		Free
	(3) Olive oil for canning fish		Free
	(4) Olive oil for use in the processing of textile	
	fibres, including the finishing of fabrics		Free
	(5) Olive oil, n.o.p		Free
276f	(1) Soya bean oil for use in the processing of	
		
	(2) Soya bean oil for use in the manufacture of	
	paints and varnishes		Free
	(3) Soya bean oil for use in the processing of tex-	
	tile fibres, including the finishing of fabrics		Free
	(4) Soya bean oil for manufacturing soap		Free
	(5) Soya bean oil for use in canning fish		Free
	(6) Soya bean oil, n.o.p		15 p.c.
284	Drain pipes, sewer pipes and earthenware fittings	
	therefor, chimney linings or vents, chimney tops	
	and inverted blocks, glazed or unglazed, n.o.p		15 p.c.
284e	Earthenware tiles, n.o.p		15 p.c.
Cn
General Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.174 P-c.	12J p.c.	174 p-c.	171 P-c.10 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.Free	Free	Free	Free25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.Free	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	Free20 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	20 p.c.Free	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	Free25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.35 p.c.	15 p.c.	22J P.c.	35 p.c.35 p.c.	15 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.
295c
296i
297a
305a
305b
305c
305d
305e
307
307a
307b
307c
308a
312b
352e
Activated clay, when imported for use in the refining of oils		10 p.c.
Mica, pblogopite and muscovite, unmanufactured, in	
blocks, sheets, splittings, films, waste and scrap.. ..	12 J p.c.
Quartz, piezoelectric:- (1) Not further processed than cut into slabs or blanks and ground to shape		Free
(2) Fully manufactured ready for use in electric telephone, telegraph, wireless or radio apparatus....	Free
Flagstone, sandstone and all building stone, not hammered, sawn or chiselled		10 p.c.
Marble, rough, not hammered or chiselled		10 p.c.
Granite, rough, not hammered or chiselled		10 p.c.
Marble, sawn or sand rubbed, not polished		Free
Granite, sawn		Free Free
Paving blocks of stone		
Flagstone and building stone, other than marble or granite, sawn on not more than two sides		Free
	
Manufactures of marble, n.o.p		30 p.c.
	
Manufactures of granite, n.o.p		30 p.c.
Manufactures of alabaster, n.o.p		20 p.c..
Asbestos, crude		
(I) Demijohns or carboys, bottles, flasks, phials, jars and balls, of glass, not cut, n.o.p.; lamp chimneys of glass, n.o.p.; decanters and machine-made tumblers of glass, not cut nor decorated, n.o.p		15 p.c.
(2) Glass tableware, n.o.p., and illuminating	10 p.c. 10 p.c.
(3) Opal glassware, n.o.p		
(4) Cut glass tableware and cut glassware, n.o.p.	10 p.c.
Metal parts in any degree of manufacture, coated or not, and wooden parts in the rough, when imported by manufacturers of spools, quills, pirns, bobbins and shuttles, for use in the manufacture of such articles, in their own factories		10 p.c.
10 p.c. 12* p.c.
Free 10 p.c.
12* p.c. 10 p.c. 12* P-e. 10 p.c.
15 p.c. 15 p.c.
15 p c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. 35 p.c. 22* p.c. Free
22* p.c.
22* p.c. 22* p.c. 22* p.c.
10 p.c.
25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	12* p.c.	12* p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	Free	25 p.c.30 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	30 p.c.20 p.c.	10 p.c.	12* p.c.	20 p.c.20 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	20 p.c.20 p.c.	10 p.c.	12* p.c.	20 p.c.35 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	35 p.c.35 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	35 p.c.35 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	35 p.c.35 p c.	Free	' 15 p.c.	35 p.c.40 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	40 p.c.40 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	40 p.c.40 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	40 p.c.40 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	40 pc.35 p.c.	20 p.c.	22} p.c.	35 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	Free	25 p.c.32* p.c.	15 p.c.	22* p.c.	32* p.c.32* p.c.	10 p.c.	22* p.c.	32* p.c.32* p.c.	10 p.c.	22* p.c.	32* p.c.32* p.c.	10 p.c.	22* p.c.	32* p.c.35 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	35 p.c.10 p.c.	10 p.c.	30 p.c.10 p.c.	10 p.c.	45 p.c.10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.
s
>
*
[Stage Direction]
Oi
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff
Item
366
366a
366b
British
Preferential
Tariff
Aluminum and alloys thereof, crude or semi-fabricated:-
(a)	Pigs, ingots, blocks, notch bars, slabs, billets,
blooms, and wire bars	per pound
(b)	Bars, rods, plates, sheets, strips, circles, squares,
discs and rectangles	per pound
(c)	Angles, channels, beams, tees and other rolled,
drawn or extruded sections and shapes	
Free
Free
Free
(i) Wire and cable, twisted or stranded or not, and whether reinforced with steel or not	
(e)	Pipes and tubes	
(f)	Leaf, n.o.p., or foil, less than .005 inch in thickness, plain or embossed, with or without backing
(a) Aluminum powder	
(h)	Aluminum leaf, less than .005 millimetre in
thickness	
(i)	Aluminum scrap	
Provided, that nothing shall be deemed to be
aluminum scrap except waste or refuse aluminum, fit only to be remelted.
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
Watches of all kinds	
Provided, that when imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff, the duty sliall be not less than	each
20 p.c.
Watch actions and movements, finished or unfinished Free Provided, that when imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff, the duty shall be not less than	each	
Parts of watch movements, finished or unfinished.. Free
Provided, that when imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or General Tariff, the duty on plates designed to hold in place four or more wheels or other moving parts shall be not less than per plate
Clocks, time recorders, clock movements, clockwork mechanisms, and clock cases	
15 p.c.
Provided, that when imported under the Most-Favoured-Nation or the General Tariff, the duty shall be not less than	each
General
Tariff
5 eta. 7J cts. 30 p.c.
30 p.c. 30 p.c.
30 p.c. 30 p.c.
Free
Free
35 p.c.
40 cts. 15 p.c.
40 cts. 15 p.c.
10 cts. 35 p.c.
50 cts.
Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General TariffFree	2 cts.	30 p.c.Free	3 cts.	30 p.c.Free	22} p.c.	30 p.c.Free	22} p.c.	30 p.c.Free	22} p.c.	30 p.c.Free	30 p.c.	30 p.c.Free	30 p.c.	30 p.c.Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free20 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.40 cts.	40 cts.Free	15 p.c.	15 p.c.40 cts.	40 cts.Free	15 p.c.	15 p.c.5 cts.	10 cts.15 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.o.40 cts.	50 cts.
w
[Stage Direction]

o
o
2
o
to
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Sheets, plates, hoop, band or strip, of iron or steel:- (b) Coated with tin, n.o.p	
384 Skelp of iron or steel, hot rolled, when imported by manufacturers of pipes and tubes for use exclusively in the manufacture of pipes and tubes, in their own factories, under regulations prescribed by the Minister	
392c Forged golf club heads of iron or steel, with or without face or similar marking, but not ground, polished plated or otherwise finished	
402b
Woven netting, of iron or steel, coated, made from wire of 17 gauge or heavier, with meshes not smaller than one inch and not larger than two inches, with specially strengthened joints, when for use exclusively on fur farms, under regulations prescribed by the Minister:-
(1) Of a class or kind not made in Canada..
(2) N.o.p.
Typewriters
414a Complete parts of typewriters	
414b Dictating, transcribing and cylinder shaving machines and complete parts thereof, including cylinders and unfinished wax blanks	
414c Bookkeeping, calculating and invoicing machines and complete parts thereof, n.o.p	
414d Adding machines	
414e Complete parts of adding machines	
425a Lawn mowers designed for use with motive power, whether or not containing the power unit	
426a
Machinery and apparatus enumerated in Tariff Item 412a, when for use by manufacturers of articles made from regenerated cellulose or cellulose acetate; complete parts of such machinery and apparatus, not to include saws, knives, and motive power	
426b
Veneer-drying machines, and complete parts thereof.
426c
Wire stitchers and staplers, either hand or power type, but not including motive power; complete parts of >
the foregoing	
15 p.c
Free 10 p.c
5 p.c. 12* P. Free Free
10 p.c
Free
Free
Free
10 p.c
5 p.c. 5 p.c.
5 p.c.
15 p.e.
5 p.c.
10 p.c.
17$ p.c. 20 p.c. 20 p.c. 15 p.c.
12$ p.c.
10 p.c. 17$ p.c. 15 p.c.
15 p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
20 p.c.
5 p.c. 30 p.c.
30 p.c. 30 p.c. 25 p.c. 25 p.c.
25 p.c.
25 p.c. 25 p.c. 25 p.c.
32$ p.c.
35 p.c. 35 p.c.
35 p.c.
Free
Free 10 p.c.
5 p.c. 12$ p.c. Free Free
10 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
10 p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
15 p.c.
5 p.c.
10 p.c.
17$ p.c. 20 p.c. 20 p.c. 15 p.c.
12$ p.c.
10 p.c. 17$ p.c. 15 p.c.
15 p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
20 p.c.
5 p.c. 30 p.c.
30 p.c. 30 p.c. 25 p.c. 25 p.c.
25 p.c.
25 p.c. 25 p.c. 25 p.c.
32$ p.c.
35 p.c. 35 p.c.
35 p.c.
>
w
o
[Stage Direction]
to
On
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff

Tariff Item	-	British Preferential Tariff
429	Cutlery of iron or steel, plated or not:- (a) Razors and complete parts thereof; razor blades,	
		
	(h) Safety razor blades		Free
430b	Screws, or iron or steel, coated or not:-	
	(1) Wood screws		15 p.c.
	(2) Machine and other screws, n.o.p		15 p.c.
	and, per one hundred pounds	
434	(l)Locomotives and motor cars for railways, for use exclusively in mining, metallurgical or sawmill	
	operations, n.o.p., and chassis, tops, wheels and	
	bodies for the same, n.o.p	 (2) Locomotives for use on railways, and chassis.	15 p.c.
	tops, wheels and bodies for the same, n.o.p		15 p.c.
440g	(1) Manufactures of iron, brass or other metal, of a class or kind not made in Canada, for use exclusively in the construction or equipment of ships or vessels, under regulations prescribed by	
	the Minister	 (2) Diesel and semi-diesel engines, of a class or kind not made in Canada, and complete parts thereof, for use exclusively in the construction or	Free
	equipment of ships or vessels		Free
440m	(i) Unfinished parts of aircraft, n.o.p., not including	
parts of aircraft engines	
(ii) Direct or inertia starters with or without related operating gear and parts thereof; generators; voltage control boxes; batteries; de-icing and anti-icing equipment and parts thereof, not including parts of rubber; vacuum pumps with related operating gear and parts thereof; landing and navigation lights; propellers; hydraulic jacks and pumps and parts thereof; aircraft wheels; aircraft brakes with related operating gear and parts thereof; aircraft tires and tubes; oil coolers; fuel pressure warning devices; exhaust gas analysers; pressure fire extinguishers; primer pumps; instruments excepting fuel contents gauges; bolts, nuts, cocks, turnbuckles, clevis and pins, swaged wires and tie rods; bars, tubes, extrusions and	FreeMost-Fa voured-Nation Tariff	General Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff27] P-c.	30 p.c.	Free	271 P-c.	30 p.c.20 p.c.	30 p.c.	Free	20 p.c.	30 p.c.20 p.c.	30 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 p.c.m P-c.	30 p.c.	15 p.c.	17| p.c.	30 p.c.50 cts.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	35 p.c.25 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.Free	Free	Free	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free	Free	Free15 p.c.	271 P-c.	Free	15 p.c.	27J p.c
The Budget-Customs Tariff
446g	forgings of aluminum, aluminum alloys and magnesium alloys; steel tubing; all the foregoing when of types and sizes not made in Canada and imported for use exclusively in the manufacture or for spares, overhaul or repair of the goods enumerated in Tariff Item 4401 under such regulations as the Minister mayprescribe	 (1)	Electric apparatus designed for welding anti parts thereof, not including motors			 (2)	Mechanically-operated gas apparatus designed for cutting or welding and parts thereof, not including motors		Free 5 p.c.
	(3) Gas apparatus designed for welding or cutting	
	and parts thereof, n.o.p		5 p.c.
446k	Tools of iron or steel, for use in machines, n.o.p., of a	
	class or kind not made in Canada		Free
446m	Welding rods or welding wires of rust, acid or heat	
	resisting steel, whether or not flux-coated		10 p.c.
450	Roller skates and parts thereof 	15 p.c.450a	Skates of all kinds, other than roller, and parts thereof	15 p.c.451b	Pins manufactured from wire of anv metal:-	(1) Specially designed for marking systems	Free(2) N.o.p	15 p.c.and, per pound	461a	Automatic scales or weighing machines, of a class or	kind not made in Canada, and complete parts of the	foregoing, for use in Canadian manufactures	Free505b	Shingles of cedar, creosoted, vulcanized or otherwise	processed or treated	Free511c	511d	511c	Ski poles	20 p.c.518	Bagatelle and other game tables or boards	17| p.c.518a	Billiard tables, with or without pockets; cues, balls,	cue-racks and cue-tips	1	17J p.c.Free	27} p.c.	Free	Free	27} p.c.20 p.c.	30 p.c.	5 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 p.c.10 p.c.	35 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	35 p.c.20 p.c.	30 p.c.	5 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 p.c.10 p.c.	35 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	35 p.c.	10 p.c.	15 p.c.	35 p.c.15 p.c.	30 p.c.	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	30 p.c.25 p.c.	30 p.c.	15 p.c.	25 p.c.	30 p.c.5 p.c.	10 p.c.	Free	5 p.c.	10 p.c.25 p.c.	30 p.c.	15 p.c.	25 p.c.	30 p.c.10 ets.	10 cts.	10 cts.	10 cts.Free	Free	Free	Free	FreeFree	25 p.c.	Free	Free	25 p.c.22} p.c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	22} p.c.	35 p.c.22} p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	22} p.c.	35 p.c.22} p.c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	22} p.c.	35 p.c.22} p.c.	35 p.c.	17} p.c.	22} p.c.	35 p.c30 p.c.	35 p.c.	17} p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.
The Budget-Customs Tariff

to
C/i
o>
British Preferential Tariff .	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	Tariff Item	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff519	House, office, cabinet or store furniture or wood, iron or other material, and parts thereof, not to include forgings, castings, and stampings of metal, in the rough:- (1) Substantially of wood	15 p.c.	27$ p.c.	45 p.c.	15 p.c.	27$ p.c.	45 p.c.(2) Other than of wood	15 p.c.	25 p.o.	45 p.c.	15 p.o.	25 p.c.	45 p.c.520	(1) Raw cotton and cotton 1 inters not further manufactured than ginned; waste wholly of cotton unfit for use without further manufacture	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free(2) Rags unfit for use without further manufacture, not to include used garments nor waste portions of unused fabrics	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free522c	(1) Rovings, yarns and warps wholly of cotton, including threads, cords and twines generally used for sewing, stitching, packaging and other purposes, n.o.p.; cotton yarns, wholly or partially covered with metallic strip, generally known as tinsel thread	15 p.c.	17$ p.c.	25 p.c.	15 p.e.	17$ p.c.	25 p.c.and, per pound (2) Cotton yarns, wholly covered with a double layer of metallic strip in single strand only, when imported by manufacturers for use exclusively in the manufacture of electrical conductors, in their own factories	10 p.c.	3 cts. 10 p.c.	4 cts. 25 p.c.	10 p.c.	3 cts. 10 p.c.	4 cts. 25 p.c.and, per pound (3) Sewing thread, wholly of cotton, on spools, not to exceed 250 yards on one spool	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	4 cts. 25 p.c.	15 p.e.	20 p.c.	4 cts. 25 p.c.523	and, per pound Woven fabrics, wholly of cotton, not bleached, mercerized nor coloured, n.o.p	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	4 cts. 25 p.c.	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	4 cts. 25 p.c.523b	and, per pound Woven fabrics, wholly of cotton, printed, dyed or coloured, n.o.p.:- (1) Valued at more than 80 cents per pound	17J p.c.	3 cts. 17\ p.c.	4 cts. 32J p.c.	17$ p.c.	3 cts. 17$ p.c.	4 cts. 32$ p.c.and, per pound	3 cts.	4 cts.	3 cts.	4 cts.
o
o
o
2
o
w
The Budget-Customs Tariff
523n
524a
532c
532d
535g
538b
547a
548c
(2)	Valued at 50 cents or more but not more than
80 cents per pound	
and, per pound
(3)	Valued at less than 50 cents per pound....
and, per pound
(4)	Woven fabrics, wholly of cotton, commonly
known as denims, when imported by manufacturers for use in their own factories in the manufacture of garments	
and, per pound
Woven fabrics, wholly of cotton, composed of yarns of counts of not less than 80 and not more than 99. including all such fabrics in which the average count of the warp and weft yarns is not less than 80 and
not more than 99	
and, per pound
Cotton bags:-
(1) Seamless	
and, per pound
(2) N.o.p	
and, per pound
Fabrics with cut weft pile, wholly of cotton or of
cotton and synthetic textile fibres or filamentsand, per pound
Clothing, wearing apparel and articles made from woven fabrics, and all textile manufactures, wholly or partially manufactured, composed wholly of
cotton, n.o.p	
and, per pound
Curtains, wholly or partially manufactured, composed
wholly of cotton, n.o.p	
and, per pound
Fabrics wholly of cotton, coated or impregnated,
n.o.p	
and, per pound
Piassava fibre, not coloured, nor further manufactured than dried, cleaned, cut to size, ground and sifted.. .
Twine for baling farm produce	
Bags or sacks of sisal	
and, per pound
Tablecloths, centre-pieces, and doilies of sisal, palm
straw or cane straw	
and, per pound
17* p.c. i7* p.c.
17* P.c.
12* p.c. 15 p.c. 20 p.c.
5 p.c.
25 p.c.
22* p.c.
22* p.c.
Free Free 17* p.c.
20 p.c.
22* p.c. 3 cts.
25 p.c. 3* ets.
17* p.c. 3 cts.
20 p.c.
3 cts.
22* p.c. 22* p.c.
25 p.c. 3* cts.
25 p.c.
27* p.c.
27* p.c.
Free Free 17* p.c.
20 p.c.
32* p.c. 4 cts. 32* p.c. 4 cts.
17* p.c. i7* p.c.
22* p.c. 3 cts. 25 p.c. 3* cts.
32* p.c. 4 cts. 32* p.c. 4 cts.
32* p.c. 4 cts.
17} p.c.
17* p.c. 3 cts.
32* p.c. 4 cts.
27* p.c. 4 cts.
25 p.c.
4 cts.
12* p.c.
15 p.c.
20 p.c.
3 cts.
22* p.c.
27* p.c.
4 cts.
25 p.c.
4 cts.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
20 p.c.
22* p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
32* p.c. 4 cts.
5 p.c.
25 p.c. 3* cts.
32* p.c. 4 cts.
s
>
to
35 p.c. 4cts.
25 p.c.
25 p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
[Stage Direction]
Cn
35 p.c. 4 cts.
22* p.c.
27* p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
22* p.c.
27* p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
Free
25 p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
Free Free 17* p.c.
Free Free 17* p.c.
Free
25 p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
35 p.c. 4 cts.
20 p.c.
20 p.c.
35 p.c. 4 cts
to
cn
[DOT]o
The Budget-Customs Tariff

British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget	Tariff Item	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff549	Wool not further prepared than combed, n.o.p. per pound	Free	10 cts.	15 cts.	Free	10 cts.	15 cts.549a	Wool, not further advanced than scoured, not including wool of the sheep of the type commonly known as karakul, when imported by carpet manufacturers for use exclusively in the manufacture of carpets, in their own factories	per pound	Free	Free	15 cts.	Free	Free	15 cts.549b	(1) Hair of the camel, alpaca, goat or other like animal	per pound	Free	Free	15 cts.	Free	[DOT] Free	15 cts.(2) Hair, cleaned or uncleaned, but not curled, dyed nor otherwise manufactured; and horse hair not further manufactured than simply cleaned and dipped or dyed	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free	Free(3) Hair, curled or dyed, n.o.p	12$ p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	12$ p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.549f	Nets made from human hair	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	35 p.c.	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	35 p.c.552a	Felt, splint, for use in making molded splints for medicinal purposes	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	25 p.c. and553	Blankets of any material, not to include automobile rugs, steamer rugs, or similar articles:- (1) Household blankets, wholly of cotton	17$ p.c.	17$ p.c.	35 p.c.	17$ p.c.	17§ p.c.	20 cts. per pound 35 p.c.and, per pound	5 cts.	5 cts.	30 cts.	5 CtB.	5 cts.	30 cts.(2) Blankets, wholly or in part of wool or hair...	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	35 p.c.and, per pound	5 cts.	20 cts.	30 cts.	5 cts.	20 cts.	30 cts.(3) Blankets, n.o.p	20 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.and, per pound	5 cts.	25 cts.	30 cts.	5 cts.	25 cts.	30 cts.554e	Filter nress cloth of wool or hair (except human hair)	Free	15 p.c.	40 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	40 p.c.568b	and, per pound (1) Gloves of kid, n.o.p	20 p.c.	30 cts. 22$ p.c.	35 cts. 45 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 cts. 22$ p.c.	35 cts. 45 p.c.(2) Gloves and mitts of all kinds, n.o.p	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	45 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.	45 p.c.569	Hats, hoods and shapes of fur felt or of wool-and-fur felt, under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe	17£ p.c.	22\ p.c.	35 p.c.	17£ p.c.	22\ p.c.	35 p.c.
to
cn
oo
[Stage Direction]

o
*1
o
o
£
[Stage Direction]
o
2!
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Customs Tariff
569a Ol U1 CO rfk I 570a 571a	(1)	Hats, hoods and shapes of wool felt	 and, per dozen (2)	Hoods and shapes, knitted, crocheted, plaited or woven, in a single piece, and hoods and shapes of braid, not sewn, under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe	 (3)	Hoods and shapes, n.o.p	 and, per dozen (4)	Hats, n.o.p	 and, per dozen (5)	Berets of wool, knitted and fulled	 and, per dozen (6)	Caps, bonnets and berets, n.o.p., under such regulations as the Minister may prescribe	 (1)	Carpeting, rugs, stair pads, mats and matting of straw, hemp, flax tow or jute	 (2)	Carpeting, rugs, mats and matting of paper; carpet lining and stair pads	 (3)	Carpeting, rugs, mats and matting of sisal, palm straw or cane straw	 (1) Mats with cut pile, of cocoa fibre-per square	22| p.c. 45 cts. Free 22} p.c. 22} p.c. 75 cts. 22} p.c. 22} p.c. 15 p.c. 15 p.c. 15 p.c.
	(2) Mats, n.o.p., rugs, carpeting and matting of	
cocoa fibre	
per square yard	6| cts.572a	Carpets of sisal, palm straw or cane straw	20 p.c.597	(1) Pianofortes and organs, n.o.p	20 p.c.(2) Pipe organs	15 p.c.(3) Pipe organ player actions and parts thereof;	parts of pipe organs, n.o.p	Free(4) Parts of pianofortes and parts of organs, n.o.p.	Free597a	(1) Musical instruments of all kinds, n.o.p	15 p.c.(2) Phonographs, graphophones, gramophones	and finished parts thereof, n.o.p., including cylin-	ders and records therefor	15 p.c.(3) Mechanical piano and organ players	15 p.c.(4) Cylinders or records specially made for use	in the study of languages, under such regulations as	tr.	may be prescribed by the Minister	Free35 p.c.	22} p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.$1.25	45 cts.	90 cts.	$1.2510 p.c.	Free	10 p.c.	10 p.c.35 p.c.	22} p.c.	30 p.c.	35 p.c.50 cts.	50 cts.	50 cts.35 p.c.	224 P-C.	27} p.c.	35 p.c.$1.50	75 cts.	$1.00	$1.5035 p.c.	22} p.c.	22} p.c.	35 p.c.65 cts.	50 cts.	65 cts.35 p.c.	22} p.c.	27} p.c.	35 p.c.25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	15 p.c.	22} p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	25 p.c.5 cts.	2} cts.	3 cts.	5 cts.10 cts.	6} cts.	7} cts.	10 cts.40 p.c.	20 p.c.	20 p.c.	40 p.c. and 20 cts. per square foot.30 p.c.	20 p.c.	22} p.c.	30 p.c.30 p.c.	15 p.c.	15 p.c.	30 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	20 p.c.	25 p.c.30 p.c.	15 p.c.	17} p.c.	30 p.c.30 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 p.c.30 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.	30 p.c.30 p.c.	Free	Free	30 p.c.
s
>
a
o
a
[Stage Direction]
Ot
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Abbott.]
Tariff
Item
603a
605
607a
607b
611a
(1)	Brass band instruments, of a class or kind not made in Canada	
(2)	Brass band instruments, n.o.p	
(3)	Bagpipes and complete parts thereof.
Karakul skins, wholly or partially dressed, but not dyed	
(1)	Belting leather in butts or bends; and all
leather further finished than tanned, n.o.p	
(2)	Sheepskin or lambskin leather, further finished
than tanned, n.o.p	
(1)	Leather produced from East India tanned kip, uncoloured or coloured other than black, when imported for use exclusively in lining boots and shoes		
(2)	Genuine reptile leathers.
Leather, consisting of beef-cattle hides, horse-hides or sheep-skins, but not including suedes, Cabrettas, Spanish capes or African capes, when imported by manufacturers of gloves or leather clothing, for use exclusively in manufacturing gloves or leather clothing in their own factories	
Leather, not further finished than tanned, in whole hides, in grains, or splits, when imported by manufacturers of upholstering leathers, for use exclusively in the manufacture of upholstering leathers, in their own factories	
(I)	Boots, shoes, slippers and insoles of any material, n.o.p	
(2)	Canvas shoes with rubber soles.
(3)	Boots, shoes and slippers of sisal with cork, sisal, leather or rubber soles	
British
Preferential
Tariff
Free
Free
Free
Free 7$ p.c. 7i p.c.
Free
Free
Free
Free
20 p.c. 20 p.c.
17$ p.c.
o
General Tariff	Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
British Preferential Tariff	Most>
Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff25 p.c.	Free	17* p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	20 p.c.	25 p.c.25 p.c.	Free	25 p.c.	25 p.c.15 p.c.	Free	Free	15 p.c.27J p.c.	7* p.c.	17* p.c.	27* p.c.27* p.c.	7* p.c.	22* p.c.	27* p.c.15 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	15 p.c.15 p.c.	Free	7* p.c.	15 p.c.20 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	20 p.c.15 p.c.	Free	15 p.c.	15 p.c.40 p.c.	20 p.c.	27* p.c.	40 p.c.40 p.c.	20 p.c.	27* p.c.	40 p.c.40 p.c.	17* p.c.	25 p.c.	40 p.c.
n
o
o
2
o
as
w
The Budget-Customs Tariff
55946-81J
(1)	Rubber, crude, caoutchouc or India-rubber,
unmanufactured, n.o.p	
(2)	Powdered rubber and rubber or gutta percha
waste or junk	
(3)	Recovered rubber and rubber substitute...
(4)	Latex, being crude rubber in liquid form, not compounded beyond the addition of preservatives
619a
Rubber clothing and clothing made from waterproofed cotton fabrics	
and, in addition on raincoats	each
623a
Handbags of sisal, palm straw, or cane straw, with or without lining	
624a
(1) Dolls
(2)	Toys of all kinds, n.o.p	
(3)	Mechanical toys of metal	
(4)	Juvenile construction sets of metal or rubber, consisting of various stampings, punched or moulded, and connections therefor; parts of the foregoing:-
(a)	Of metal	
(b)	Of rubber	
648b Diamonds, rough or uncut, and not advanced in condition or value from their natural state by cleaving, splitting, cutting, or other process, whether in their natural form or broken	
654 Bristles, natural	
654b
Broom corn.
655 Pens, n.o.p., penholders and rulers, of all kinds 655c Pen nibs of steel	
(a)	Tobacco pipes of all kinds	
(b)	Cigar and cigarette holders	
(c)	Cases for cigar and cigarette holders, cigar and
cigarette cases, smokers' sets and cases therefor, and tobacco pipe mounts	
(d)	Tobacco pouches	
Free
Free
Free
Free
22} p.c.
7} p.c. 10 p.c. 10 p.c. 10 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
12} p.c.
Free
17} p.c. 17} p.c.
17} p.c. 17} p.c.
5 p.c.
5 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
27} p.c.
17} p.c. 25 p.c. 30 p.c. 30 p.c.
25 p.c. 20 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
22} p.c.
12} p.c.
22} p.c. 25 p.c.
25 p.c. 25 p.c,
5 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
35 p.c. 50 cts.
40 p.c. 40 p.c. 40 p.c. 40 p.c.
40 p.c. 40 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
27} p.c.
27} p.c.
35 p.c. 35 p.c.
35 p.c. 35 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
Free
22} p.c.
7} p.c. 10 p.c. 10 p.c. 10 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
Free
Free
12} p.c.
Free
17} p.c. 17} p.c.
17} p.c. 17} p.c.
5 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
27} p.c.
17} p.c. 25 p.c. 30 p.c. 30 p.c.
25 p.c. 20 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
22} p.c.
12} p.c.
22} p.c. 25 p.c.
25 p.c. 25 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
35 p.c. 50 eta.
40 p.c. 40 p.c. 40 p.c. 40 p.c.
40 p.c. 40 p.c.
Free
Free
Free
27} p.c.
27} p.c.
35 p.c. 35 p.c.
35 p.c. 35 p.c.
s
>
a
o
a
to
o>
The Budget-Customs Tariff

			Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff		Rates in Effect Prior to Rates Proposed in this Budget		
Tariff Item	Dl ItlSll Preferential Tariff	General Tariff	British Preferential Tariff	Most- Favoured- Nation Tariff	General Tariff663h	Oyster shells, not further manufactured than crushed or screened, or both, for use as poultry feeds or in	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.	25 p.c.
710	Coverings, inside and outside, used in covering or holding goods imported therewith, shall be subject to the following provisions, viz.:- (b) Usual coverings containing goods subject to any ad valorem duty, when not included in the	Free	7s p.c.	20 p.c.	Free	7J p.c.	20 p.c.
							
to
o>
4.	Resolved, that Schedule C to the Customs Tariff, being chapter forty-four of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927, as amended, be further amended by deleting therefrom Items 1211 and 1214 and by inserting in said Schedule C the following Item:-
1.	Common mongoose (Herpestes griseus) or mongoose of any kind;
2.	Any bird of the Starling family (Sturnidae), except the European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris);
3.	Any other non-game bird, except any of the following:-
(a)	a domestic bird of a kind kept for food purposes;
(b)	a bird intended solely for exhibition in a public zoological park;
(c)	a bird intended solely to be kept in confinement in a cage or to be used for purposes of public entertainment.
5.	Resolved, that any enactment founded upon Resolutions 1 and 3 of the foregoing Resolutions to amend the Customs Tariff or Schedules thereto shall come into force on the first day of June, one thousand nine hundred and fifty, and shall apply to all goods mentioned in the foregoing Resolutions imported or taken out of warehouse for consumption, on and after that date, and shall apply to goods previously imported for which no entry for consumption was made before that date.
6.	Resolved, that any enactment founded upon Resolutions 2 and 4 of the foregoing Resolutions to amend the Customs Tariff or Schedules thereto shall be deemed to have come into force on the twenty-ninth day of March, one thousand nine hundred and fifty, and to have applied to all goods mentioned in the foregoing Resolutions imported or taken out of warehouse for consumption on and after that date, and to have applied to goods previously imported for which no entry for consumption was made before that date.
(See also Budget Papers at pp. 12 77 et seq.)
[Stage Direction]
w
[Stage Direction]


►d
o
o
3
o
as
w
The Budget-Customs Tariff
Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: I think it was Churchill, Mr. Speaker, who once remarked that in a democracy the things we have in common are more than the things that divide us. It is therefore possible for us, in all sincerity, to congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) on delivering a speech which is well within the established budget tradition of our country.
I doubt, however, that he enjoyed delivering it quite as much as he enjoyed the one a year ago. A year ago, Mr. Speaker, it was "Roses, roses, all the way". He had just tickled our ears with words about tax.reductions. He had just cut what I suppose we might call a melon. He had primed the pump for the election in various ways.


Mr. Cruickshank:: He did a pretty good job.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Yes, I will admit that. I am perhaps exhibit A in the case. We admit that the pump was well primed. After all, there were $460 million going to the farmers and by way of rebates to the income-tax payers. Then there were such small matters as the treatment of the Hong Kong veterans and the Canso bridge. Indeed, it almost looks as though there had been a surplus; because you will realize, Mr. Speaker, that the Canso bridge appropriation did not have to be used up and it is still available. There seems to be some difference of opinion between the Liberals here and the Liberals in Halifax as to just what the reason for delay was; but I do not think we lesser people need to go into these disputes between what I suppose the Prime Minister would call the master race. The only thing I would suggest is this. If a bridge 22 feet wide produced X votes, how many votes will a bridge 24 feet wide produce? We might get the genial Minister of Transport to work that problem out for us.
Today, Mr. Speaker, things are changed. The roses are somewhat faded. There is no melon tonight.


An hon. Member:: There is a grape, though.


An hon. Member:: And ice cream.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We may
have ice cream, but it will not go well with the lemon which we have tonight. It is a wishy-washy mixture, I take it. There is no election in the offing today. We are just left to trudge along as best we may, without any of the allurements of a year ago.
A budget is, in some sense, a stocktaking and, in some sense, a report to the shareholders. I should like to take a few moments this evening to raise a few questions which I think a prudent man of business would raise in connection with the statement which has just been presented to us. The first thing,
28, 1950
The Budget-Mr. J. M. Macdonnell of course, that occurs to every man is what his taxes are; and the minister has made clear the position. It is not an exciting budget in that respect. None of us expected that it would be. We are just scraping along; no hundreds of millions of dollars to juggle with now. We are pretty well at the bottom of the barrel and just scraping along.
And that, of course, raises the question in the mind of the taxpayer about spending and about economy-because taxes result from spending. The taxpayer of course is not pleased to compare the first estimate of today with the first estimate of a year ago, and find that it is about $90 million up. Oh, I know the minister will be quick to say, "Yes, but our defence estimates and family allowances are up and we have $20 million for a trans-Canada highway." But, nevertheless, I think our prudent man will ask the minister what signs of real economy there are. The minister said of course that economies in many departments had taken place. I noticed he did not say all. I am sure he has very great difficulties, and I sympathize with him. I examined the Department of Agriculture. When you first look at the figures it looks as if there was a reduction but when you look further you realize that there is really no reduction because there was $12 million of which they were relieved in connection with western freight. When you look through the items- there are forty-five items-you find that there are twenty-eight increases and some ten decreases.
What the minister said is right. If we are going to have these services, then we have to pay for them. But our complaint is that there is no opportunity in this House of Commons for members to form a view at first hand because we never have the chance. We have no chance to talk to the civil service. Then there are hundreds of thousands of dollars in sundries, a few thousand here and a few thousand there, next to various publicity items which might add up to $5 million, which makes one wonder if we are spending too much money for that kind of thing when, actually, we are just scraping along.
There is one particular economy to which I wish to draw the attention of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) because it has to do with something he himself mentioned. I noticed the other day that a certain member of the other place suggested that we should practise economy by nationalizing the Canadian Pacific Railway, and amalgamating it with the Canadian National. I think I would just say to the Prime Minister, who made the mistake of telling the railway workers that our party favoured amalgamation, that I do not consider that that is the kind of economy that should be made, if indeed it is an econ-

The Budget- Mr. J. M. Macdonnell omy, because of creating a huge monopoly.
I add my voice to all others so as to make clear the position of this party in that matter, so that the Prime Minister will not make that mistake again.
I come to the next thing which the prudent man would be concerned with, and that is the state of business of the country. He would naturally look first of all at the external trade of the country. I think that the truth is now known. I am not an alarmist, and I am not preaching calamity, but I think the people are getting nearer to the truth. The bedtime stories we heard last spring from the two privy councillors, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) and the Minister of Trade and Commerce, which we might call "the great illusion" are pretty well put to rest, and the people are realizing now that our trade is actually slipping. They realize that in 1949 our over-all external trade dropped by about $87 million; and in the first two months of this year indications are that our over-all trade was $22 million down, and our trade with the commonwealth $45 million down.
Some of the items, as we study them, are rather interesting. We find that our trade to some foreign countries is only in the amount of a few hundred dollars, or perhaps even less. We find for instance, that in the last year-and I do not know whether this is significant-our exports of skunk skins to Great Britain were entirely stopped. I do not know what that has to do with international affairs.


An hon. Member:: The socialists.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The socialists may have something to do with it.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to suggest that the government is responsible for all this; but I am going to suggest that so far as we on this side of the house are concerned -and we are not told much-but so far as we can judge, there has been a negative approach on the part of the government.
We had a very interesting account from the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) about his journey to Colombo. But what he had to say made one feel that he was just an onlooker-a friendly onlooker, I am sure. Indeed, he actually described himself as a "dollar gadfly." I have looked up the word "gadfly" in the dictionary, and I find that it is "a fly that bites and annoys cattle."
Well, whether that attitude would be useful at cabinet meetings, I cannot say; but I cannot believe that it was very useful at Colombo. Indeed one got the feeling that the Secretary of State for External Affairs had not gone there with any mandate from the cabinet that he was to try to help things along.

The Minister of Finance will say, "Oh, but you must remember that they are all in the sterling area, and that we are not a sterling country." I will agree with that. And without taking more than a second or two to discuss the point, I shall say that our complaint is that the government is to blame for keeping us in a strait-jacket and that it is going to get worse unless something is done about it.
There was a certain negation also I thought in the answer to the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) who moved a resolution suggesting that we might have a commonwealth conference on trade. The hon. member for Lake Centre did not suggest that that was going to work miracles, but he did suggest that it was a reasonable thing to do; and I think many hon. members in this house felt it was a reasonable thing to do. But the Minister of Finance was entirely negative. He did not say that it would do no good. He said if we were invited to one we would go, but that we would not take the initiative. So I think it is fair to describe the attitude of the government as a negative attitude.
I say, further, if things were going well we might be content with a negative attitude on the part of the government. But I submit that even he will not say things are going well. He spoke some serious and grave words tonight. I suggest the situation is far from good.
One thing I am not overlooking, and that is the visits of the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) to Europe. When he comes back we have an optimistic statement. Perhaps if he could go there every day and make a statement every morning it might help. His feeling seems to be "A statement a day keeps depression away."


Mr. Howe:: It has kept away for a good many years, hasn't it?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I do like an optimist, and I like the Minister of Trade and Commerce; and there certainly is a place for optimism, so long as it is not overdone.
The next thing that this prudent man of business of whom I have been talking would ask is this. He would ask where we are going. It is true that we have had a fairly complete review from the Minister of Finance, in which he has said many things which are of interest. I think the minister contented himself largely with congratulating himself on the past; as someone has said, he was "resolutely facing the past."
But I think our prudent citizen, looking at things as they are, would have been troubled about things. He would see as I have said that we are just scraping the barrel now in the matter of income. There is nothing to

come and go on. Secondly, he would remind himself of the international danger of which the minister has spoken, and of the certainty of higher defence expenditures. Thirdly, he would say to himself that the government, by its extravagant election promises to further social security, has got itself into a position where, with all the wiggling it can do, it can hardly get away from carrying out some of the things which it suggested during the election. Further, he would remind himself that we are just now beginning to feel the cutback; we are just beginning to feel the effects of the cutback of British purchases. He would remind himself that this fertilizing stream of Marshall aid, which has given to us so much, is likely to be dried up in another year. He would say to himself, "All this is happening at the end of years of boom, of the highest activity we have ever known, when, on the theory of cyclical budgeting which has been expounded in this house, we should be having much larger surpluses than we have." Taking those considerations together I think our friend will say that not everything is rosy. I think he would consider it incredible levity if it were considered in that way.
I think he will say further, "What will happen if we have even a minor recession which will cut down earnings and, of course, cut down taxes?" I think he will further say that we should have, and indeed we have had to a certain extent, an exposure of conditions by the government, but I think most of all he will feel that we seem to be coasting along, that the government has not really indicated anything except hope and optimism in dealing with the situation which is facing us. I think he would say finally that what is needed is a much more active attitude on the part of the government to help people to help themselves and to help develop this country.
We have in the west resources that are only now coming fully into being. We have great mineral resources along with the oil and coal in the prairie provinces. If there was a plan concerted by the government along with the provinces-I do not mean that the government should do things itself-if there was an effort to create an economy favourable to enterprise, what someone has called an economy of opportunity, it seems to me that there might be brought about that industry, energy and initiative to develop the resources which we need to help to carry this extra load.
On motion of Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood) the debate was adjourned.
Transitional Measures Act



TRANSITIONAL MEASURES ACT, 1947 CONTINUATION OF CERTAIN ORDERS AND REGULATIONS

Douglas Charles Abbott: the second reading of Bill No. 56, to amend the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act, 1947.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, the house now has before it the bill which arises out of the resolution debated on Friday last. The bill is quite brief, simply having the effect of continuing the statute for a period of thirteen months from its present expiry date of March 31, 1950. In one or two respects the bill does not contain what it was indicated to the house it would contain. When the resolution was in the committee stage it was 'clearly stated that the measure would contain the actual orders in council which were to be continued thereby. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Sinclair) is reported on page 1105 of Hansard of March 24 as saying:
The actual list of controls which will still be In effect will appear as a schedule to the bill.
Then at page 1107 he is reported as saying: . . . the schedule to the bill will show the orders in council and amendments which are being carried forward.
The bill before the house contains no such thing. We must look to the consolidation of orders in council outside the statute and do a little subtracting in order to find out precisely what orders in council the house is now being asked to give legislative effect to in what I call a devious and improper way for a parliament to proceed. The parliamentary assistant will recall that a year ago the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson), who piloted this same measure through the house in that session, told us that twelve orders in council were to be continued. We are now told that the twelve orders are still in effect. Much has been made of the fact that we have been told there has been considerable demobilization in the control structure, but we find that there are still twelve orders in effect. Six of them are to be terminated on March 31 while six will be continued for the remaining thirteen months of the life of the bill now before us.
In a statement to the house on March 24 the minister made it clear that the bill was intended to permit the government to continue rent control. He said, as reported on page 1089 of Hansard:
. . . during the past year all the orders contained in the schedule to the act have been revoked except those relating to price and rent control.

Transitional Measures Act
I interpolate here that what I think the minister meant was that orders have been passed which will have the effect on the 31st of this month of terminating six of the twelve orders that were continued in effect a year ago. The minister continued:
The government does not intend to invoke the limited powers now granted by the act to reimpose controls already lifted. Therefore the practical effect of the proposed bill is to continue the authority to control1 rentals only, for a further period.
Taking up the minister's statement for the moment, if the only purpose of this bill is to continue rent control, then there can be no room for argument or difference of opinion within the house. I have not heard any party or any member of this house object to the continuation of rent control. If that is the only purpose of the bill, then we are in agreement on the purpose. The question remains then as to the method by which the purpose is to be carried out.
Looking at the hodgepodge of orders in council which he was asking parliament to give legislative effect to for this further period of thirteen months, the minister, with commendable candour, said, as reported on page 1089 of Hansard:
These are extraordinary powers and they should be exercised with great discretion.
May I comment upon the two phrases of that statement, dealing first with the second phrase, that they should be exercised with great discretion. I take it that there will be complete agreement with the formula thus laid down by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott), but if we are to judge his conception of what is great discretion in the exercise of such powers by the exercise that he and the government made of those same powers last November, when they brought in sweeping and blanket increases in rent control without the slightest consultation with the house, then the house will want more than the bland assurance given by the minister in his statement of March 24 before assuming that these extraordinary powers will be exercised in fact with great discretion.
I do not propose to review what I said on March 24 about the kind of statements that have been emanating from the ministry in recent years. I call the attention of the house to the low estimate placed by the government upon its own statements. I recall, as I did in the house last Friday, the way in which it suited the convenience of the present Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) in November, 1947, to turn tail upon the most categorical assurances given to this house in 1946 by his predecessor, the then minister of finance, Mr. Ilsley, on foreign exchange control. I refer also to the way in which it suited the convenience of the

Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) in this house last fall to turn tail on assurances that he himself had given to the house in April of last year that the radio committee would be consulted and would have an opportunity to report before the government would ask the house to vote a loan of $4 million to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for the development of television. Other instances can be cited of the very low way in which the government has treated assurances that it gave the house, to which the house attached the utmost good faith when they were made, and upon which it relied.
Let me turn to the first branch of the statement made by the Minister of Finance. He said, "these"-referring to the powers that the government seeks to arrogate to itself by the present bill for a further period of thirteen	months-"are extraordinary
powers." They are extraordinary powers indeed. No member of the house can gainsay that fact. It is because they are extraordinary powers and because in this year of grace, 1950, five years after V-E day, there can be no excuse for the continuation of extraordinary and arbitrary powers in such a form, that we in the opposition have said that this is an utterly and inherently wrong method of dealing with the question of rent control. If the field within which, according to the minister's own statement, these extraordinary powers are to have their play is to be confined to rent control, what possible excuse can there now be for failing to bring before the house a proper measure to continue rent control?
In the face of what the minister has pictured to the house as a simplification of the situation, why must we now continue to have a situation where we do not find the law relating to rent control that parliament is being asked to pass in the legislation that will actually pass this house, if the house gives effect to it, and will receive the assent of the governor general? Why do we have to go elsewhere, why do we have to go to the privy council office to find out what is the law of the land on a measure that is of the highest importance to hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Canadian people? Surely there cannot be any excuse five years after the end of the war for asking parliament to proceed in this way and to hand over to the governor in council the power to make law, or for that matter to clothe with the effect of legislation orders in council that were never passed by parliament, orders in council that were simply passed by the governor in council and repose today in the privy council office. That is precisely the effect of the present measure.

We are being asked to give continued legislative effect to something that never has been legislated, to something that in the beginning was order in council and will under the measure before the house continue to be order in council. In the year 1950 that is just as wrong as any type of procedure could be that the government could propose in this house. If the house sees fit to pass the present bill it will be continuing a situation where we do not find the legislation in the statute books of parliament, where we cannot find the law of the land in the statute rolls of the house, where the law of the land is to be found only in the privy council office, and where legislative effect is being given to the acts of a group that is outside parliament in its actions in this respect. There can be no possible excuse five years after V-E day, Mr. Speaker, for parliament subjugating and demeaning itself by giving legislative effect to orders in council in a situation of that kind.
What possible justification does the government give us? There has not been one word of attempted justification yet from the government benches of this abuse of the parliamentary method. There has not been the slightest excuse. It is true it might have involved a little draftsmanship in bringing in a bill that would select from this hodgepodge of orders in council those portions that require to be enacted in order to give proper legislative form and effect to rent control. Does it pass the ingenuity of those who are the advisers of the government to draft the necessary legislation? Would it have taken any longer for the house to deal with it? I do not think it would have. If it had been in proper form it would have taken less time because, as I have said, I think all members of the house are in agreement in supporting the principle of continuation of rent control.
That has not suited the purpose of the government. They have chosen rather to have parliament demean itself by continuing this hodgepodge of orders in council. I wonder how many hon. members of the house, who are again being asked in effect in the name of parliament to abdicate the proper use of the legislative function of the house in favour of the secondary method of giving legislative effect to something that was not done in the house, have really taken the trouble to read and scrutinize with care the remaining six orders in council which will be given legislative effect for a further period of thirteen months if the bill passes. I wonder, for instance, if they have read with care order in council P.C. 8528 and all the many amendments to it. If they have they will see that this order in council, apart from setting up
Transitional Measures Act the wartime prices and trade board, in clause 4 proceeds to clothe the board with sweeping and vast powers the like of which, apart from some aspects of rent control, are totally unnecessary now and, if the statement of the government is to be accepted, will not be used. They are powers the equal of which have never been conferred by parliament on any body in peacetime in the history of Canada. Yet parliament is being asked to give continued legislative effect to this order in council, and to confer on the wartime prices and trade board vast powers which the government itself now says it should not be necessary for that board to possess or exercise in view of the narrowing of the field within which the control system is to operate.
What a position in which to place the Canadian parliament: to vest in the wartime prices and trade board vast powers which the government does not even make the slightest attempt to pretend are required for the limited purpose of rent control! You know, Mr. Speaker, what many of these powers are. We find the broadest powers in order 8528 in reference to the investigation of the prices of goods and services. We have arbitrary powers vested in the board in regard to licensing. What possible justification can there be for continuing to give the board these licensing powers, when the duties of the board are to be confined to the administration of what remains of the system of rent control? Nevertheless, without the slightest explanation parliament is being asked to swallow this whole system of sweeping and arbitrary powers, and to give them legislative effect for another thirteen months. What possible justification can there be for continuing provisions like this, in paragraph 8 of this order in council:
No person shall sell or offer for sale or supply any goods or services at a price that is higher than is reasonable and just, or withhold any goods or services from sale or supply for a price that is higher than is reasonable and just and. in any case where a person engaged in business accused under this provision has not kept such books of account as are necessary to exhibit or explain his transactions, the onus shall be upon such accused person to establish that the price is reasonable and just . . .
The government makes not the slightest pretence of offering any reason why sweeping powers of that kind should continue to be vested in the wartime prices and trade board; yet it asks this parliament to swallow them holus-bolus and continue to abdicate its own functions, something which this parliament cannot possibly contemplate if it is to retain its self-respect.
Then we have another provision, to the effect that no person shall acquire, accumulate or withhold from sale any goods beyond an amount reasonably required for the ordinary
1268

Transitional Measures Act purposes of his business. What has that to do with rent control? It has not the slightest bearing. Why, then, should this parliament be asked to give it continued legislative effect?
That is only one order in council. If we turn to P.C. 9029, with all its amendments, it may be that more of that order is required because that was the general order in council in regard to rent control; nevertheless it contains powers that are not needed today; and I could go through the other four orders that are to continue in effect for thirteen months commencing April 1 of this year.
There has not been a sounder point of view advanced in this house during the lifetime of this parliament than that advanced by my leader in his speech on Friday last, March 24, when he told the government in plain, well understood terms that if it would bring in a proper measure dealing with rent control, a measure in proper parliamentary form, it would undoubtedly command general support from all parties. That would have been the sound legislative method, the method that would commend itself to a parliament prepared to be reasonable in its actions, sound in its approach to national problems, yet determined to assert the proper position of parliament as champion of the rights of the people. That is the approach that would have commended itself to any government that had, first, a proper sense of responsibility to the house, and second, a desire to see the house proceed by proper parliamentary methods. Apparently neither of these attributes is to be found in this government. Without any attempt at or pretence of excuse or justification they simply dump on the doorstep of parliament this whole hodgepodge of consolidated orders in council, asking parliament to forget its proper procedure, to forget that it is a parliament and once more to reduce itself to the status of a rubber stamp in order to give legislative effect to something that will not be found in the bill but will repose over in the privy council office.
If ever there was an issue crystal clear, it is the issue now presented by this bill. Last year the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) thought he had a case for the continuation of this measure because at that time twelve orders in council and five types of control were still in effect. At that time it will be remembered that we still had controls with respect to steel, timber and building materials. Whatever justification he thought he had at that time, however, has been completely swept aside by the action of the government in reducing those controls to one, that is, rental control. If the situation is as simple as the government has pictured it to the house; if the intentions of the government are as straightforward as the


Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) pictured them in the house last Friday, then I say the government has deprived itself of the slightest shred of excuse or justification for asking parliament to abdicate its proper functions and swallow holus-bolus this hodgepodge of orders in council.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, the measure before us is one that parliament will have to pass. As a matter of fact if we get that far with it and the government asks unanimous consent to give it third reading tonight, I will not object to waiving the rules so that can be done. The reason I make that statement is that some people are concerned lest they lose even the minimum amount of protection now provided under rent control.
In putting it that way I think I make it clear that while we are ready to support this measure, we feel we must take a few moments to condemn the government for the way it has handled this whole business of rent control, particularly during the last two or three years. The people of Canada, I am afraid, have become inured to this sort of treatment, and are resigned to the statement made by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) the other day that the federal government intends to get out of rent control altogether by April 30, 1951. Nevertheless I feel the government should be told that thousands of people across this country-and this is particularly true in the city from which I come-resent the callous indifference the government has shown to this important problem in the lives of a great many Canadians.
While I am on my feet I want to say that to some extent I share the views expressed by the hon. member who has just spoken, though in part I may differ with him. I share his resentment of the fact that the bill does not include some of the things the parliamentary assistant told us last Friday it would include. Perhaps I resent it even more than the member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming), because the statement the last speaker quoted was given as a direct answer to a question I put to the parliamentary assistant. He told us that there would be a schedule to the bill that would indicate the orders in council to be continued in force beyond March 31, and which would indicate also the orders in council to be continued only until March 31 of this year. The parliamentary assistant was a bit annoyed the other day because I was not satisfied with an indication of the orders in council by number. I wanted him to go

further and give us a schedule to the bill which would actually set out these orders in council.


James Sinclair: I even gave the page numbers on which they could be found.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The hon. member still does not seem to understand our complaint. He is boasting about the information he gave this house, which is found on page 1106 of Hansard of March 24, 1950. He stated categorically that that information would .be included as a schedule to the bill. I wonder if the parliamentary assistant has seen the bill?


James Sinclair: Yes.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Where is the schedule?


James Sinclair: I shall answer that when the time comes.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I hope the parliamentary assistant will do more than answer the question. I hope he will implement his categorical assurance given the other night, by moving an amendment to put at least that much information into the proposed statute.
I want to say a bit more, Mr. Speaker, about the lack of information contained in the bill. While I share the views expressed by the member for Eglinton about the way in which this practice disregards the rights of parliament, I want to speak more particularly from the standpoint of the average citizen, be he a tenant or a landlord, who has a problem in the field of rent control. In a democracy it should be possible for a citizen who has to deal with a government department, or a government official, to be shown in black and white, and in simple language, what the law is. It should be possible to set before him a simple document telling him what his rights are. What a time any citizen, be he landlord or tenant, has today trying to find out what his rights are under this rent control legislation. As a matter of fact, as a result of the inadequate information that is available, many of these people write to their member of parliament for information. I think I know my way around the statutes, orders in council, regulations, documents, and the tremendous amount of material and information available to us here in Ottawa. I confess, however, that many of the questions that come to me in the field of rent control are presented in such a way that the only thing I can do is address a question to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott).
For example, a few days ago I had an inquiry about the present situation with respect to evictions. I knew there was something about that somewhere in the regulations, but it seemed to me a waste of time to
Transitional Measures Act try to find it, because I realized that if I did find it, it would probably have been amended since the time my copy of the regulations was issued. So I wrote to the Minister of Finance, and asked him if he would supply me with the latest office consolidation of the relevant orders, and in particular give me information so that I could answer the question I had received about evictions. I received a letter from the Minister of Finance dated March 22, 1950. I should like to read part of it:
There are no regulations dealing exclusively with evictions, but I would refer you to section 2 and section 13 of board order 800. Section 2 lists the types of property and leases not affected by that order and section 13 tells the circumstances under which a landlord may recover possession in accordance with the law of the province in which the accommodation is situated. In addition to these two sections, subsection 3 of section 4 of order 813 provides "that a landlord of any lodging as distinguished from a self-contained dwelling may recover possession by giving to the tenant a six-months' notice to vacate", and section 7 of the same order provides "that a landlord of any self-contained dwelling may give to the tenant a six-months' notice to vacate if he needs the accommodation as a residence for himself and the members of his family."
Yours very truly,
D. C. Abbott
I proceeded to look up, in the two booklets which the minister sent along with that letter, the various orders, sections and subsections to which he referred me. I found I was right in my original thought, that it would have been useless for me to look it up, because several of those sections had been amended. Little bits of paper containing the amendments had been pasted in the booklet, or the changes had been written in in ink.
My whole point, Mr. Speaker, in presenting this example, is that in addition to the affront to parliament that this sort of procedure involves, it is unfair to the average citizen of this country, because he is not able to go into a government office and be shown a clear statement of his rights. He should be able to find it in the law of the land. One should be able to turn up a statute governing the matter in question, and find it there. If he turns up what we have before us tonight, Bill 56, he finds it has one section, which changes the expiry date of the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act, 1947, so that it will continue in effect until April 30, 1951. That is all there is to it, and it tells him nothing. If, perchance, the parliamentary assistant decided it might be a good idea this time to keep the promise he made the other day, and put a schedule in the bill containing the information he said would be in a schedule to the bill, what would we then have in this 55946-821

Transitional Measures Act legislation? We would have, as the member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) said the other day, a book of numbers.
There would be two sections to that schedule. I am basing this assumption on what the parliamentary assistant said, as recorded at page 1106 of Hansard of March 24, 1950. The first section would list those orders in council that are being continued until April 30, 1951. We would know that the first one was P.C. 8528 1/11/41, wartime prices and trade regulations. Under that, we have a list of 15 other orders in council by number and date. The effect of these orders in council is simply to amend the first one. Then, the second order in council would be P.C. 9029 21/11/41, wartime leasehold regulations. Then, there is a list of nine more orders in council which amend that one, listed by number and by date. I shall not bother with the other four groups under that first heading, having to do with the orders in council to be continued in force, because they deal with relatively minor matters, nor with the second group of six orders in council, which will be discontinued as at March 31 of this year.
The main question before us is the continuation of rent control. As I say, in order to do that, there are to be these many orders in council carried forward. I suppose the parliamentary assistant is thinking of saying that it would be ridiculous to include, as a schedule to the bill, all of those 26 orders in council to which I have referred. In speaking of 26, I mean P.C. 8528, plus its 15 amending orders, which, taken together, constitute the wartime prices and trade regulations; and then P.C. 9029, which is the wartime leasehold regulations, plus its 9 amending orders in council. One of the reasons that it would be ridiculous to carry all of those orders in council forward into a schedule is that most of them are now dead. As a matter of fact some of the material the member for Eglinton was reading here tonight, and complaining about, is a dead letter. He was worked up over some of the authority that seemed to be contained in them, but rather needlessly, I would say.
The member for Coast-Capilano (Mr. Sinclair) seems to be enjoying the fact that I am saying that about the member for Eglinton. I tell him, however, that if it is the case that most of those 26 orders in council are in the category of dead letters, would it not be a simple matter to boil them down to a few sections in the statute itself that would give the necessary authority for rent control? Would it not be a simple matter to put these regulations down in black and white in the statute so that people of this country would know what their rights are? Let me come back to my point. The whole


purpose of the first sixteen orders in council referred to in this schedule, which the parliamentary assistant said would be in the bill but which is not in the bill, is simply to keep alive on paper the wartime prices and trade regulations as a base or an authority for there being a rent control division. Let us get rid of all that and simply enact, by one section of the bill, the rent control authority. Similarly, P.C. 9029 and its nine amending orders in council simply make various changes in the original constitution of the rent control authority, all of which could be boiled down and made clear.
A while ago I referred to the documents which the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) sent me the other day. One of them is entitled:
Office Consolidation May, 1949
Wartime Prices and Trade Board Orders Respecting Maximum Rentals and Termination of Leases for Housing Accommodation and Shared Accommodation
When I look into the booklet I find that within the space of seven pages there is printed P.C. 9029 as amended by the nine amending orders in council referred to as item 2 in the promised schedule. Right there that suggests the possibility of boiling all this material, which it is quite hard to find, down to a fairly simple statement. The parliamentary assistant says, "Oh, you need the other orders in council in order to give authority to P.C. 9029". This parliament now has authority to constitute or to continue its constitution, if you will, the rent control authority that is in existence; and I submit that it is something of that kind that should be done.
Then after you get this P.C. 9029 by this devious process of carrying forward the whole raft of dead-letter orders in council, you then move on to the board orders; and their numbers, of course, run fairly high. I have reached as high as board order No. 813; but they do not all relate to rent control. Many of them, of course, dovetail into each other. Any time that a difficult question is put to the Minister of Finance or to the rent control people, they have to get the answer. They have to sit down and study this section and that, and make sure that one section has not been repealed by another. Would it not be a great deal simpler-in fact, would it not save time and labour for all of the people out in the various offices-if once and for all the whole business were boiled down to a simple statement?
I argue that point for the sake of efficiency and because I think it is unfair to ask parlia-

ment to pass legislation that is so involved as this is and is so far removed from parliamentary investigation or inquiry. I urge it also because it seems to me that the democratic tradition is a good one, namely, that the people of the country have the right to know what the law of the land is and have the right to know what their rights are. As the situation is now, any citizen, whether landlord or tenant, who goes into a rent control office is obliged to take the word of the official that he is telling him what his rights are or are not. One of the reasons that we get many letters from these people is not that they do not trust the official who is behind the counter in the rent control office but that they have been brought up in the tradition that citizens in a democratic society have a right to know what the law is.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The official does not always know what it is.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Quite so. The official probably does what I do; he writes a letter to Ottawa, to the Minister of Finance, and gets a reply referring him to all these various sections, and gets a new book with the little slips pasted in so that he is brought up to date. Surely it is a fundamental rule that our citizens are entitled to know what the law is. When they go into a government office in Winnipeg or Vancouver it should be possible for them to see the law in black and white. They should know whether they are being given justice or not, and whether the law is being interpreted rightly or not. They should know when and where they may go to court to have their rights under the law protected, if they wish to do so.
I submit that it is not a good enough excuse simply to say that there are only thirteen more months with this and let us muddle along with it as it is. We have done far too much of that already, particularly since the war, with the habit that the government got into; and in my view this would be a good place to begin with the enacting of proper legislation.
One other comment I should like to make at this time is this. I suppose we have to accept the government's statement in the matter, a statement which is being carried forward into the bill, and that is that it is definitely going out of the field of rent control thirteen months from now. All previous extensions of the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act have carried with them the possibility of that act being continued for another year by the simple device of a resolution of both houses of parliament. For the first time that device is not being included, and we have a bill which foreshadows a definite ending of rent control at the end of
Transitional Measures Act April, 1951. As I say, the people in my city of Winnipeg and in other cities across the country have had, in the last few years, so many hard knocks in the matter of rent control that they have become inured to the government's callousness; but I would not be doing my duty if I did not again protest the way in which we have had, not rent control, not protection of the interests of our people, but rent decontrol hastened or pushed forward at an unnecessary rate, particularly in view of the failure of the government to deal with the fundamental problem in this field, namely, the problem of decent and adequate housing for all our people.


George Alexander Drew: With the purpose of this act, Mr. Speaker, in so far as it relates to a measure of rent control, there is not much disagreement in this house. But there should be disagreement on the part of every member of this house with the procedure that is being followed if he really examines what this act does and what result is produced. As has been pointed out, there is a problem presented to the members in connection with this present act which proposes to continue the transitional powers for another thirteen months,, by the simple fact that this is March 28 and that, according to the information conveyed to the government by the law officers of the' crown, this and any similar act terminates at midnight the day after tomorrow. For that reason we are confronted with a situation in which, if we assert the position that should be asserted in regard to legislation of this kind, we can produce a situation in which there would be no remaining rent control, simply because of the dilatory conduct of the government and their failure to bring this legislation before the house in time for hon. members to have the opportunity of giving it ample consideration and of finding some alternative course.
Now, from the remarks that have already been made, I wonder how many hon. members realize exactly what they are being called upon to pass. Do members of this House of Commons realize-those of them who are showing sufficient concern to listen to this debate on this tremendously important bill- that what is now being sought is the power to continue not only price controls, but a very wide measure of control, not only over goodsy but over services? And do they realize that under this act as presented, if it is passed by the House of Commons, the government could deal with human services in any way it might see fit, and without any limitation imposed by the act?
You may say that would not be done. Other things have been done by this government which have greatly surprised members erf the

Transitional Measures Act house, as well as the people of Canada generally. I think a number of members have either misunderstood or misread the undertakings given by the government as to the scope of the continuing powers. I think many members of the house thought that it dealt only with rent controls.
I propose to speak about rent control, under this unsatisfactory method; but I also propose to speak of the other powers that are continuing. If this unsatisfactory method, this utterly unsound method of dealing with this particular problem, is to be adopted-and the very casual manner in which the government brings this on at the last moment would seem to make that almost a necessity-then it is quite true that it was necessary to continue the existence of the board which supervises the rent control provisions. That board is the board set up separately under order 8528, which was the original order in council establishing the wartime price and trade regulations. That order created the wartime prices and trade board, which is the board referred to in the rent control provisions.
Therefore in order to make the rent control provisions effective, without any change, and carry those loose provisions forward, it was necessary to provide for the continuance of this board. But they have gone a great deal farther than that, to provide for the continuance of the board. They have continued in force all the regulations that were put into effect, except those that were definitely limited in March of 1949.
Again may I say that a great many hon. members did not fully appreciate the effect of the provisions of the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act, which was discussed last year. Section 2 of that act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding anything in the said act or in any order or regulation set out in the schedule thereto, the wartime prices and trade board shall not
(a)	exercise any of its powers under paragraph (f) of subsection one of section four of the wartime prices and trade regulations; or
(b)	grant leave to prosecute any person for violation of subsection one of section eight of the wartime prices and trade regulations;
with respect to any goods or services other than the goods and services with respect to which an order of the board was made under that paragraph and is in force at the commencement of this act.
Now, paragraph (f) of section 4 is the part of section 4 which relates to the fixing of certain maximum or minimum prices on certain goods, and relates only to the power of the board in relation to those. But it does not in any way limit the power of the board to deal with a great many other very important subjects. It does not in any way limit the power of the board to deal with everything from (a) right down to (m) of the powers that were originally conferred.

Then when you come to section 8 (1) with respect to the wartime trade board we find that section 8 is the one which relates to offences, penalties and prosecutions, and that the only subsection of section 8 which has been deleted is the subsection which refers to penalties for goods being sold at higher than a reasonable and just price. But it does not in any way remove any of the other penalties in relation to orders made by the board in regard to prices, or the control of goods or services.
Now, this is not simply an exercise in the definition of terms. Just let us see some of the things that are being continued by this bill that is now before us. I shall take only a few of them, to illustrate the extent of the powers that are being continued by this bill now under consideration. Let us take paragraph (g), for instance, of section 4 (1), which provides that the board shall have power-
To prescribe the terms and conditions upon which, and the manner and circumstances in which, any goods or services may be produced, manufactured, extracted, refined, processed, stored, transported, purchased, sold, offered for sale, supplied, assembled, installed, constructed, distributed, exhibited, advertised, delivered, used or dealt in or with, either generally or by specified persons, and to prohibit transactions and acts not in accordance therewith.
Mr. Speaker, that practically gives this board power over every human activity in this country, either in dealing with goods, or in offering their services. This provides power in the hands of this government for the conscription of manpower under any terms they see fit.


James Sinclair: Nonsense.


George Alexander Drew: Someone says "nonsense". Well, that is some illustration of the way in which this government presents legislation. They do not even know what they are putting forward; and then they object to a discussion of a bill that this all-powerful government introduces.


James Sinclair: Read section 2 of last year's act.


George Alexander Drew: I have just read it, if you had been listening.


James Sinclair: That is the section which says that any order in council which has been removed up to that time cannot be imposed.


George Alexander Drew: It does not say anything of the kind.


James Sinclair: Read the last three lines.


George Alexander Drew: It does not say anything of the kind at all. It simply says that that relates to paragraph (f) of section 4 (1), and it relates to section 8 (1). And the whole of that section is governed by those two limitations.


James Sinclair: With respect to those few orders in council in effect when this act was passed, on March 25, 1949.


George Alexander Drew: 1 cannot hear the hon. member, but I am trying to guess at what he is saying. If the hon. member has anything to say I wish he would say it. I may say that I am not discontinuing my remarks.


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: This is on the second reading and there is no question period.


George Alexander Drew: This is no question period. If the hon. member has something to say to the house I am quite prepared to sit down and listen to it.


Alphonse Fournier: What he intended to say was that when we have cancelled an order in council referring to these matters we cannot revive it or pass another.


George Alexander Drew: That is exactly the point. The fact that the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) comes in and supports this utterly preposterous statement by the parliamentary assistant is an indication that no one in the government knows what they are asking parliament to assent to.


Alphonse Fournier: You are all wrong once more.


George Alexander Drew: I am not all wrong. The government does not even know what it is asking parliament to do. What the act means is that if parliament by order in council cancels any of these provisions, they cannot be revived. That is exactly what the government should put before this house to deal with. If they simply want this act to retain the existence of the board they should cancel all of the wartime regulations except the one which provides for the board itself. When they do that, then under the act that was passed and to which the hon. member has referred it cannot be revived. But this is an order still continuing; this is an order still in effect.
That is exactly what the government should have done-cancelled by order in council all the provisions except that one part of this particular wartime order that is now carried forward and which creates the board necessary to administer the rent control provisions of the other order. I should like to point out some of the other provisions that are still here so that hon. members will know what is being dealt with. As an illustration, section 4, subsection (1) (h), provides:
(1) The board shall have power
(h)	to require any person to obtain licences or permits from the board or from any person specified by the board; to prescribe the terms and conditions under which and the manner and circumstances in which such licences or permits or amendment thereof shall be obtained;
Transitional Measures Act
Then it goes on to point out what those licences may be for, and the next paragraph follows:
(i)	to amend, suspend or cancel any licence or permit issued or granted;
(j)	to prescribe the quantities of, the manner in which, and the terms and conditions under which, any goods or services may be bought, sold, supplied, distributed, delivered or used within prescribed periods of time and to prohibit purchase, sale, supply, distribution, delivery or use except in accordance with such prescription;
(k)	to require any person owning or having possession, control or power to dispose of any goods or services-
May I underline the word "services":
-to deal with, use, dispose of or supply any such goods or services, in such manner as may be prescribed by the board; and no use, disposition or supply of any such goods or services in accordance with such manner shall constitute infringement of any mark, design, or other private or proprietary right;
Then it goes on to deal with manufacturing provisions. Those are the powers that are being continued. Some hon. members may be under the impression that an undertaking was given that those powers would not be exercised in the statement made by the Minister of Finance on March 24, but that is not what the Minister of Finance said. The Minister of Finance pointed out what powers were still in existence, which were the six orders to which the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) has referred, which are as follows: 8528, 9029, 34/4433, 3122, 4600 and 6233. The two important orders are 8528, the one covering the wartime prices and trade regulations, and 9029 covering the wartime leasehold regulations.


Mr. Cannon:: The regulations which the leader of the opposition has been referring to have been in force for eleven years. Does he think it will do much harm to have them in force one more year?


George Alexander Drew: I am pleased to note that the very capable lawyer who has just spoken realizes that these are in force. I am happy that he has enlightened the parliamentary assistant to that extent. When he asks whether it would do any harm to have them still in force I would remind the hon. member that these orders were put into effect in the days of great emergency just after the outbreak of war. They granted powers that were justified and would have been accepted by the people of Canada only under those grave conditions. There is no occasion eleven years afterward for an hon. member to say, "You have had them for eleven years, you might just as well continue them." The fact is that on other occasions this government has revived statutes or powers that were available to them without notice to this House of Commons and to the parliament of Canada.

Transitional Measures Act
I for one do not believe that any hon. member of this house should let pass in this casual way powers of this kind that place in the hands of the government, at their whim at any time, full control over all business and personal activities of this country and full power over the personal services of our people, in whatever capacity those services may be performed. Yet that is what is before us. Let us see what the Minister of Finance said with regard to the exercise of these powers. He is reported at page 1089 of Hansard of March 24, 1950, as having said:
The government does not intend to invoke the limited powers now granted by the act to reimpose controls already lifted.
That is no assurance that these powers will not be invoked. It simply says that the government does not intend to invoke. There are hon. members of this house who have been here for many years and who will recall occasions on which this government explained originally that they did not intend to do something but, finding they had authority and power to do it, felt that it was appropriate and necessary for them to exercise that power. This is only a declaration of intention and nothing more.
If the government has no intention of using these powers, then let them by order in council repeal tomorrow that part of order 8528 which does not relate to the mere creation of the board which is necessary for the purposes of carrying on the rent controls under order 9029. If they do that they will give evidence that they have no intention of exercising any wider powers. If they do not do that then every hon. member here must accept full responsibility for leaving powers in the hands of the government under which in time of any measure of stress powers and controls inconsistent with our system of parliamentary responsibility may be invoked.
I am going to leave my remarks as to these wide provisions at this time in the hope that between now and three o'clock tomorrow afternoon the government will recognize it has no occasion to continue such powers unless it has some intention not disclosed by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott). There is one simple way to demonstrate that, by passing the appropriate order in council which they can do in a matter of a few minutes with the knowledge before them. I am simply saying that for the time being I am going to leave the discussion of this particular subject so that the government will have an opportunity to consider the matter before the debate is revived tomorrow afternoon.
I will pass on to the provisions as to rent control. I have made our position clear on an earlier occasion. For the purpose of keep-

ing the record quite straight I propose to refer to the position we took last year when these same measures were before the house. I do so because of the misinterpretation which has been placed upon the position which we took. On March 14, 1949, in the discussion of these very same measures, I had this to say, as reported at page 1449 of Hansard for that date:
I would recall again that when the government of Canada asks us to give these loose powers to deal with rent control, with steel control, with timber control, with priorities, and with ail these other controls, it has already said to the provincial governments, in effect: We do not believe that there is any emergency of the kind which necessitates our general authority; you go ahead and deal with these orders and we shall be very happy to leave the matter with you. Of course, the provinces will be called upon to deal with these by statute, and if they could deal with a rent control act, defining the rights of the tenants and landlords, then this house could have an act by which they could deal with other matters in the same way. And we should have them. There is no difficulty whatever in having proper acts of parliament to deal with each one of these subjects, which will restore to parliament its own authority, and which will restore to the members elected by the people of Canada their opportunity to say what the rights of the people will really be.
Further down on the same page I had this to say:
If the Canadian parliament has any right to conn tinue these powers, then it has the right and the authority to deal in the proper way with every one of the subjects covered in this omnibus bill; and that is the proper way to deal with it. But do not ask this House of Commons, do not ask parliament, to pass this omnibus bill which puts in one package all these loose and arbitrary powers in the way this one does.
The continuance of these powers involves an extremely wide and arbitrary measure which permits ministers of the crown, and appointed officials who delegate their authority to others, powers which are not defined and which are expressly made free from the ordinary restraints of the courts; and they become in effect a sort of arbitrary power which we have come to associate with dictatorships in other countries.
I deal further with the same subject at page 1454 of Hansard for the same date in these words:
I urge hon. members on both sides of the house, particularly those members on the other side of the house who have themselves criticized bureaucracy and the petty czars and dictators, that they vote against this resolution. By doing so they will insist upon proper acts being brought forward and they will also insist upon the return of true democratic parliamentary procedure in Canada.
The matter came up for discussion again on March 16, 1949, and on that occasion I was again discussing the question of dealing with these matters at that stage by loose orders instead of by clearly defined statutes which would leave no doubt about the rights of those affected by the legislation. I wish

to quote these words from what I said on March 16, 1949, as reported at page 1545 of Hansard:
I said before and I repeat that the government still has the opportunity to deal with this ini the parliamentary way. Bring before this house a rent control bill that will really deal with the rights of tenants and! the rights of landlords, and really establish the rights of our people generally; and the government will find support from every part of this house.
That was what I said in March of last year and it is what I say now. This is a subject which should be dealt with by a bill which will define the rights of those who are affected in such a way that from one end of the country to the other the rights of tenants and of landlords in their related capacities may be clearly determined, that they may be able to go to the courts to have decisions made in our ordinary constitutional way, and that they may be no longer subject to the arbitrary decisions of a board set up to meet the emergencies of war which has no place in this fifth year after the war in a free Canada.
On motion of Mr. Drew the debate was adjourned.



IMMIGRATION


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to have unanimous consent to revert to motions for the purpose of making a short statement. On September 26 last the minister of mines and resources announced in the house that, while no change had been made in the existing regulations with respect to the admission to Canada of German nationals, it was the intention of the government to
Immigration
modify the enforcement of the regulations by considering applications for the admission from Germany of first degree relatives of legal residents of Canada. If approved, these applications were to be dealt with by special order in council. Consideration would be given to applications for the wife and unmarried children under eighteen, the husband, the parents- aged sixty-five years and over, and the fiancee.
I am now tabling order in council P.C. 1606 passed on the 28th day of March, 1950, providing for the admission, without the necessity of a special order in council in each case, of German nationals who are close relatives of legal residents of Canada. Applications will be considered for the admission to Canada of the husband or wife; son, daughter, brother or sister, together with husband or wife, and unmarried children; the father or mother; the orphan nephew or niece under twenty-one years of age; the prospective husband or wife. The order in council also provides for the admission of displaced persons or refugees of German ethnic origin who were not German nationals on September 1, 1939.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Alphonse Fournier: Tomorrow we shall continue with the debate on this bill. When it is passed we will take up Bill No. 54, to amend the Fisheries Prices Support Act, 1944. If time is left we will take up the motion of the Minister of National Health and Welfare to set up a committee on old age security, and the motion of the Secretary of State for External Affairs to refer his estimates to a standing committee.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
*
[Stage Direction]

The Budget-Appendix


[Stage Direction]
presented by Honourable D. C. Abbott, M.P., for the information of Parliament on the occasion of the Budget of 1950-51
[Stage Direction]

r*""	:[DOT]
[Stage Direction]


			
			
			
			
			
			

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
The purpose of these Papers is twofold:
(1)	to make available in one place and in convenient form, as a supplement to the Budget, some of the more comprehensive indicators of economic conditions prepared by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and other Government agencies, together with brief comments;
(2)	to present a preliminary review of the Government accounts for the fiscal year ending on March 31, 1950.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
1.	The National Accounts
National Income, Output and Expenditure Personal Income and its Disposition Saving Investment
Revenue and Expenditure of All Governments
2.	Employment and Wages
3.	Trend of Prices
4.	Balance of International Payments
The tables in this Budget Paper are based upon estimates provided by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and other Government Departments. Some of the figures appear for the first time; others have been published elsewhere. All 1949 estimates are preliminary and subject to revision.
Except where indicated, the figures for Canada do not include the Province of Newfoundland because of the lack of comparable data for the period prior to Union, March 31, 1949.

The Budget-Appendix THE NATIONAL ACCOUNTS
National Income, Output and Expenditure
National Income measures the annual earnings of Canadian residents from productive operations. As such it includes salaries, wages and other forms of earnings by employees, in cash or otherwise, plus military pay and allowances. It includes corporation profits and other returns on invested capital. It includes the net income of farmers and of others who are in business on their own account.
Gross National Product is the value at market prices of all the goods and services produced in a year by the labour, capital and enterprise of Canadian residents. It is obtained by adding to National Income indirect taxes and such costs as depreciation allowances which may be regarded as entering into the cost of the goods and services produced, but do not form part of the incomes of Canadians. On the other hand, government subsidies, which reduce the price to the consumer or add to the income of producers, have to be deducted since they form part of the income of Canadians but do not enter into costs of production.
The goods and services produced in a year are either sold at home or abroad or added to inventories. Gross National Expenditure indicates how the Gross National Product was disposed of. Thus it measures the same total as Gross National Product but in a different way. Since foreign expenditures on Canadian goods and services, i.e., exports, form part of the earnings of Canadians in the Gross National Product, they are likewise included in Gross National Expenditure. While Canadian expenditure on imported goods and services is included in the totals of consumer expenditure, government expenditure and gross home investment, it is not part of the disposition of Canadian production and is therefore deducted.

[Stage Direction]
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS	MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

 CAI rwnAP VT-AQC;	zn wm 116000
8000
12000
4000
1939	1940	1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948	1949
[Stage Direction]
The Budget*-Appendix
Production and Income
The total value of goods and services produced by Canadians continued to rise during 1949, though at a lower rate than in the previous year. Eliminating the upward price change, it is estimated that national production in terms of physical volume increased by about 2% between 1948 and 1949.
Looking back to 1939, the national product has grown in value by over 180% and in physical terms by about 70%. Most of the increase in physical output occurred during the war years and can be attributed in large measure to the absorption of unemployed labour and resources. During the postwar years of high employment, output has shown a small but steady annual rise.
Income received in the form of wages and salaries rose by 7% between 1948 and 1949, reflecting the continued high level of employment and a further increase in rates of pay. Farm income, which has risen proportionately more than any part of the National Income since prewar years and which increased by about one-third from 1947 to 1948, fell by 5% between 1948 and 1949. Both lower prices and reduced crops account for the decline.
Investment income and the income of unincorporated businesses other than farming were up very slightly from the previous year.


[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949
		(Millions or Dollars)		
1. Salaries, wages and supplementary labour income.	2,583	6,212	7,113	7,6302. Military pay and allowances	32	83	82	1153. Investment income	783	2,307	2,348	2,3734. Net income of agriculture and other unincorporab-	ed business	891	2,336	2,912	2,8595. NATIONAL INCOME (1+2+3+4)	4,289	10,938	12,455	12,9776. Indirect taxes less subsidies	737	1,604	1,767	1,7827. Depreciation allowances and similar business costs	582	1,009	1,141	1,2778. Residual error of estimate	-10	40	108	-939. Gross National Product at Market Prices	(5+64-7+8)	5,598	13,591	15,471	15,94310. G.N.P. in Constant (1935-39) Dollars	5,523	8,990	9,201	9,412
The Budget-Appendix
Expenditure
The additional output produced by Canadians in 1949 was absorbed at home. Exports, which are a measure of the demand from outside the country, were about equal in value to the previous year.
Personal expenditure on consumer goods and services increased by $667 million, or 7% from 1948. This increase, though substantial, is less both in absolute amount and proportionately than in recent years.
Investment demands for plant, equipment and housing absorbed an even higher proportion of available labour and materials than in 1948.
From the peak of war expenditures in 1944 until 1947 the claims of federal, provincial and municipal governments on the available supply of goods and services declined steadily and sharply. In 1948 the trend was reversed and in 1949 there was another increase of 18%.
These changes in the expenditure side of the national accounts are analysed in greater detail in the following pages.

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949
		(Millions of Dollars)		
1. Personal expenditure on consumer goods and				
services	3,861	9,126	10,083	10,7502.	Government expenditure on goods and services	
3.	Gross home investment-	724	1,551	1,787	2,108(a) plant, equipment and housing	554	2,057	2,663	2,829(b) inventories	327	879	646	124. Exports of goods and services 0)	1,451	3,629	4,044	3,9745. Imports of goods and services^)	-1,328	-3,612	-3,645	-3,8246. Residual error of estimate	9	-39	-107	947. Gross National Expenditure at .Market Prices	(1+2+3+4+5+6)	5,598	13,591	15,471	15,9438. G.N.E. in Constant (1935-39) Dollars	5,523	8,990	9,201	9,412
f1) Minor adjustments have been made to the figures of current receipts and payments shown in Table 12 and in "The Canadian Balance of International Payments, 1926-48", Dominion Bureau of Statistics, to achieve consistency with the other component series.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Personal Income and Its Disposition
How much Canadians spend for consumer goods and services depends upon their personal incomes, their taxes and how much they decide to save, borrow, or spend out of previous savings.
The total of personal income differs from the National Income in several respects. For example, it includes only that part of corporation income which is actually distributed. Deductions from employees' total earnings must also be made for unemployment insurance contributions and similar contributions which, although forming part of the compensation for services performed, are not actually received by the employee within the year. On the other hand, transfer payments such as family allowances, old age pensions, veterans benefits and charitable contributions by corporations are included in arriving at the total of personal income.

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 19491.	Salaries, wages and supplementary labour income.. Deduct: Employer and employee contribution to social ins. and govt, pension funds	
2.	Military pay and allowances	
3.	Net income of agriculture and other unincorporated	2,583 -34 32 891 564 249 6	(Millions o 6,212 -181 83 2,336 1,032 848 15	r Dollars) 7,113 -223 82 2,912 1,141 851 16	7,630 -238 115 2,859 1,196 917 164.	Interest, dividends and net rental income of persons 5.	Transfer payments to persons (excluding interest) (a)	from government	
(b)	charitable contributions made by corpora-	6. Personal Income (1+2+3+4+5)	4,291	19,345	11,892	12,495
Personal income, like the National Income, continued to rise during 1949, but at a less rapid rate than in previous years. Wages and salaries were higher. Substantial payments by the Canadian Wheat Board and payment of the refundable portion of wartime income taxes added to personal incomes (0. As already indicated, however, farm incomes were somewhat lower as a result of poorer crops and lower average prices.
There was an increase in the total of transfer payments by governments. Family allowances and old age pensions involved significantly larger transfers in 1949, as a result both of higher average rates of benefits and a growing number of recipients. Unemployment insurance benefits were on a higher level, reflecting the increase in the numbers of unemployed, a high proportion of whom were covered by the insurance scheme. These gains were reduced by a further tapering off in payments of such postwar benefits to veterans as gratuities, rehabilitation benefits and re-establishment credits, which were at their peak in 1946.
0) However, the total of personal income shown in Table 3 does not include the payment of the refundable portion of wartime income taxes.

The Budget-Appendix
The amount of personal income available for spending or saving is the total of personal income less direct taxes on personal income. In 1949, direct taxes fell sharply, accounting for less in absolute amount than in any year since 1945, and for a smaller proportion of personal income than in any year since 1941. As a result, personal disposable income rose by about 6% between 1948 and 1949.
Consumer spending increased in about the same proportion, indicating that net savings out of personal income were about the same as in 1948. There was a modest increase in dollar expenditure on perishable goods such as food, tobacco and beverages, and an even smaller increase in spending for semi-durable goods such as clothing. When price changes are eliminated, there was probably a small decrease in total volume of purchases of perishables and semi-durables. On the other hand, expenditure for durables-automobiles, furniture, household appliances, etc.-rose by an estimated 14% in value and about 9% in physical volume. Expenditure on services also increased substantially, reflecting in part the rising level of rentals.
As shown in table 4, it is estimated that consumer expenditure was 180% higher in dollar terms in 1949 than in 1939. Eliminating price changes in the interval and making allowances for the population increase, it would appear that, on the average, each Canadian is now consuming about 50% more of goods and services than in immediate prewar years.

[Stage Direction]
MILLIONS or DOLLARS	MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 19491. Personal direct taxes (a) income taxes	61	(Millions c 694	f Dollars) 717	674(b) succession duties	28	61	57	56(c) miscellaneous	21	36	47	56Total direct taxes	110	791	821	7862. Personal expenditure on consumer goods and services- Goods: (a) Perishable-foods, tobacco, beverages, drugs, fuel, etc	1,644	4,305	4,852	5,074(b) Semi-durable-Clothing, house furnishings, auto accessories, etc	508	1,430	1,586	1,602(c) Durable-automobiles, furniture, household appliances, hardware, jewellery, etc	245	751	820	938(d) Miscellaneous	45	152	190	202Services	1,475	2,529	2,758	3,011Net Personal Expenditure Abroad	-56	-41	-123	-77Total Consumer Expenditure	3,861	9,126	10,083	10,7503. Personal saving- (a) personal saving excluding farm inventories	260	317	1,053	1,065(b) net changes in farm inventories	60	111	-65	-106Total personal saving	320	428	988	959t. Personal Income (1+2+3)	4,291	10,345	11,892	12,495
The Budget-Appendix
Saving
For the purpose of the National Accounts, saving is defined as being equal to investment.
Thus, a balance sheet can be constructed showing, on the one side, the sums which Canadians do not spend out of their incomes on immediate consumption-which are defined as saving-and, on the other side, the total amount spent for non-consumption goods such as factories, machinery, houses, additions to inventories, etc.-which are defined as investment.
Saving can therefore be regarded as the source of funds out of which investment expenditure is financed or, alternatively, investment expenditure can be regarded as providing an outlet for the savings set aside out of income.
A surplus of government revenue over expenditure adds to the total of saving. It is in effect a form of community saving. A government deficit, on the other hand, is a claim upon, and therefore a deduction from, private saving.

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949
		(Millions or Dollars)		
Personal saving	320	428	988	959Undistributed corporation profits	219	602	716	62537	-155	-84Inventory revaluation adjustment (*)	-56	-18	-4	3Depreciation allowances	582	1,009	1,141	1,277Government surplus (+) or deficit (-)(!)	-42	816	807	398Residual error of estimate (3)	-10	40	108	-93Total	1,013	2,914	3,601	3,085
0) The adjustment has been made only to grain held in commercial channels.
(2)	See Table 10.
(3)	See Tables 1 and 2.
Because of limited supplies of goods and services, particularly durables, and under the stimulus of loans and savings campaigns, personal saving was at a very high level during war years. During 1945, 1946 and 1947 consumption expenditures revived quickly and personal saving fell proportionately. In 1948, however, the trend was again reversed; incomes rose much more rapidly than expenditure for current consumption-probably because of sharply rising prices-leaving proportionately as much over for saving as in 1946. Personal saving remained at approximately the same level in 1949.
Corporate profits both before and after taxes were at levels somewhat below
1948.	Dividends paid out increased by $73 million, leaving retained profits of about $625 million as against $716 million in 1948.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949Corporate profits before taxes0)	618 -112	(Millions c 1,828 -724	f Dollars) 1,969 -710	1,914 -673
506 -287	1,104 -502	1,259 -543	1,241 -616
				
				
	219	602	716	625
				
(*) Includes depletion charges and is adjusted for corporate losses, renegotiation of war contracts and conversion to a calendar year basis.
(2) Taxes paid or payable in respect of the calendar year's income, excluding the refundable portion of the excess profit tax. (See Table 10).
(') Includes charitable contributions made by corporations. (See Table 3 Item 5(b)).
(<) See Table S.
The gradual return to a position of balance between the expenditure and revenue of federal, provincial and municipal governments is reflected in the decline in the amount of saving accounted for by government surplus from $807 million in 1948 to $398 million in 1949.
The other substantial change in private saving was the further reduction in undistributed profits of the Canadian Wheat Board which, during 1949, made substantial participation payments to producers.
table 7

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949
		(Millions of Dollars)		
Gross Home Investment		881	2,936	3,309	2,841
Net increase in foreign assets (including foreign				
exchange) adjusted (*)	123	17	399	150Residual error of estimate (2)	9	- 39	-107	94Total	1,013	2,914	3,601	3,085
0) Minor adjustments have been made to the figures appearing in Table 12. (*) See Tables 1 and 2.

The Budget-Appendix
Investment
The claims upon saving represented by investment expenditure in plant, equipment and housing were sustained at a high level in 1949. Net investment abroad and in foreign exchange, i.e., the net balance of international payments on current account, however, fell sharply from 1948 to 1949 (For more detailed discussion see section on Balance of International Payments). There was no appreciable investment in additional inventory.

[Stage Direction]
-	1939	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949
		(Millions or Dollars)		
Plant, Equipment, and Housing-Total(')	554	2,057	2,663	2,829New Residential Construction^)	145	492	647	753Other New Construction	126	564	806	847New Machinery and Equipment	283	1,001	1,210	1,229Inventories-Total	327	879	646	12Grain in Commercial Channels (3)	127	22	55	- 1Farm Grain and Livestock (*)	60	-111	- 65	-106All Other Inventories^)	140	968	656	119Gross Home Investment^)	
Percentage of Gross National Product	881 M%	2,936 22%	3,309 31%	2,841 18%
(') Includes private businesses and institutions, and publicly owned public utilities.
(') Excludes construction by Wartime Housing Limited which is included with Government expenditure on goods and services (Table 2).
(*) Value of physical change.
0) Change in value. Includes privately financed industrial and trade inventories.
(s) See Table 2, Item 3.
Analysis of investment expenditure in 1949 reveals some decline in capital expenditure by manufacturing industries and by trade, finance and commercial services, but this was more than offset by investment on a rising scale by primary industries, institutions and public utilities and in housing.
Capital expenditure by governments, too, rose substantially even though the policy of the Federal Government was to postpone projects wherever possible in order to avoid competition with private demand for labour and materials.
The forecast for 1950, prepared by the Economic and Research Development Branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce, is for a continued upward movement in over-all capital outlay. Expenditure by institutions, public utilities and government are likely to comprise an increasing proportion of the total program. House building activity may tend to level off.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
-	1946	1947	1948	Prelim. 1949	1950(*)Primary industries and construction industry	229 321 239 164 54 412 194	(Mill 395 539 379 203 80 533 290	ions of Do! 529 579 551 281 137 682 392	lars) 575 522 642 258 187 786 457	536 496 703 291 232 785 553
Trade, Finance and Commercial Services						
					
Direct Government	
Total Capital Expenditure	
Total Capital Expenditure as a percentage of G.N.P	
Total Capital Expenditure in Constant (1939) Dollars	1,613	2,419	3,151	3,427	3,59614	18	20	21	221,067	1,407	1,589	1,643	1,711
(*) Forecast.

[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Revenue and Expenditure of all Governments
In Table 10, "Government Transactions Related to the National Accounts", an attempt is made to bring together in one statement and under uniform headings the activities of all governments in Canada on a calendar year basis.
The table is designed to include only those transactions which have relevance for the National Accounts, and consequently the surpluses or deficits shown here do not agree with those shown in the various public accounts. It has been necessary to adjust the conventional accounting statements of fiscal year revenue and expenditure to exclude purely bookkeeping transactions as well as the purchase and sale of existing capital assets. Extra-budgetary funds such as unemployment insurance, workmen's compensation and pension funds have been added, and surpluses or deficits of Government enterprises are likewise included. In the federal accounts some of the more substantial adjustments are as follows: addition of national defence recoverable expenditure, allocation of war refunds to prior j'ears, adjustment of corporate taxes to an accrual basis, elimination of sales of war assets to business, and elimination of British Commonwealth Air Training Plan write-off from expenditure. In addition the federal figures have been adjusted to a calendar year basis by using the monthly figures published by the Comptroller of the Treasury. Government loans to foreign countries or accumulation of gold or foreign exchange are not included with government expenditure.
For purpose of analysis, expenditures by governments may be divided into two main categories: expenditures for the purchase of goods and services, and so-called transfer payments, i.e., family allowances, old age pensions, veterans benefits, the greater part of the interest on the public debt, etc., which do not arise from current production of goods and services. The first category represents the demands which governments place on the annual output of the nation Transfer payments, on the other hand, simply add to the sums available for [DOT] spending or saving by the recipient.

[Stage Direction]
PERCENT	DrD/TMT
80
40
0
1939	1940	1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948	1949
1292
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
Prelim.
(Millions of Dollars)
Government Revenue-
Direct Taxes-Persons	
Income and Excess Profits-
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal...
Succession Duties-
Federal	
Provincial	
Miscellaneous-
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal..
Direct Taxes-Corporations-
Income and Excess Profits-
Federal	
Provincial	
Withholding taxes-federal..
Indirect Taxes	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal.
Investment Income	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal.
Employer and Employee Contributions to Social Security and Pension Funds	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal	
Transfers from Other Governments- Provincial and Municipal	
Total Revenue	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal,
Deficit (or surplus-)	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal	
Total Revenue plus Deficit (or minus Surplus)
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal	
110	791	821	78646 15	694	717	67430	29	2628	31	28	303	4	6	718	32	. 41	49123	759	751	72098	652	588	54714	72	122	12611	35	41	47720	1,781	1,842	1,857310	1,136	1,085	1,043410	645	757	81499	345	346	365-11	115	105	124110	230	241	24134	181	223	2386	100	129	13928	81	94	9983	208	150	' 1811,169	4,065	4,133	4,147463	2,766	2,700	2,607706	1,299	1,433	1,54042	-816	-897	-398- 4	-717	-802	-48046	- 99	-5	821,211	3,249	3,326	3,749459	2,049	1,898	2,127752	1,200	1,428	1,622
The Budget-Appendix
TABLE 10-Concluded

[Stage Direction]
Total Expenditure.
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal.
Government Expenditure- Goods and Services	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal	
Transfer Payments	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal....
Subsidies	
Federal	
Provincial and Municipal....
Transfers to Other Governments- Federal	
1947
Prelim.
(Millions of Dollars)
724	1,551	1,787	2,108214	619	667	861510	932	1,120	1,247421	1,313	1,314	1,385180	1,051	1,010	1,013241	262	304	372-17	177	75	75-18	171	71	721	6	4	383	208	150	181
1,211
752
3,249
2,049
1,200
3,326
1,898
1,428
3,749
2,127
1,622
1294
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
During 1949 the civilian labour force of Canada, including Newfoundland, averaged approximately 5,200,000, a gain through natural increase and net immigration of 110,000 over 1948. Employment averaged 5,055,000, an increase of 80,000 over 1948. Unemployment, defined as those wholly unemployed and looking for work, averaged 145,000 in 1949, an increase of 30,000 over the previous year.
There is a considerable shift in and out of the labour force during certain seasons of the year. The labour force and employment is normally at its peak around September 1. The total number employed at the seasonal peak in 1949 numbered 5,255,000, an all-time high for Canada.
The following table presents a comparative picture of the civilian labour force, employment and unemployment for the years 1946-1949. The annual averages do not include Newfoundland which was first surveyed in October 1949. Results showed a total labour force in Newfoundland of 114,000 composed of
95,000	males and 19,000 females.

[Stage Direction]
THE LABOUR FORCE*
Annual Averages
Civilian Labour Force...
Male	
Female	
Unemployed	
Employed	
Paid Workers	
Farm	
Non-farm	
Self Employed	
Farm	
Non-farm	
Unpaid Family Workers
Farm	
Non-farm	
(Thousands of Persons)
1946	1947	1948	19494,794	4,908	4,982	5,0903,720	3,841	3,919	4,0021,074	1,067	1,063	1,088143	98	103	1334,651	4,810	4,879	4,9573,124	3,262	3,372	3,469146	119	134	1442,978	3,143	3,238	3,3251,126	1,158	1,160	1,160679	661	668	670447	497	492	490401	390	347	328360	335	294	27441	55	53	54
* Data do not include Newfoundland.
An indication of the trend of unemployment during the recent winter is provided by data on persons who have applied for work at National Employment Service offices. The average figures for November and December, 1949, were
206,000	and 274,000 respectively; and for January and February, 1950, an average of 362,000 and 377,000 respectively. Caution must be used in interpreting them as a measure of unemployment because they include some persons who had a job and exclude some unemployed persons who did not register. The increase in the number of persons looking for work was basically seasonal but reflected in some degree the impact of adverse weather conditions, lower overseas exports and currency revaluations. Present unemployment is concentrated in specific areas and industries; in many areas there is virtually full employment. The underlying employment trend is firm.

The Budget-Appendix
Labour income during 1949 was estimated at $7,630 million, 7% higher than in 1948. This increase was accounted for by a gain in employment of 2% and an over-all rise in wage rates estimated at slightly under 5%. Per capita weekly earnings, excluding agriculture, were estimated at about $43, compared to the 1948 average of $40.
1 owards the end of the year, earnings showed a tendency to level off. Wage settlements generally showed provision for smaller increases in wage rates. As well, the easing of the labour market tended to retard the upward movement of wage rates in the unorganized sections of the labour jnarket, such as agriculture.
Changes in hours wrnrked per week had little effect on labour income in the aggregate, although short-time work was of significance in certain industries and a reduction of the standard work week was evident in others. On the whole, the number of hours worked per week in manufacturing during the year showed little change, the average of 42-9 being down fractionally from the figure of 43-2 for 1948.


[Stage Direction]
3000
+
1500

[Stage Direction]
1500
+
1500
4500
1947
1949

[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
When goods are exported (unless they are given away) they give rise to payments or debts in favour of Canada. Similarly, when goods are imported they give rise to payments or debts in favour of the rest of the world. Other transactions, such as interest and dividend payments, the tourist trade, freight and shipping charges, also give rise to similar payments or debts in either direction. The difference between the debits and credits arising from these current transactions is referred to as the net balance of international payments on current account. When total credits exceed total debits within a year, the rest of the world has gone into debt to Canada or Canada has paid off some of her debt to the rest of the world. When total debits exceed total credits, the net position is, of course, reversed.

[Stage Direction]
BALANCE OF INTERNATIONAL PAYMENTS Estimated Current Account between Canada and All Countries
(Millions of Canadian dollars)
-	1939	1947	1948	1949 (>)Current Credits	2,723	3,030	2,988Exports (adjusted)	906	Non-monetary gold	184	99	119	139Tourist expenditures	149	251	282	288Interest and dividends	57	62	70	73Freight and shipping	102	322	337	310Inheritances and immigrants' funds	/ 59 \	69	S3	64Other current receipts	i "7	220	218	210Total Credits	1,457	3,746	4,139	4,072Current Debits	2,598	2,686Imports (adjusted)	713	2,535	Tourist expenditures	81	167	132	191Interest and dividends	306	337	32o	390Freight and shipping	119	278	275	257Inheritances and emigrants' funds	{m}	49	49	49Other current payments	333	307	306Total Debits	1,331	3,699	3,686	3,879Net Balance on Current Account	+126	+47	+453	+193
Estimated Geographical Distribution of the Net Balance on Current Account
-	1939	1947	1948	1949Between Canada and-	-116 +137 +39 {+66}	-1,135 +633 +241 +274 +34	-401 +488 +129 +229 +8	-604 +445 +145 +182 +25
+126	+47	+453	+193
				
(l) Estimates for 1949 are tentative and subject to significant alteration.

The Budget-Appendix
Canada's net surplus on current account of $193 million in 1949 was $260 million less than in 1948. The change is split evenly between commodity trade and other current transactions. About $190 million of the change is the result of an increase in Canadian payments, very largely in payments to the United States, arising from increased imports from that country. The other $70 million of the change is the result of a decrease in Canadian receipts, chiefly in receipts from E.R.P. countries other than the United Kingdom, and resulted mainly from a reduction in exports to those countries. There was very little change from 1948 to 1949 in either the value of exports to or of imports from the countries of the sterling area (including the United Kingdom); consequently Canada's surplus on current account with the sterling area was substantially the same as in the previous year.
Compared with 1948 there were in 1949 considerably increased exports of wheat, newsprint, non-ferrous metals, and a few types of fully manufactured goods, and substantially reduced exports of other agricultural products, especially of meats, of most other forest products, and of manufactured goods generally. Export prices were slightly higher in 1949 than in 1948 and the volume of exports in 1949 was lower than in 1948 by some 3%.
An appreciable decline occurred in imports of coal and petroleum. Otherwise imports generally were higher, including large increases in fruits and vegetables and motor vehicles and parts. Import prices were slightly higher in 1949 and there appears to have been little change in the volume of imports.
The available detail of Canada's international transactions on capital account in 1949 may be compared with 1948 as follows:
(Millions of Canadian Dollars) 1948	1949
Loans to United Kingdom and other governments (gross)	
-142	-120Government of Canada borrowing in the United States	
+150	-1
Increase ( -) in official reserves of gold and United States dollars
(U.S.S)	 -496	-119
Other capital, including exchange adjustments, errors and omissions +35	+46
Total2	 -453	-193
1	Excludes funds borrowed to retire securities guaranteed by the Government of Canada and payable in U.S. dollars.
2	Equal in size but opposite in sign to net balance on current account.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
(millions of U.S. dollars)
-	Exchange Fund Account and Bank of Canada	Other Government of Canada Accounts	Private (2)	TotalGold	U.S. dollars	U.S. dollars	U.S dollars	Gold and U.S. dollarsSept.15, 1939	204-9	33-8	22-4	132	393-1Dec. 31, 1939	218-0	54-8	33-4	98	404-2Dec. 31, 1940	136-5	172-8	20-8	2	332-1Dec. 31, 1941	135-9	28-2	23-5	187-6Dec. 31, 1942...	154-9	88-0	75-6	318-5Dec. 31, 1943	224-4	348-8	76-4	649-6Dec. 31, 1944	293-9	506-2	102-1	902-2Dec. 31, 1945	353-9	922-0	232-1	1,508-0Dec. 31, 1946	536-0	686-3	22-6	1,244-9Dec. 31, 1947	286-6	171-8	43-3	501-7Dec. 311 1948	401-3	574-5	22-0	997-8Dec. 31 i 1949	486-4	594-1	(>) 36-6	1,117-1
(*) Not including $18 2 million in United States dollars borrowed by the Government of Canada in August, 1949, and set aside for the retirement on February 1, 1950, of a security issue guaranteed by it and payable at the holder's option in United States dollars.
(2) Exclusive of working balances.


[Stage Direction]
1935-39 = 100

[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
Taking the year as a whole, price levels in Canada in 1949 were higher than in 1948. The year ended, however, with the indexes of both general wholesale prices and the cost of living several points below the postwar peak.
General wholesale prices reached their highest point in December 1948 at a level about double 1939. Subsequently there has been a decline of about 2%. The prices of Canadian farm products reached their peak somewhat earlier- in July of 1948-at a level more than two and a half times the 1939 average and have since declined by about 9%.
The decline in agricultural prices found its reflection in a decline in food prices to consumers, which form a high proportion of the items included in the cost-of-living index. As a result, in spite of rising rents, the cost-of-living index is now about 1% below its peak of August 1949. However, rent increases which took place under the recent changes in rentals regulations are not yet recorded in the official index.

[Stage Direction]
WHOLESALE PRICE INDEXES (1935-39 = 100)
Monthly Averages	Total	Canadian Farm Products	Fully and Chiefly Manufactured Goods1939	97-8	92-6	99-0 107-11940	107-6	96-1	1941	116-8	106-6	116-71942	124-1	127-1	120-8 122-	4 123-	01943	129-8	145-4	1944	133-0	155-3	1945	134-4	165-3	123-6 129-91946	141-1	177-0	1947	167-5	189-7	154-31948	199-1	229-6	184-4 188-4206-7	232-2	205-2	226-2	186-8204-5	224-2	185-2204-4	224-5	186-6203-0	225-2	187-0202-8	230-2	186-8203-2	231-4	186-8 187-0201-8	225-9	201-7	222-6	186-4203-9	219-7	187-8 187-7203-7	220-0	203-5	219-9	187-4203-8	217-2	187-7
1300
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
COST OF LIVING INDEXES (1935-39=100)
Monthly Averages	Canada	United States	Total	Food	Total	Food1939	101-5	100-6	99-4	95-21940	105-6	105-6	100-2	96-61941	111-7	116-1	105-2	105-51942	117-0	127-2	116-5	123-91943	118-4	130-7	123-6	138-01944	118-9	131-3	125-5	136-11945	119-5	133-0	128-4	139-11946	123-6	140-4	139-3	159-61947	135-5	159-5	159-2	193-81948	155 0	195-5	171-2	210-2159-6	202-2	170-9	204-8159-5	200-4	169-0	199-7159-2	199-1	169-5	201-6159-3	198-5	169-7	202-8159-5	199-5	169-2	202-4160-5	202-9	169-6	204-3July	162-1	207-2	168-5	201-7162-8	209-2	168-8	202-6162-3	207-0	169-6	204-2162-2	205-0	168-5	200-6161-7	203-3	168-6	200-8161-5	201-9	167-5	197-3161-0	199-4	166-9	196-0


[Stage Direction]
1935-39" 100

[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Part II

[Stage Direction]
Index
Page
1.	Introduction	
262.	Summary of Governmental Financial Operations during the year	
263.	Summary of the 1949-50 Revenue and Expenditure Statement	
274.	Analysis of Revenues	
305.	Comparison of Actual Revenue with Budget Forecast	
376.	Analysis of Expenditures	
3g7.	Estimated Balance Sheet Position at March 31, 1950	
448.	Analysis of Changes in Principal Liability Classifications	
469.	Summary of Security Issues and Redemptions	
4610.	Analysis of Changes in Principal Asset Classifications	
6011.	Indirect or Contingent Liabilities	
5312.	Supplementary Detailed Tables	
65
55946-84i
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix


[Stage Direction]
1.	Introduction
1.	The figures appearing in this part must be regarded as necessarily preliminary and subject to revision. Although the Government's fiscal year ends on March 31, the books must remain open for several weeks after that date in order to record various adjusting entries, as well as all payments up to April 30 made on account of expenditures originating in, and properly chargeable to, the current fiscal year. For these reasons final figures for the current year will not be available for some considerable time.
2.	SUMMARY OF GOVERNMENTAL FINANCIAL OPERATIONS

[Stage Direction]
2.	Total revenues of the Government for the year ending March 31, 1950, are now estimated at $2,548 million. Expenditures, on the other hand, are estimated at $2,437 million. On the basis of these figures it would appear that the Government's accounting or budgetary surplus for the current year will probably total something in the neighbourhood of $111 million compared with $595-5 million for the year ended March 31, 1949. As a result of the current year's estimated surplus of $111 million, the Government's net debt (i.e. the excess of total liabilities over total active assets) will reflect a reduction of an equivalent amount.
3.	In addition to collecting revenues and making expenditures in the narrow accounting or budgetary sense of those terms, the Government also receives and disburses substantial amounts of cash in other ways. These other receipts and disbursements relate to transactions which give rise to increases or decreases in the Government's assets and liabilities, and they do not, therefore, appear in what might be called the Government's income account for the year, nor do they enter into the calculation of the Government's annual surplus or deficit. In 1949-50 the total of these other disbursements exceeded the total of other receipts, and a large part of the cash provided by the 1949-50 surplus had to be used to finance the difference. The balance of cash available for the reduction of funded debt was, therefore, considerably reduced.
4.	The following summary shows the nature and extent of these nonincome account transactions and their effect upon the Government's net cash position. The figures indicate that although a total cash sum of $287 million became available to the Government as a result of the current year's budgetary surplus, this was reduced to an over-all "cash surplus" of only $67 million after financing the large cash requirements on non-income account.
(millions)
Net cash balance arising from the current year's budgetary surplus
(i.e., budgetary surplus of $111 million adjusted for non-cash items)*.	$287
Add other receipts-
Increases in annuity, pension, insurance and guaranty accounts... .	$ 99
Increases in floating debt, deposit and trust accounts, deferred credits
and sundry suspense accounts	 71
Repayments of loans-
By Canadian National Railways	 $20
By provincial and municipal governments	 4
By Crown agencies and others	 6

The Budget-Appendix
Deduct other disbursements-
Advances to the Foreign Exchange Control Board	 160
Loans to the United Kingdom and other governments (net)	 104
Loans to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	 100
Loans to the National Harbours Board	 20
Increases in other loans and investments (net)	 25
Acquisition of sinking funds	 1
Increases in Canada's subscriptions to the capital of the International Monetary Fund and of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development	 3
Cost of loan flotations (portion to be amortized)	 7
[Stage Direction]
	420
Cash surplus-i.e., balance available for debt reduction	 $ 67
5.	As shown above the total of other receipts during the year amounted to $200 million, while the total of other disbursements amounted to no less than $420 million. The Government nevertheless reduced its outstanding funded debt by a net cash amount of $486 million. This reduction in funded debt was made possible through the sale of bonds out of the Securities Investment Account. 1 his account is the one used to record temporary holdings by the Government of its own securities, such securities being held as a temporary investment of surplus cash balances.
6.	A reconciliation between the "cash surplus" of $67 million, the net cash reduction in funded debt of $486 million and the net change in the Government's cash position during the year, is shown below:
.	(millions)
Gash surplus-i.e. excess of total receipts from all sources over
total disbursements	 $ 67
Add-net sales of securities from Securities Investment Account..	430
[Stage Direction]
Deduct-net cash reduction in funded debt	 $486
Net increase in cash balances during the year (i.e. balance sheet
[Stage Direction]
increase of $13 million less $2 million of an increase effected through revaluation of currencies)	 $ n
To calculate the amount of cash made available to the Government as a result of the current year's surplus there must be added back to the accounting or budgetary surplus figure of $111 million the following items included in total expenditure which did not involve current outlays of cash: provision for possible losses on ultimate realization of active assets, $75 million; provision for conditional benefits under The Veterans Land Act, $7 million; the annual amortization of bond discounts and commissions, $10 million-assumption of part of Newfoundland s debt in accordance with Terms of Union, $02 million (after deducting rleTtembeiTo f^r^mm^r1'10'18 aSSetS &nd liabilities c°'>a«iuent upon the revaluation of currencies
3.	SUMMARY OF THE 1949-50 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENT
7.	The table which follows gives a summarized statement of revenues and expenditures for the year ended March 31, 1950, with comparable figures for the four preceding fiscal years. More detailed tables, in comparative form, may be found at the end of this Appendix.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
SUMMARY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (In millions of dollars)
Fiscal Year Ended March 31
-	1946	1947	1948	1949	Estimated 1950*	$	$	$	$Revenues	Ordinary revenues	2,363-2 0-4	2,588-5 0-1	2,629-8 0-1	2,649-1 0-1	2,489-0Special receipts and other credits	649-6	419-3	241-8	122-2	59-6Total Revenues	3,013-2	3,007-9	2,871-7	2,771-4	2,548-6Expenditures	Ordinary expenditures	1,061-9	1,236-2	1,380-0	1,573-4	1,712-2Capital expenditures	4*5	11-2	15-7	18*5	24-2War, demobilization and reconversion	464-1expenditures	4,002-9	1,314-8	634-4	425-6	Special expenditures	17-4	31-9	63-1	34-8	40-8Government-owned enterprises	1-3	10-7	18-7	39-7	52'3Other charges, including the write down	48-2	29-4	83-7	83-9	143-9of assets	Total Expenditures	5,136-2	2,634-2	2,195-6	2,175-9	2,437-5Budgetary Surplus or Deficit (-)	-2,123-0	373-7	676-1	595-5	111-18.	Total revenues, estimated at $2,548 million for 1949-50, are expected to show a decrease of $223 million from the total for the previous fiscal year. Total expenditures, on the other hand, are estimated at $2,438 million, an increase of $262 million over the total for 1948-49.9.	Ordinary revenues are estimated at $2,489 million, a reduction of $160 million from the total for the previous year. The total of $60 million for special receipts and credits represents a decrease of $62 million from the total of $122 million received in 1948-49. The reduction in these receipts, which consists largely of refunds of previous years' war, demobilization and reconversion expenditures and sales of surplus Crown assets, continues to reflect the normal decline which is to be expected in revenues from this source.10.	On the expenditure side, all categories contributed to the over-all increase of $262 million. The total of ordinary expenditures increased by $139 million (from $1,573 million in 1948-49 to $1,712 million in 1949-50) and was attributable largely to increases of $26-7 million in family allowances, $27-2 million in old age pensions and pensions to blind persons and $21-9 million in premium, discount and exchange expenditures. The total for demobilization and reconversion expenditures, more than half of which represents defence costs, increased by $38 million (from $426 million in 1948-49 to $464 million in the current year). Other charges, including the write-down of assets, reflect an increase of $60 million from $84 million in 1948-49 to $144 million in 1949-50. The remainder is accounted for by increases of $6 million in capital expenditures, $13 million in government-owned enterprises, and $6 million in special expenditures.
The Budget-Appendix


[Stage Direction]
939 1940 1941	1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950


[Stage Direction]
+
1000
2000 3000
1939 1940 1941	1942	1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950
FISCAL YEARS ENDING MARCH 31								
| _								
^ ^ ^	1 1		i 1		I		i	
DEFICIT *-								
	Ld							
+
1000
3000
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
4.	ANALYSIS OF REVENUES
11.	Estimated revenues for the year 1949-50, classified according to major categories, are presented in the following table, along with corresponding figures for the previous fiscal year.

[Stage Direction]
(In millions of dollars)
-	Fiscal Year Ended March 31				Increase (+) or Decrease (-) in 1949-50
	1950 (Estimated)		1949		
Amount	Percent	Amount	Percent	$	$	$Direct Taxes-	Individual Income Tax	611-5	24-0	762-6	27-5	- 151*1Corporation Income Tax	586-5	23-0	492-0	17-8	+ 94*5Excess Profits Taxes	- 2-5	- 01	44-8	1-6	- 47-3Tax on Interest, Dividends, Rents and	Royalties	45-5	1-8	43-4	1*6	4~ 2*1Succession Duties	28-5	1-1	25*5	0-9	+ 3-0Total Direct Taxes	1,269-5	49-8	1,368-3	49-4	-98-8Indirect Taxes-	229-0	9-0	223-0	8-0	-f* o*0215-5	8-5	204-7	7-4	+ 10-8Excise Taxes	568-0	22-3	636-1	23-0	- 68-1Other Indirect Taxes	4-0	0-1	4-0	0-1	Total Indirect Taxes	1,016-5	39-9	1,067-8	38-5	- 51-3Non-Tax Revenue-	84-0	3-3	80-6	2*9	+ 3-4Return on Investments	90-4	3-6	107-9	3-9	- 17*5Other Non-Tax Revenue	28-6	1-1	24-5	0-9	+ 4*1Total Non-Tax Revenue	203-0	8-0	2130	7-7	- 10-0Total Ordinary Revenue	2,489-0	97-7	2,649-1	95-6	-160-1Special Receipts and Credits	59-6	2-3	122-3	4-4	- 62-7Total Revenue	2,548-6	100-0	2,771-4	100-0	-222-812.	It will be noted that 49-8% of grand total revenues for the year was derived from direct taxes, 39-9% was obtained from indirect taxes, and the remaining 10-3% was attributable to non-tax revenues and special receipts and credits.
Tax on Personal Incomes.
13.	The personal income tax yielded an estimated total of $611-5 million and retained its position as the largest single source of revenue. Total collections from this tax showed a decrease of $151-1 million from the 1948-49 total due to the reduction in tax rates announced in March, 1949, effective from January 1, 1949. The full effect of this reduction in rates was not apparent in 1949-50, because of substantial payments received during the fiscal year in respect of 1948 and previous taxation years, and also because tax deductions at the source continued for a period at the higher rates.

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS	MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
10 0 0
8 0 0
60 0
40 0
2 0 0
Corporation Income and Excess Profits Taxes.
14.	Corporation income taxes yielded a total of $586-5 million, an increase of $94-5 million over the previous year's total. This increase is attributable to the decline during the year in tax refunds and adjustments in connection with the re-negotiation of war contracts, and apparently to somewhat higher profits in 1949.
The excess profits tax ceased to be levied on profits earned after December 31, 1947. Small clean-up payments were received during the year but were exceeded by refunds and adjustments.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix


[Stage Direction]
Taxes on Interest, Dividends, Rents and Royalties.
15.	Revenues under this heading come from withholding taxes on certain payments made to non-residents. The 1949-50 total of $45 [DOT] 5 million is approximately $2 [DOT] 1 million greater than for the previous year, an increase largely due to a higher level of dividend payments during 1949.
Succession Duties.
16.	Revenue from succession duties is estimated at $28 * 5 million for 1949-50. This is an increase of $3-0 million over the previous year's total.
Customs Duties.
17.	Net revenues from customs duties for the current year are estimated at $229-0 million, representing a moderate increase of $6-0 million over the 1948-49 total.

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
MILLIONS or DOLLARS	MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
1939	1940	1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948	1949	19 50
Excise Duties.
18.	Excise duties are levied exclusively on alcoholic beverages and tobacco products. In 1949-50 they yielded an estimated total revenue of $215-5 million, an increase of approximately $10-8 million over the previous year. Gross receipts from these duties, before deducting refunds, are divided as follows: $104-5 million from alcoholic beverages ($101-1 million in 1948-49), and $114-0 million from tobacco products ($106-2 million in 1948-49).
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS	MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
200
0
1939	1940	1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948	1949	1950
Excise Taxes.
19.	Excise taxes are levied on a variety of items under the Excise Tax Act. Total net collections for the year are estimated at $568-0 million, a reduction of about $68-1 million from 1948-49. The most important of these taxes in terms of revenue is the sales tax, which yielded a gross revenue of $415-5 million, an increase of $25-3 million over the previous year. This increase took place despite the fact that during the year fuel oils were added to the list of exempt items.
20.	The second largest revenue source among the excise taxes is the tax on tobacco products which yielded approximately $83-4 million. This is an increase of 7 [DOT] 3% over the previous year's total reflecting the continued upward trend in tobacco consumption. Other tax sources showing small amounts of increase during the year were cigarette papers and tubes ($71,000) and wines ($110,000).
21.	Despite these increases the over-all yield from excise taxes was reduced from the preceding year by the elimination, or reduction in rates, of taxes on a number of commodities and services. The taxes on beverages, candy and chewing gum, transportation tickets and communications were all repealed on March 22, 1949, and only yielded clean-up amounts during the year. The taxes on toilet articles, luggage, matches and lighters, smokers' supplies, and pens and pencils, were all reduced to 10% on March 22, 1949, and as a result yielded sharply reduced revenue during the year. The change of the retail purchase tax to a 10% tax at the manufacturer's level resulted in a lower yield from this source. The revenue from the tax on automobiles and rubber tires and tubes also showed a decline from the previous year. This occurred because the revenue from this source in the previous year reflected in part the temporary high tax rates imposed on automobiles up until the end of July, 1948, as part of the exchange conservation program.

The Budget-Appendix
22.	The tax sources showing the largest decrease, and the amount of the decrease in each case, are given below:
Estimated
decrease
from
Beverages	$26,059,000
Transportation and communications	 25,084,000
Candy and chewing gum	 18,868,000
Toilet preparations and soaps	 3,337,000
Trunks, bags, luggage, etc	 3,275,000
Automobiles, rubber tires and tubes	 2,743,000
Matches and lighters	 2,332,000


[Stage Direction]
Other Indirect Taxes.
23.	Small amounts of tax revenue were derived from the tax on chartered bank note circulation; from the tax on the net premium income of insurance companies; from a tax on the export of electric energy from Canada; and from a tax on the export of furs from the Northwest Territories. Total revenue from all these sources in 1949-50 is estimated at $4-0 million, about the same as the previous year.
Non-Tax Revenues.
24.	Non-tax revenues for 1949-50 are estimated at $203-0 million, a decrease of $10 million from the 1948-49 total. Revenue classified as "Return on Investments", is expected to reach $90-4 million in 1949-50 as compared with a total of $107 [DOT] 9 million in 1948-49. The larger items entering into total receipts under this classification are: interest on advances to the Canadian National
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Railways, $21-8 million; Bank of Canada profits, $20-4 million; interest on loans to, and operating profits of, the Foreign Exchange Control Board, $16-0 million; interest on bonds held in Securities Investment Account, $5-6 million; interest on loans to foreign governments under part II of The Export Credits Insurance Act, 815-0 million; and interest on advances under the Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land Act, 83 [DOT] 5 million.
25.	Also included in the general category of non-tax revenues are post office receipts, which are estimated at 884 [DOT] 0 million for 1949-50 as compared with a total of 880 [DOT] 6 million during 1948-49. It may be of interest to note that the total costs of operating the Post Office Department during the year are estimated at 883 [DOT] 1 million, so that receipts on this account exceeded costs by approximately 80 [DOT] 9 million. In making this comparison, however, it should be borne in mind that the total shown for Post Office receipts does not reflect the value of services rendered free of charge to other departments. Similarly the total shown for operating expenses does not reflect any charges for premises owned by the Government and occupied by the Post Office Department.
26.	Other non-tax revenues of $28-6 million represent receipts derived from the following sources: services and service fees, $10-6 million; privileges, licences, and permits, 87-8 million; bullion and coinage, $4-1 million; proceeds from sales of publications, experimental farm produce, etc., $3 [DOT] 0 million; refunds of previous years' expenditures, 81-3 million; and miscellaneous non-tax receipts, 81-8 million.
Special Receipts and Credits.
27.	The total of Special Receipts and Credits for the fiscal year 1949-50 is estimated at 859-6 million as compared with total receipts of 8122-3 million for the preceding year. Special Receipts and Credits are made up largely of sales of surplus Crown assets and sundry refunds arising out of war, demobilization and reconversion expenditures of previous years. The following summary gives an estimate of the principal items and receipts under this general heading,-
Millions
Receipts from the Crown Assets Disposal Corporation, after allowing for transfers to "Active Assets" of amounts applicable to "Balances Receivable under Agreements of Sale of
Crown Assets"	 $17-5
Amount to be recovered from contractors and Income Tax Division of the Department of National Revenue in respect of re-negotiation of war contracts with private contractors	 16-0
Amount received from the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation representing a sum in excess of the 85 million
reserve fund established by the Company	 6-5
Payments by foreign governments in settlement of military
relief supplies	 8-7
Amount to be credited to revenue in connection with Park Steamship Company Limited vessels chartered by the
United Kingdom Government	 2-7
Estimated surplus of the Canadian Arsenals Limited	 2-0
Kental of land and buildings, revenue from meals and quarters and sundry receipts received by the Department of National
Defence	    3-3
Miscellaneous receipts, sundry departments	 2-9
8	59-6

The Budget-Appendix
5.	COMPARISON OF ACTUAL REVENUE WITH BUDGET FORECAST
28.	The total revenues now estimated for the year 1949-50 will be only $3-6 million more than the revised forecast of revenues made in the budget speech of October 20, 1949. The revenues from sales tax, personal income tax and corporation income tax proved more buoyant than expected last March. By October it was possible to make a more accurate estimate and the revenues actually received during the year from all sources are quite close to the forecast made at that time.	*

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Source of Revenue	Budget Forecast of Revenue (Oct. 20, 1949)	Actual Revenue (Estimated)	Increase (+) or Decrease (-) in Revenue as Compared with Budget Forecast235-0	229-0	-6-0215-0	215-5	+0-5 -1-9406-0	404-1	168-0	163-9	-41603-0	611-5	+8-5 -1-5588-0	586-5	48-0	45-5	-2-5- 2-5	-2-526-0	28-5	+2-540	4-0	
2,293 0 202-0	2,286-0 203-0	-7-0
			+ 1-0
			
	2,495-0 50-0	2,489-0 59-6	-6-0 +9-6
			
			
	2,545-0	2,548-6	+3-6
			
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
6.	ANALYSIS OF EXPENDITURES
29.	The table which follows presents a summary of expenditures, by major classifications, for the fiscal year 1949-50, together with corresponding figures for the previous fiscal year.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
-	Fiscal Year Ended March 31				Increase or Decrease (-)
	1950 (Estimated)		1949		
	Amount	Per Cent	Amount	Per Cent	
Ordinary Expenditure-					
Public Debt Charges-					
Interest on Public Debt	439-2	18-0	465-1	21-4	-25-9Other Debt Charges	10-5	0-4	9-7	0-4	0-S449-7	18-4	474-8	21-8	-25-1Subsidies and Compensation to Provinces	under Tax Agreements (including Transi-	tional Grant to Newfoundland)	103-9	4-3	101-4	4-7	2-5Family Allowances	297-6	12-2	270-9	12-5	26-7Old Age Pensions and Pensions to Blind	Persons	94-0	3-9	66-8	3-1	27-2Unemployment Insurance Act-	Administration and Government's Con-	tribution	46-5	1-9	39-1	1-8	7-422-0	0-9	0-1	21-9Agriculture	25-0	1-0	20-4	0-9	4-618-3	0-8	18-346-3	2-1	-46-322*9	0-9	22-9National Revenue	51-0	2-1	49-3	2-3	1-7Post Office	83-1	3-4	77-6	3-6	5-5Public Works	66-8	2-7	50-6	2-3	16-226-1	1-1	26-1Trade and Commerce	36-3	1-5	26-9	1-2	9-4Transport	54-7	2-2	41-5	1-9	13-2Veterans Affairs	175-2	7-2	183-0	8-4	- 7-8Other Departments	139-1	5-7	124-8	5-7	14-3Total Ordinary Expenditure	1,712-2	70-2	1,573-4	72-3	138-8Capital Expenditure	24-2	1-0	18-5	0-8	5-7Demobilization and Reconversion Expen-	DITURE-	National Defence (Army, Navy and Air	Services and Defence Research)	364-5	14-9	254-9	11-7	109-6Veterans Affairs	52-8	2-2	87-3	4-0	-34-5Wartime Prices and Trade Board (including	subsidies, drawback claims of millers, and	administrative costs)	4-0	0-2	29-2	1-3	-25-2Agriculture	22-5	0-9	23-2	1-1	- 0-7Trade and Commerce	6-5	0-3	13-8	0-6	- 7-3Other Departments	13-8	0-6	17-2	0-8	- 3-4Total Demobilization and Reconversion	Expenditure	464-1	19-1	425-6	19-6	38-5Special Expenditure	40-8	1-7	34-8	1-6	6-0Government Owned Enterprises	52-3	2-1	39-7	1-8	12-6Other Charges	143-9	5-9	83-9	3-9	60-0Grand Total Expenditure	2,437-5	100-0	2,175-9	100-0	261-6
The Budget-Appendix Ordinary Expenditures
Debt Charges
30.	Interest on public debt was again the largest single item of government expenditure, the estimated total of $439 * 2 million for 1949-50 being 18% of the total expenditure for the year. Of the total interest payments, $408 million represents interest paid on the government's outstanding funded debt, while the balance of $31-2 million represents interest paid or credited to various annuity, superannuation, insurance and trust accounts. The substantial decrease of $25-9 million from 1948-49 is attributable in part to a reduction in the outstanding funded debt and in part to the absence of any payment during 1949-50 comparable to that in 1948-49 for the accumulated interest on the 1943 and 1944 refundable portion of personal income taxes, which were repaid in March, 1949. The reduction of $10-8 million in the payment of interest on the outstanding funded debt, and of $19-1 million on the payment of interest on the refundable portion of personal income taxes, was partially offset by an increase of $4 million in interest paid or credited to the various annuity, superannuation, insurance and trust funds.
31.	The annual charges for the amortization of discounts and commissions, for other costs of new loan flotations which are not amortized, and for miscellaneous debt servicing expenses bring the total of all public debt charges for the year to $449 [DOT] 7 million.
Payments to Provinces
32.	Payments to provinces for statutory subsidies and compensation under the Dominion-Provincial Tax Rental Agreements amounted to $103-9 million. The net increase of $2-5 million over the total for the previous year is explained in the following table.
	Fiscal Year Ended March 31		Increase or Decrease (-)
	1950 (Estimated)	1949	
	(millions of dollars)		
All Provinces (excluding Newfoundland)-			
Statutory subsidies	17-3	17-1	0-2Compensation under tax rental agreements	73-4	84-3	-10-990-7	tot 4	-10-7N e \vf oundland-	Statutory subsidy	1-9	-	1-9Compensation under tax rental agreement	4-8	-	4-8Transitional grant	6-5	-	6-5,	1S-S	-	1S-Z103-9	101-4	2-5
A reduction of $20-2 million, equivalent to the amount which it is anticipated that the Government will have paid during the year to the seven provinces participating in the 1947 tax rental agreements on account of collections of the provincial 5% corporation taxes, offset by a general increase of $9-3 million in basic payments, accounts for the net decrease of $10-9 million in tax compensa-iion payments.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Details of payments, by provinces, for the current fiscal year are:
-	Statutory Subsidies	Compensation under the Dominion-Provincial Tax Rental Agreements	Transitional Grant	Total
		(millions of dollars)		
Newfoundland	1-9	4-8	6-5	13-2Nova Scotia	2-0	9-8	11-8Prince Edward Island	0-7	1-8	2-5New Brunswick	1-6	7-6	9-2Quebec	2-9	2-9Ontario	3-1	-	3-1Manitoba	1-8	11-0	12-8Saskatchewan	2-1	12-6	14-7Alberta	2-1	12-3	14-4British Columbia	10	18-3	-	19-319-2	78-2	6-5	103-9
Family Allowances, Old Age Pensions and Pensions to Blind Persons
33.	Payments for family allowances are estimated at $297-6 million for 1949-50, representing approximately 12-2 per cent of the total expenditures for the year. Part of the estimated increase of $26-7 million over the preceding year is attributable to the payment of $9-8 million to residents of Newfoundland. Elimination of the reduction in allowances payable for children after the fourth child, the reduction in the period of residence in Canada required for immigrants and settlers to one year prior to registration, and the natural increase in population in the eligible age groups, account for the remainder of the increase.
34.	Expenditures for old age pensions and pensions to blind persons are expected to total $94 million, an increase of approximately $27 [DOT] 2 million over the total for 1948-49. Of the total increase, $2-2 million is attributable to payments to residents of Newfoundland; the remainder is due to an increase from $30 to $40 per month in the basic rate of pension provided in legislation enacted in April, 1949, and to an increase in the numbers receiving aid.
35.	The estimated distribution of these payments, by provinces, is as follows:
-	Family Allowances	Old Age Pensions and Pensions to Blind PersonsNewfoundland	(millions 9-8 15-3 2-4 13-4 95-9 84-9 15-7 190 19-	8 20-	8 0-6	of dollars) 2-2 6-4 0-9 5-5 23-7 29-1 5-8 5-6 5-4 9-4Nova Scotia	Prince Edward Island	New Brunswick	Quebec	Ontario	Manitoba	Saskatchewan	Alberta	British Columbia	
297-6	94-0

The Budget-Appendix
Premium, Discount and Exchange
36.	The revaluation of the Canadian dollar on September 19, 1949 is chiefly responsible for the increase of $21-9 million in premium, discount and exchange expenditures. Assets and liabilities payable in sterling and United States dollars, previously carried on the balance sheet of Canada at £1 sterling = $4-03 Canadian and $1 U.S. = $1 Canadian, were revalued as of that date to £1 sterling =$3-08 Canadian and $1 U.S. = $1-10 Canadian. An increase of $35 [DOT] 7 million in net indebtedness payable in United States dollars (consisting of an exchange debit of $39-9 million on matured and unmatured funded debt and outstanding interest, less a credit of $4-2 million on cash and securities held in New York) was offset by a decrease of $14-4 million in net indebtedness payable in sterling (consisting of an exchange credit of $19-4 million on matured and unmatured funded debt and outstanding interest, less a debit of $5-0 million on cash and securities held in London).
Citizenship and Immigration Mines and Technical Surveys Resources and Development
37.	During the year the functions and services of the Department of Mines and Resources and the Department of Reconstruction and Supply were transferred to the newly created Departments of Cit'zenship and Immigration, Mines and Technical Surveys and Resources and Development. The administration of Indian Affairs and Immigration Services was transferred from the Department of Mines and Resources to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, which also took over the citizenship and citizen registration services which formerly came under the Secretary of State. The administration of mines, and topographic, geological, hydrographic and geodetic surveys and certain other technical services, including the operation of the Dominion observatories, was transferred from the Department of Mines and Resources to the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. The Department of Resources and Development took over the forests, water resources, wild life, national parks and other services, including the administration of the Northwest and Yukon Territories, from the Department of Mines and Resources and the housing and planning and development services, and the administration of the Canadian Government Travel Bureau and the National Film Board from the Department of Reconstruction and Supply.
38.	To compare satisfactorily the expenditures on these services as between the years 1948-49 and 1949-50, it is necessary to consider the expenditures of these departments together. The following table is a comparative summary of the expenditures for the last two years:
-	Fiscal Year ended March 31	
	1950 (Estimated)	1949
	(millions 18-3 22-9 26-1	of dollars) 46-3 3-4 0-2
		
		
		
		
		
		
	67-3	49-9
The net increase of $17-4 million is accounted for in part by increases in payments under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, and in part by an extension of services and a general increase in service costs.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix Public Works
39.	Public Works expenditures still reflect the policy in effect during recent years of deliberately deferring, wherever possible, all expenditures on new construction and equipment. There was however an increase of approximately $16-2 million over the total for the preceding year, accounted for by a general increase in operational, maintenance and repair costs for public works and buildings and in the costs of dredging and improving harbours and rivers.
40.	A general expansion of Air Services, with expenditures of $24 [DOT] 1 million in 1949-50 as compared with the total of $15-9 million in the previous year, accounts for the major part of the increase of $13-2 million in the expenditures of the Department of Transport. The remainder is attributable largely to a general increase in the costs of departmental services.
Veterans Affairs
41.	The ordinary expenditures of the Department of Veterans Affairs for 1949-50 are estimated at $175-2 million, a decrease of $7-8 million as compared with the total for the previous year. The greater part of this decrease is attributable to a reduction in payments of pensions to veterans.
Transport


[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix Capital Expenditures.
42.	Expenditures charged to capital account are estimated at $24 [DOT] 2 million for the fiscal year as compared with a total of $18-5 million for 1948-49. The principal items in this category are the costs of constructing and improving civil airways and airports, the costs of dredging the St. Lawrence ship channel, and expenditures for construction and improvement of terminal facilities for the Prince Edward Island Car Ferry and Terminals.
Demobilization and Reconversion Expenditures.
43.	Demobilization and Reconversion expenditures for 1949-50 are estimated at $464 [DOT] 1 million, an increase of $38 [DOT] 5 million as compared with the total of $425-6 million for the previous year. An increase of $109-6 million in the expenditures of the Department of National Defence for Army, Navy and Air Services and for Defence Research was offset by decreases of $34-5 million for the Department of Veterans Affairs, $25-2 million for Wartime Prices and Trade Board, $7-3 million for the Department of Trade and Commerce, and a total of $4-1 million for other departments.
44.	The greater part of the decrease in the demobilization and reconversion expenditures of the Department of Veterans Affairs is due to substantial reductions of $20 million in post-discharge rehabilitation benefit payments, and $13-3 million in payments of war service gratuities and re-establishment credits.
45.	Of the estimated decrease of $25-2 million in the expenditures of the Wartime Prices and Trade Board, $14-9 million is accounted for by a decrease in the cost of subsidies, and $9-7 million by a reduction in the amount of payments of drawback claims to millers.
46.	Reductions of $2-4 million in payment of production and transportation subsidies for Canadian steel producers, and of $2-6 million in the cost of administration, reconversion and operation of Crown companies and plants, account for the reduction in the demobilization and reconversion expenditure of the Department of Trade and Commerce.
Special Expenditures.
47.	Special expenditures are estimated at $40-8 million for the year, an increase of $6 million compared with the 1948-49 expenditures. Increases of $4-2 million under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act for the deficit of the Prairie Farm Emergency Fund and of $7-4 million in agricultural and other projects, are offset by a decrease of $5 million due to the grant in 1948-49 to British Columbia for emergency relief and rehabilitation in connection with the Fraser River flood disaster. The principal items making up the 1949-50 total of expenditures are: the deficit of the Prairie Farm Emergency Fund, $12-8 million; expenditures under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, $3 million; the net operating loss of the Agricultural Prices Support Account for 1948-49, in connection with the 1947 and 1948 Nova Scotia apple crops and the 1948 Ontario crop of white beans, $3-5 million; irrigation and water conservation projects in the prairie provinces, $7-1 million; the deficit of the Canadian Wheat Board for 1947 and 1948 flaxseed and 1948 rapeseed operations, etc., $4-6 million; and Canada's share of the cost of repairing and reconstructing dykes and other protection of works in the Fraser Valley, $4-1 million.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Government Owned Enterprises.
48.	Expenditures under this heading consist of the operating deficits of, and non-active loans to, wholly owned governmental enterprises established prior to world war II.
49.	The increase of 812-6 million in this category of expenditures as compared with the previous year is accounted for largely by an increase of $8-5 million in the deficit of the Canadian National Railways from $33-5 million for the calendar year 1948 to $42 million for the year 1949. The over-all C.N.R. deficit for the year includes all interest charges paid on government advances. It should be noted, therefore, that although the charges to the government's expenditures for 1949-50 reflect the absorption of the C.N.R.'s total deficit of 842 million, the government's revenues for the year also included, under "Return on Investments", an amount of 821-8 million received from the railways for interest on such advances.
50.	Other charges under this classification include 84-3 million for the 1949 operating deficit of Trans-Canada Air Lines (as compared with the 1948 deficit of 82-9 million); 81-2 million for the 1949 operating deficit of the Prince Edward Island Car Ferry and Terminals (81-2 million in 1948) and 84-3 million for losses of, and non-active loans to, the National Harbours Board (82 million in 1948-49).
Other Charges, Including the Write-Down op Assets.
51.	The total expenditures for the fiscal year in this category are estimated at 8143-9 million, an increase of 860 million as compared with the total of 883-9 million for 1948-49. The increase is attributable to the non-recurring charge of 862-3 million in connection with the assumption by Canada of part of the Newfoundland debt in accordance with the Terms of Union.
52.	The largest single item is again an amount of 875 million transferred to the general reserve for possible losses on ultimate realization of active assets. This reserve was established in 1940-41, and 825 million was set aside annually from that time up to and including the fiscal year 1946-47. In 1947-48, 1948-49 and again this year, the annual provision has been $75 million-the larger provision being deemed advisable to offset the charges that have been made to the reserve during recent years and to establish the reserve at a level commensurate with the government's active assets. The reserve now stands at $320-8 million.
53.	Also included under this classification is the reserve provision of $6-6 million for conditional benefits under the Veterans' Land Act.
7.	ESTIMATED BALANCE SHEET POSITION AT MARCH 31, 1950
54.	The following table presents, in summary form, the Government's estimated balance sheet position as at March 31, 1950, with the comparable figures for March 31,1949.

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
(In millions of dollars)
	Fiscal Year Ended March 31		Increase or Decrease (-)
	1950 (Estimated)	1949	
	$	$	$
Liabilities			
Floating Debt	494-2	450-7	43-5Deposit and Trust Accounts	136-6	107-5	29-1Annuity, Insurance, Pension and Guaranty Accounts	816-6	718-0	98-6Deferred Credits	11-7	4-4	7-3Sundry Suspense Accounts	68-7	59-6	9-1Province Debt Accounts	11-9	11-9	Reserve for conditional benefits-Veterans' Land Act	19-9	13-3	6-6Funded Debt	15,191-6	15,585-0	-393-4Total Liabilities	16,751-2	16,950-4	-199-2Active Assets	Cash and Other Current Assets	1,428-8	1,660-3	-231-5Loans to, and Investments in, Crown Agencies	1,163-0	1,058-9	104-1Other Loans and Investments	2,724-6	2,578-6	146-02-3	2-3	Deferred Charges	62-6	65-8	- 3-2Sundry Suspense Accounts	25-7	54-2	- 28-5Total Active Assets	5,407-0	5,420-1	- 13-1Less reserve for possible losses on ultimate realization of	active assets	-320-8	-245-8	- 75-0Net Active Assets	5,086-2	5,174-3	- 88-1Net Debt (Excess of Liabilities over Net Active Assets)	11,665-0	11,776-1	-111-155.	The aggregate liabilities of the Government at March 31, 1950, are estimated at $16,751 [DOT] 2 million, a reduction of $199 [DOT] 2 million from the comparable total at the end of the previous year. Unmatured funded debt outstanding, including bonds, treasury bills, deposit certificates and the estimated refundable portion of excess profits taxes, accounts for $15,191-6 million or approximately 91 per cent of all liabilities. Of the total unmatured funded debt now outstanding, only $499-7 million, or approximately 3-3 per cent is payable in foreign currencies-$437-8 million payable in United States dollars and $61-9 million in pounds sterling. A complete statement in tabular form of the Government's unmatured funded debt at March 31, 1950, with details of interest rates, dates of maturity, annual interest charges, and principal amounts for each loan may be found at the end of this Appendix.56.	Floating debt, consisting of outstanding cheques and interest, matured funded debt and similar demand liabilities is estimated at $494-2 million. Amounts at the credit of annuity, insurance, pension and guaranty accounts are expected to total $816-6 million.57.	The other principal items on the liabilities side of the balance sheet are: deposit and trust accounts (consisting of moneys deposited with or held in trust by the Receiver General for various purposes), $136-6 million; sundry suspense accounts (where some uncertainty as to disposition exists), $68-7 million; reserve for conditional benefits under the Veterans' Land Act, $19-9 million; province debt accounts (representing settlements arising from agreements at the time of confederation). $11-9 million; and deferred credits (consisting of balances whose ultimate accounting treatment is known, but which are held until certain conditions are met), $11-7 million.
The Budget-Appendix
58.	Offsetting these liabilities, and in a measure explaining their existence -for a substantial portion of the total debt is attributable to loans, advances, and investments-are the Government's active assets. Essentially, these consist of assets which yield interest, profits, or dividends, together with very liquid assets such as cash and departmental working funds.
It is estimated, although some of the items are very difficult to forecast, that the totals of the principal asset categories at March 31,1950, will be mash and other current assets, $1,428-8 million; loans to, and investments in, Crown agencies, $1,163 million; other loans and investments, $2,724-6 million; deferred charges (discounts and commissions on loan flotations in the process of being amortized over the life of the loans), $62-6 million; sundry suspense accounts, $25-7 million; and province debt accounts, $2-3 million.
59.	The reserve for possible losses on the ultimate realization of active assets which now stands on the books at $320 [DOT] 8 million is shown on the balance sheet as a deduction from the total of the active assets.
8.	ANALYSIS OF CHANGES IN PRINCIPAL LIABILITY CLASSIFICATIONS DURING THE YEAR
60.	The most significant change on the liabilities side of the balance sheet was again the substantial reduction in the Government's outstanding funded debt. The unmatured funded debt decreased from $15,585 million at March 31, 1949 to an estimated total of $15,191-6 million at March 31, 1950, representing a total net reduction of $393-4 million. The various loan redemptions and flotations which resulted in this net decrease are described in greater detail in the following section.
61.	Annuity, pension, insurance and guarantee accounts show an estimated increase of $98-6 million, attributable largely to increases of $59-3 million in government annuities; $16 million in the permanent forces pension fund; $8-9 million in the Civil Service Superannuation account; and $7-6 million in the cash balance of the Unemployment Insurance Fund.
62.	It is estimated that there will be an increase of $43-5 million in floating debt. An increase of $49-4 million in the amount of demand notes payable to the International Monetary Fund is offset by a decrease of $4-4 million in the amount of such notes payable to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
63.	Other increases on the liabilities side of the balance sheet are: deposit and trust accounts, $29 [DOT] 1 million ($24 [DOT] 1 million of which is attributable to the deposit by the Government of Newfoundland of a portion of its financial surplus, as provided under the Terms of Union); sundry suspense accounts, $9-1 million; deferred credits, $7-3 million; and reserve for conditional benefits under the Veterans' Land Act, $6 [DOT] 6 million.
9.	SUMMARY OF SECURITY ISSUES AND REDEMPTIONS

[Stage Direction]
64.	During the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950, Government obligations totalling $3,137-4 million and all payable in Canada matured or were called for redemption. The financing of these retirements was effected as follows:
(Millions)
By refunding or conversion into new issues	 $ 2,213-3
By proceeds of new borrowings-
Sale of Canada Savings Bonds Series IV	 293 [DOT] 2
Sale of Deposit Certificates (part)	 45-0
From available cash	 585-9
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
65.	The retirement of $585-9 million out of available cash represents the net reduction achieved during the year in the total funded debt payable in Canadian dollars.
66.	Funded debt payable in United States funds increased by $139-8 million in the fiscal year. Most of this increase represented merely a switch from guaranteed debt to direct debt resulting from the $100 million twenty-five year 2|% bonds dated September 1, 1949, which were issued in New York in August, 1949, at a cost to the Government of 2-79%. The proceeds of this issue to the extent of $98-8 million were sold to the Canadian National Railways and the National Harbours Board to provide United States dollars to redeem obligations of these agencies payable in U.S. dollars, which bore the guarantee of the Government of Canada. In addition, Canada's funded debt payable in United States dollars was written up by $39-8 million due to the revaluation of the Canadian dollar in September, 1949.
G *. Funded debt payable in pounds sterling increased during the fiscal year by $52 * 6 million. This was due to the assumption as of April 1, 1949, in accordance with the Terms of Union, of liability for $71-7 million of Newfoundland 3% Guaranteed Stock less a reduction of $19 [DOT] 1 million in the amount of sterling debt expressed in Canadian dollars as a result of the revaluation of the pound in September, 1949.

[Stage Direction]
68.	From the above analysis it will be seen that the over-all reduction in the Government's outstanding funded debt during the year amounted to $393-4 million, i.e., the net reduction of $585-9 million in Canadian debt less the increase of $139-8 million in funded debt payable in New York and the net increase of $52-6 million in funded debt payable in sterling.
1324
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
69.	It is interesting to note that the average coupon rate on the Government's outstanding funded debt at the close of the current fiscal year is estimated at $2-61%. The comparable figure at the close of the previous fiscal year was $2-64% and on March 31, 1939 was 3-52%.

[Stage Direction]
1920	1925	1930	1935	1940	1945	1950
70.	More complete details of redemptions and new issues of securities during the year are set out in the following tables.

[Stage Direction]
Maturity or Call Date	Interest Rate	Where Payable	Amount
	%		$
May 1, 1949	t	Canada	200,000,000July 1, 1949	4	Canada	33,293,471Sept. 1, 1949	2	Canada	550,000,000Sept. 2, 1940	2	Canada	100,000,000Oet. 1, 1949	3	Canada	324,945,700Nov. 1, 1949	41	Canada	2S9,693,300Nov. 1, 1949	3	Canada	200,000,000Nov. 1, 1949	13	Canada	267,800,000Feb. 1, 1950	3i	Canada	50,086,750Mar. 1, 1950	3	Canada	550,000,000Mar. 1, 1950	U	Canada	325,000,000122,954War Savings Certificates	3	Canada	42,682,632Canada Savings Bonds, Series I, II and III	23	Canada	148,312,8103,081,937,91755,416,413Total Redemptions of Debt	3,137,354,030
55946-85£

[Stage Direction]
Payable in Canada
Issued to Chartered Hanks-
Three Year Bonds	
Three Year Bonds	
Deposit Certificates	
Issued to Bank oj Canada-
Six Months Treasury Notes Six Months Treasury Notes
Three Year Bonds	
Six Months Treasury Notes Six Months Treasury Notes Three Year Bonds	
Issued to General Public-
Canada Savings Bonds, Series IV-Net	
Issued to Prairie Provinces- School Lunds Debentures.
Total Issues Payable in Canada.
Payable in United States
Issued to General Public-
Twenty-Five Year Bonds	
Issue
Date
Grand Total.
Sept. 1, 1949
Maturity
Date
Nov.	i,	1949	Nov.	i,	1952Mar.	i,	1950	Mar.	i,	1953Mar.	i,	1950	Aug.	30,	1950May	i,	1949	Nov.	1,	1949Sept.	i.	1949	Mar.	1,	1950Nov.	i,	1949	Nov.	1,	1952Nov.	i,	1949	May	1,	1950Mar.	i,	1950	Sept.	1,	1950Mar.	i,	1950	Mar.	1,	1953Nov.	i.	1949	Nov.	1,	1959July	i,	1949	July	1,	1950
Interest
Rate
%
n
[Stage Direction]


Sept. 1, 1974
n
Price to Government
99-30
100-00
99-45
100-00
99-375
99-25
Yield at Price to Government
%
1-74
0-	75 0 75
1-	69
0-	75 0 75
1-	74
2 82
2-79
Total Amount Issued
210,000,000
139.505.000
100.000	000
Renewals or Reconversion Included in Amount Issued
449,505,000
200,000,000
550.000.	000 90,000.000
200.000.	000 550,000,000 185,495,000
1,775,495,000
293,200,000
33,293,471
2,551,493.471
100,000,000
2,651,493,471
210,000,000
139,505,000
55,000,000
404,505,000
200,000,000
550.000.	000 90,000,000
200.000.	000 550,000,000 1S5,495,000
1,775,495,000
33,293,471
2,213,293,471
2,213,293,471
Amount Issued lor Cash
45,000,000
45,000,000
[Stage Direction]


I -i
293,200,000
338,200,000
100,000,000
438,200,000
[Stage Direction]
to
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
10.	ANALYSIS OF CHANGES IN PRINCIPAL ASSET CLASSIFICATIONS DURING THE YEAR
Cash and Other Current Assets.
71.	Cash and other current assets decreased by approximately $231-5 million during the fiscal year. The following table summarizes the changes in the various accounts in this category:

[Stage Direction]
(In millions of dollars)
-	Balance at 1950 (Estimated)	Vtarch 31 1949	Increase or Decrease (-)Cash in current and special deposits including blocked currency... Other Liquid Assets- Advances to Foreign Exchange Control Board	
Securities Investment Account	% 103-8 1,260-0 18-3 8-0 25-1 2-7 10-9	$ 90-7 1,071-2 455-8	s 13-1 188-8 -437-5 8-0 3-2 -	3-1 -	4-0Working Capital Advances-	21-9 5-8 14-9	Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation	
1,428-8	1,660-3	-231-5
72.	The two principal changes were a decrease of $437-5 million in the temporary investments held in the Securities Investment Account and an increase of $188-8 million in the advances to the Foreign Exchange Control Board, of which $160 million represents additional cash advances for financing the purchase of gold and foreign exchange, and $28-8 million, the elimination of the Board's revaluation deficit consequent Upon revaluation of the Canadian dollar in September, 1949.
Loans to, and Investments in, Crown Agencies.
73.	The aggregate amount of loans to, and investments in, Crown agencies increased from $1,058-9 million at March 31, 1949, to $1,163 million at March 31, 1950, a net increase of $104-1 million. The changes in this category of assets are summarized in the following table:

[Stage Direction]
(In milliona of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		Increase or Decrease (-)
	1950 (Estimated)	1949	
	% 5-9 25-0 190-0 23-9 744-4 7-7 105-6 60-5	% 5-9 25-0 90-5 22-2 764-8 3-2 85-3 62-0	$
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-			
			99-5 1-7 - 20-4 4-5 20-3 - 1-5
			
			
			
			
			
			
	1,163-0	1,058-9	104-1

The Budget-Appendix
74.	Loans during the year to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for housing loans, house construction and other building activities of the Corporation are expected to amount to $99-5 million. The total advanced to March 31, 1950, including capital advances of $25 million, is estimated at $215 million.
75.	Loans to the Canadian National Railways of $744-4 million represent advances by the Government for capital expenditures, including the purchase of railway equipment, the retirement of maturing debt and the temporary financing of current operations. The decrease of $20-4 million reflects net repayments during the year.
76.	The amount of $105-6 million shown for the National Harbours Board represents the net outstanding advances in connection with harbour developments at Montreal and Vancouver. These are the only advances to the National Harbours Board which are classified as active assets in the Government's accounts. The increase of $20-3 million during the year is largely accounted for by advances to the Board for the retirement of bonds originally issued to the public by the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal for the construction of the Jacques Cartier Bridge.
77.	The total of $60-5 million shown for Other Crown Agencies represents subscriptions to capital stock of, or advances to, sundry government agencies for capital, construction and other purposes. Of the total, $42-9 million represents the Government's investment in Polymer Corporation Limited. The remainder includes loans to, or investments in, Eldorado Mining and Refining (1944) Limited ($8-2 million); Export Credits Insurance Corporation ($5 million); and Northwest Territories Power Commission ($4-4 million).
Other Loans and Investments.
78.	This group of assets includes loans to provincial and municipal governments; loans to the United Kingdom and foreign governments; the Government's subscriptions to the capital of the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; and loans to veterans under the Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land Acts. Details of the loans and investments in this category are shown in the following table:

[Stage Direction]
(In millions of dollars)
-	Balance at March 31		Increase or Decrease (-)
	1950 (Estimated)	1949	
	$ 98-5 2,028-1 322-5 70-7 185-8 19-0	$ 102-4 1,923-8 300-0 65-0 167-3 20-1	$ - 3-9 104-3 22-5 5-7 18-5 M
			
Canada's subscription to capital of the International Monetary Fund Canada's subscription to capital of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development				
Advances under the Soldier Settlement and Veterans Land Acts..			
			
	2,724-6	2,578-6	146-0
79.	Loans to provincial and municipal governments include the loans to provinces made originally under the Unemployment and Farm Relief Acts and other legislation, and the loans to municipalities under the Municipal Improvements Assistance Act. The reduction of $3-9 million represents repayments during the year.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
80.	The loans to United Kingdom and other governments consist of loans to the Government of the United Kingdom under the authority of The War Appropriation (United Kingdom Financing) Act, 1942, and The United Kingdom Financial Agreement Act, 1946, loans to other countries under Part II of the Export Credits Insurance Act and miscellaneous foreign loans. Details of the changes in each of these categories are shown in the following table:

[Stage Direction]
(In millions of dollars)
-	Balanee at March 31		Increase or Decrease (-)
	1950 (Estimated)	1949	
Loan to the United Kingdom under The War Appropriation (U.K.	$ 292-0 1,165-0 523-5 47-6	$ 302-0 1,045-0 534-5 42-3	$ - 10-0 120-0 - 11-0 5-3
Loan to the United Kingdom under The United Kingdom Finan-			
			
			
			
	2,028-1	1,923-8	104-3
81.	It is estimated that during 1949-50 the United Kingdom Government will have repaid $10 million of the interest-free loan granted under the provisions of The War Appropriation (United Kingdom Financing) Act, 1942, reducing the balance outstanding on this account to $292 million at March 31, 1950. During the year, however, additional advances of $120 million were made to the Government of the United Kingdom as part of the $1,250 million loan authorized by The United Kingdom Financial Agreement Act of 1946. The total amount advanced under this agreement now stands at $1,165 million.
82.	The advances under Part II of The Export Credits Insurance Act represent loans to certain foreign countries to assist them in purchasing goods and services in Canada. It is estimated that the total of outstanding advances under this act will be $523-5 million at March 31, 1950, representing a net decrease of $11 million compared with the total outstanding at March 31, 1949. A classification of these advances by recipient governments, showing the repayments during the year, is given in the following table:

[Stage Direction]
(In millions of dollars)
. 	Total Outstanding at March 31, 1949	Repay- ments during 1949-50	Total Outstanding at March 31, 1950 (Estimated)$	$	$64-6	2-3	62-350-5	0-3	50-216-7	16-7242-7	8-4	234-315-4	15-4118-1	118-123-6	23-02-9	2-9534-5	11-0	523-5
The Budget-Appendix
Sundry Suspense Accounts*
83.	The decrease of $28-5 million in this asset classification is attributable mainly to the elimination of the revaluation deficit of the Foreign Exchange Control^ Board following the revaluation of the Canadian dollar in September,
1949.	The revaluation surplus which will appear in the Board's balance sheet will not be shown in the Government's accounts.
Reserve for Possible Losses on Ultimate Realization of Active Assets.
_ 84. For the third successive year an amount of 875 million was added to this reserve with a corresponding amount being shown as an expenditure in the Government's accounts. There was no charge to the reserve during the year under review; the balance at the credit of the account being $320-8 million at the fiscal year-end.
11.	INDIRECT OR CONTINGENT LIABILITIES
85.	It should be noted that the balance sheet as summarized above does not reflect any of the government's indirect or contingent liabilities. Included under this heading, for example, are the government's guarantees of certain securities issued by various government owned enterprises such as the Canadian National Railways, the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited, and the Saint John Harbour Commission; the guarantee of deposits maintained by the chartered banks in the Bank of Canada; guarantees of certain loans made by chartered banks to veterans or farmers for certain authorized purposes; guarantees under The Export Credits Insurance Act; and certain commitments under housing legislation.
86.	The following table gives details of the bonds and debenture stocks guaranteed by the government, and also indicates the nature and approximate extent of the government's other guarantees and contingent liabilities.

[Stage Direction]
Date °f Maturity	Issue	Interest Kate	Estimated Amount Outstanding
		%	$
Sept. 1, 1951..	Canadian National		4f	48.022.000 667,953 1,162,768 50.000.	000 3,329 9,400,000 48.496.000 67.368.000 64.136.000 5,636,507 35.000.	000 550,727 3,597,518 26,465,130 7,999,074 35.000.	000 50.000.	000 70.000.	000 40.000.	000 1,016,092 499,709 5,446,783 22,591
Aug. 1, 1952..		5	
July 10, 1953..	Canadian Northern	3	Feb. 1, 1954..	Canadian National	5	May 1, 1954..	City of Saint John Debentures assumed by Saint John Harbour Commissioners	51	Mar. 1, 1955.. June 15, 1955..	Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited	
Canadian National	5 4!	Feb. 1, 1956..	Canadian National	a 41 31 3	July 1, 1957..	Canadian National	July 20, 1958..	Canadian Northern	Jan. 15, 1959..	Canadian National	May 4, I960..	3i 31 3	May 19, 1961..	Canadian Northern Ontario	Jan. 1, 1962..	Grand Trunk Pacific	Jan. 1, 1962..	Grand Trunk Pacific	4	Jan. 3, 1966..	Canadian National	3	Jan. 2, 1967..	Canadian National	21	Sept. 15, 1969..	Canadian National	21	Jan. 16, 1971..	Canadian National	2| 5	Perpetual	Perpetual	5	Perpetual	4	Perpetual	4	
570,490,181
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
Other Outstanding Guarantees and Contingent Liabilities as at March 31, 1950
Estimated
Amount
Outstanding
Deposits maintained by the chartered banks in the Bank
of Canada (Feb. 28, 1950)	$ 554,839,714
Bank advances, re Province of Manitoba Savings Office
(Feb. 28, 1950)	 3,740,078
Province of Manitoba Treasury Bill (Feb. 28, 1950).... 2,500,000
Loans made by chartered banks under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, 1944 (Jan. 31, 1950)	 10,755,301
Loans made by chartered banks under the Veterans' Business and Professional Loans Act (Dec. 31, 1949)....	1,717,190
Guaranteed Bank Loans-Acadia Coal Company (Feb. 28,
1950)	 438,000
Guarantees under Part II of The Export Credits Insurance
Act (Feb. 28, 1950)	 12,750,000
Loans made by approved lending institutions under The Home Improvement Loans Guarantee Act, 1937
(Dec. 31, 1949)	 11,551
Loans made by approved lending institutions under Part IV of the National Housing Act, 1944, for home extensions (Dec. 31, 1949)	5,704
Loans made by approved lending institutions under
Dominion and National Housing Acts	 Indeterminate
Guarantees of land assembly projects under National
Housing Act (Dec. 31, 1949)	 806,035
Bank Advances, re Canadian Wheat Board (Feb. 28, 1950)	30,754,234
87.	It will be noted that the total of guaranteed bonds and debentures outstanding at March 31, 1950, is estimated at $570-5 million, an increase of approximately $15-9 million over the amount outstanding at March 31, 1949. This increase was the net result of several transactions. The Canadian National Railways issued $70 million in 2f% Bonds dated September 15, 1949 and maturing September 15, 1969 and $40 million in 2J% Bonds dated January 16, 1950 and maturing January 16, 1971; less redemption on October 1, 1949 of $57-7 million 5% Bonds and on February 1, 1950 of $17-3 million 5% Bonds. In addition the National Harbours Board paid off on November 1, 1949, an issue of $19-0 million 5% Bonds.

The Budget-Appendix
12. SUPPLEMENTARY DETAILED TABLES Revenues Expenditures
Loans and Advances and Investments Unmatured Funded Debt
1332
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
(thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50$	$	$	$	$Tax Revenue-	Direct Taxes-	Direct Taxes on Incomes-	Individual Income Tax	691,586	694,530	659,828	762,564	611,500Tax on Interest and Dividends....	26,824	28,428	33,929	40,965	Taxes on Rents and Royalties	1,486	1,708	1,960	2,480	Corporation Income Tax	217,834	238,792	364,131	491,990	586,500Excess Profits Tax	494,196	448,698	227,030	44,792	-2,500Total Direct Taxes on Incomes..	1,431,926	1,412,156	1,286,878	1,342,791	1,241,000Succession Duties	21,447	23,576	30,828	25,550	28,500Total Direct Taxes	1,453,373	1,435,732	1,317,706	1,368,341	1,269,500Indirect Taxes-	Customs Import Duties	128,877	237,355	293,012	222,975	229,000Excise Duties-	Spirits, malt, etc	91,274	97,820	97,675	101,105	104,500Cigars, cigarettes and tobacco	98,228	101,163	102,116	106,241	114,000Licences	39	40	37	39	40Less refunds	-2,815	-2,979	-3,034	-2,733	-3,040Total Excise Duties	186,726	196,044	196,794	204,652	215,500Excise Taxes-	Taxes on Commodities-	Sales Tax	326,253	328,073	383,012	390,174	415,50041,198	338	Automobiles, rubber tires and	tubes	6,701	16,340	31,949	36,943	34,200Beverages	16,657	18,635	23,767	27,689	1,630Candy and chewing gum	11,904	13,277	18,279	19,888	1,020Cigars, cigarettes and tobacco	70,229	76,318	68,606	77,665	83,400Cigarette papers and tubes	4,645	6,943	6,419	6,999	7,0701,272	7	2,824	3,894	Furs	4,976	3,102	3,139	3,693	3,02029,836	36,220	2,208	Matches and lighters	3,675	4,088	3,967	3,412	1,080Phonographs, radios and tubes....	646	2,526	5.325	3,562	3,060787	1,185	2,113	279	9,974	11'339	10,572	Toilet preparations and soaps	7,107	7,522	7,146	7,757	4,420Trunks, bags, luggage, etc	4,711	5,710	4,962	5,565	2,290Wines	2,066	2,394	2,342	2,060	2,1704,260Sundry	3,811	5,109	4,716	4,700	2,250Taxes on Amusements and Services-	13,387	14,552	15,369	2,483	2,188	2^510	2,519	105	Transportation and communication	26;893	27,931	27,531	29,034	3,950Stamps, including payment of taxes	on jewellery, chinaware, cabaret	attendance, etc	21,697	24,437	24,300	22,725	9,720Licences,interest and miscellaneous	302	313	376	382	380Less refunds (mainly sales tax)...	-114,005	-29,845	-10,683	-12,871	-11,420Total Excise Taxes	496,910	579,024	640,758	636,138	568,000Other Taxes-	Chartered bank note circulation	270	220	188	166	150Insurance Companies	7,951	8,796	3,004	3,339	3,400Miscellaneous	751	690	613	531	450Total Indirect Taxes	821,485	1,022,129	1,134,369	1,067,801	1,016,500Total Revenue from Taxes	2,274,858	2,457,861	2,452,075	2,436,142	2,286,000
The Budget-Appendix
STATEMENT OF REVENUES FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS-Concluded
(thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50S	$	$	$	$Non-Tax Revenue- Post Office	68,613 70,915 4,954	72,978 69,439 2,098	77,759 75,800 1,731 3,736 18,745	80,604 107,889 3,253	84,000 90,400 4,100Return on Investments	Bullion and coinage	Premium, discount and exchange	16,322	16,355	21,202	24,500
Total Non-tax Revenue		160,804	160,870	177,771	212,948	203,000
					
Total Ordinary Revenue		2,435,662	2,618,731	2,629,846	2,649,090	2,489,000
					
Special Receipts and Credits- Refunds of previous years' Special Expenditure	20	10	7	16 117,121 69	160 58,928 60 400Special Receipts-War and Demobilization	626,616 161	412,763 170	225,757 138	Donations to the Crown	Canadian Wheat Board- Surpluses in certain special accounts. Canadian National Railways- Net credit due to increase in Canadian National Railways Securities Trust Stock (contra)	1,762	16	121	22,631 174	Investment in Crown plants transferred to Active Assets	2,053	3,704	2,528	649,602	416,758	229,622	119,855	59,548Capital and Non-active Accounts- Capital Accounts- Refunds of previous years' ex-	376	110	61	82 2,243	2Transfer to Consolidated Deficit Account (contra)	158	Non-active Accounts- National Harbours Board, reduction of indebtedness 	10	82	ii1936 and 1937 Saskatchewan Seed Grain Loans Guarantees- Adjustment pursuant to The Western Provinces Treasury Bills and Natural Resources Settlement Act, 1947	9,773	Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited, reduction of indebtedness	1,105 1,308 54	256	80	Write-off to Consolidated Deficit Account- Canadian National Railways Securities Trust Stock-reduction due to retirement of equipment during calendar years 1940 and 1947 	1,885 63	Seed Grain and Relief Loans..	45	45	20Total Capital and Non-active Accounts	421	2,587	12,278	2,450	51Total Special Receipts and Credits	650.023	419,345	241,900	122,305	59,599Total Revenue	3,085,685 72,500	3,038,076 30,200	2,871,746	2,771,395	2,548,599Less estimated amount of refundable Income and Excess Profits Taxes	
Net Total Revenue		3,013,185	3,007,876	2,871,746	2,771,395	2,548,599
1334
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
(thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50$	$	$	$	$Ordinary Expenditure	Agriculture	10,319	13,300	16,311	20,376	24,974Auditor General's Office	379	390	395	533	5665,855
12,450
Civil Service Commission	479	593	665	771	1,523External Affairs	4,522	5,128	7,195	8,676	9,500Finance-	Interest on Public Debt	409,134	464,395	455,455	465,138	439,200Cost of Loan Flotations and Annual	Amortization of Bond Discounts and	Commissions	22,311	12,139	10,914	9,745	10,495Premium paid on redemption of called	5,842	271	9	Subsidies to Provinces	14i447	14,383	33,394	17,095	19,1706,500Miscellaneous Grants and Contributions	617	95	113	147	497Civil Pensions and Superannuation	293	253	224	190	167Government's contribution to Superan-	nuation Fund	2,696	3,161	3,488	4,050	5,46814,734	9,172	in	22,000Compensation to Provinces under Dom-	inion-Provincial Taxation Agree-	ments-	Income and Corporation Taxes	94,343	94,380	122,497	84,387	78,2063,709	Special payments in respect to mat-	ters supplementary to Terms of	1,432Office of the Comptroller of the	Treasury	5,565	7,521	8,933	11,103	11,162Administrative and Sundry Expenditure	2,004	2,078	2,380	3,515	5,143Fisheries	3,262	3,599	4,097	5,158	6,646Governor General and Lieutenant	Governors	227	252	239	242	276Insurance	199	212	237	263	315Justice	2,848	3,194	3.917	4,025	4,364Penitentiaries	3,258	3,806	4,564	5,863	7,232Labour	1,620	2,010	2,319	4,712	5,335Unemplovment Insurance Act, 1940-	Administration	6,185	7,496	17,641	18,965	25,016Government's Contribution	12,514	15,200	17,500	20,103	21,500Government Annuities-	Payment to maintain reserve	294	977	332	11,408	1,500Legislation-	House of Commons	2,235	2,786	3,022	2,628	3,770Library of Parliament	74	90	103	127	128Senate	727	881	946	736	1,184General	98	167	270	272	265Chief Electoral Officer, including	elections	3,091	144	151	287	4,447Mines and Resources-*	164	173	268	366	1,524	2,047	2,665	5,564	4,466	5,948	7,180	10,378	2,689	4,962	5,630	11,863	1,323	3,444	2,554	126	1,303	1,847	5,318	17,970	22,918National Defence-	Administration and sundry services...	127	253	615	1,127	353Pensions-Militia Pension Act	(') -	(') -	(>) -	4,863	5,000Government's contribution to Perma-	(*) -	7,867	9,046(') Included under Veterans Affairs.	(*) Included under Demobilization and Reconversion-Army, Navy and Air Services.	
* See paragraphs 37 and 38.

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS-Continued
(thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50$	t	%	i	%Ordinary Expenditure-Con.	National Health and Welfare	7,294	8,616	10,815	14,381	16,900Old age pensions, including pensions to	blind persons	33,715	35,928	58,090	66,764	94,000Family allowances	172,632	245,141	263,165	270,910	297,600General health grants	7,528	14,000National Revenue (including Income	Tax)	22,630	28,551	37,312	49,323	50,996National War Services	5	Post Office	57,730	64,213	67,944	77,643	83,145Prime Minister's Office	61	88	99	106	110Privy Council	419	808	1,287	4,351	3,988Public Archives	127	149	157	173	209Public Printing and Stationery	238	293	536	753	905Public Works	16,283	26,360	35,545	50,644	66,800Reconstruction and Supply*	2,103	1,932	12,342	3,403	Resources and Development*	26,098Dominion Fuel Board administration,	coal subsidies and subventions	2,339	1,776	1,143	(a) -	(') -Royal Canadian Mounted Police	7,284	8,604	10,406	13,717	16,100Secretary of State	954	1,157	1,345	1,559	1,640Trade and Commerce	6,356	9,776	10,846	24,778	31,382Dominion Fuel Board administration	coal subsidies and subventions	2,164	4,921Mail Subsidies and Steamship Sub-	vent ions	994	1,103	(4)	(*) -	(*) -Transport-	Administration and general	1,440	1,499	1,973	3,492	3,305Air Service	4,196	5,653	10,390	15,932	24,135Marine Service	4,895	5,963	6,831	8,176	10,194Railways and Canals	3,391	3,702	4,073	5,124	7,582Maritime Freight Rates Act	4,345	4,871	5,090	6,606	7,025Mail Subsidies and Steamship Subven-	tions, including Canadian Maritime	Commission	1,764	2,166	2,414Veterans Affairs-	Departmental Administration	1,142	1,680	1,677	2,225	2,235Pensions (World War 1 and military)..	39,996	40,771	41,227	Pensions (World Wars 1 and 2 and N.W.	Rebellion, 1885)	(*) -	(') -	(*) -	102,951	96,000Treatment and after-care of returned	soldiers and allowances to depend-	ents	28,551	44,303	46,286	69,937	69,390Soldiers Settlement and Veterans	Land Acts	3,160	6,551	8,092	7,885	7,591Total Ordinary Expenditure	1,061,902	1,236,235	1,380,002	1,573,450	1,712,241Capital Expenditure	Railways	2,313	2,654	3,809	3,239	3,875Public Works	2,195	8,546	11,847	15,234	20,272Total Capital Expenditure	4,508	11,200	15,656	18,473	24,147
(*) See Department of Trade and Commerce.
0) See Department of Transport.
([DOT]) See War, Demobilization and Reconversion Expenditure. * See paragraphs 37 and 38.
1336	HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS-Continued
(thousands of dollars)
War, Demobilization and Reconversion Expenditure
National Defence-Army, Navy and Air
Services	
National Defence-Defence Research.
National Defence-
Army Services	
Naval Services	
Air Services	
Reconstruction and Supply (formerly Munitions and Supply)- Administration, reconversion and operation of Crown Companies and/
or Crown Plants	
Administration	
Housing development	
Production and transportation subsidies for Canadian steel producers, etc	 Research and development of jet
engines and aircraft	
Expansion of industry	
Acquisition of U.S. Assets	
Liquidation of contracts	
Termination of contracts	
Other	
Resources and Development	
Agriculture-
Disposal of agricultural products rendered surplus by the war	
Freight assistance on western feed
grains	
Fertilizer subventions and freight
allowance	
Subsidies and bulk purchasing of
fertilizer	
Subsidy on western wheat used exclusively as feed for live-stock	
Subsidy on milk and milk products... Premium on hog carcasses suitable
for export to U K	 -
To provide for reserve stocks of feed
grains	
Sundry	
External Affairs-
Contribution to International Refugee
Organization	
General post UNRRA relief	
Sundry	
949,578
21,1,759
524,830
6,858
(7)
112,675
1,906
151,846
5,522
278,807
17,317
7,864
41,659
9,573
1,274
4,499
82,978
Finance-
Comptroller of the Treasury	
Wartime Prices and Trade Board-
Administration	
Subsidies due to application of Order
placing a ceiling over all prices.
Advances for payment of drawback claims to millers and other manufacturers of wheat products	
House Conversion Program	
Halifax V-E Day disorders and explosion	
Payment of claims	
Expenses of investigations	
Sundry

[Stage Direction]
(*)
837
6,072
12,738
88,778
26,000
([DOT]) See Department of Trade and Commerce.
(') Included in Expansion of Industry.
(*) Included in ordinary expenditure.
([DOT]) See Department of Reconstruction and Supply.
2,127
999
136,875 |
1948-49
189,360
6,024
1,558
1,305
38,558
7,950
4,500
1,007
6,400
1,056
62,334
20,092
(8)
4,421
1,861
5,474
347
33,233
5,468
16,927
22,400 1,702 5,794 34,341
17,000
238,915
16,033
(')	-
122 1,013
(')	-
(*)	-
1,577
18,154
4,585
69,200
23,178,
5,412
102
6,839
(') -
3,321
14,911
11,000
(')
Estimated
343,467 21,005
(6>
(')
16,900
5,100
22,491
5,827
1,133
6,960
C)	-
2,621 25
1,350 (9)	-
1,457
30,689
4,038

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS-Continued
(thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50$	%	$	t	sWar, Demobilization and	Reconversion Expenditure-Con.	Labour-	National Selective Service program...	11,268	11,230	(i°) -	(!0) _	(10) _Removal of enemy aliens from pro-	tected areas	2,203	3,161	Vocational training for discharged	members of Canada's Armed Forces	4,365	13,049	6,405	3,472	2,386Vocational Schools - Payments to	Provinces	607	2,442	3,264	(ii) _	(ii)Sundry	4,416	2,772	1,723	1,767	1,40222,859	32,654	11,392	6,239	3,788Mines and Resources	3,475	2,498	1,812	989	Mines and Technical Surveys	1,354National War Services	H.24S	29	National Health and Welfare-	Old Age Pensions increased benefits..	9,103	9,517	996	(ii) _	(U) _Sundry	2,135	157	107	31	11,238	9,674	1,103	31	Privy Council	1,272	45	8	Public Works	6,205	8,651	1,242,	Royal Canadian Mounted Police	4,775	1,896	1,627'	Trade and Commerce-	Administration	1,000	Administration, reconversion and oper-	ation of Crown Companies and/or	Crown Plants	2,585	Production and transportation subsi-	7,062	4,665Research and development of jet	engines and aircraft	2,000	1 500Sundry	1,772	682	126	L157	3161,772	682	126	13,804	6,481Transport	15,013	9,723	6,387	1,637	1,278Veterans Affairs-	Treatment-Defence Forces	26,298	50,982	27,130	(1!) _	(IS)Pensions-Defence Forces	22,200	33,763	40,517	(«) _	(IS) _Additions, alterations and improve-	ments to departmental hospitals,	including land purchases	7.371	8,334	0,805	5,095	3,700Post-discharge rehabilitation benefits.	32.131	96,762	78,323	44,826	24,900War service gratuities and re-establish-	ment credits	239,585	318,325	84,175	36,148	22,800Sundry	774	273	418	1,181	1,390828,359	508,439	287,368	87,250	52,790Other Departments	2,453	2,181	805	593	67Write-off of Air Training Plan Loans and	Advance as per United Kingdom	Financial Agreement Act, 194G	425,000	Mutual Aid (excluding administration)...	766.862	Military Relief	84,468	Canada's Contribution to UNRRA	142,852	
Total War, Demobilization and Recon-					
version Expenditures		4,002,949	1.314,798	634,421	425,574	464,081
Special Expenditure					
Agricultural and Other Projects		4,423	4,432	5,253	10,489	17,858
Prairie Farm Assistance Act, 1939-					
Administration		327	333	450	402	450
Advances to Prairie Farm Emergency					
Fund		12,052	6,597	10,744	8,640	12,800
Wheat acreage reduction plan-					
Administration		159				
Payments of awards to farmers		397	2			
(10)	Included in ordinary expenditure (Unemployment Insurance administration).
(11)	Included in ordinary expenditure.
(u) Included in ordinary expenditure.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES BY MAJOR CATEGORIES AND BY DEPARTMENTS FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS-Continued (thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50$	$	$	$	$Special Expenditures-Con.	20,562	31,450 13,963 733	4,454	4,580Subsidies on oats and barley, used as feed	Reimbursement to Canadian Wheat Board for expenses of regulating deliveries of grain-Department of Trade	128	Reimbursement to Canadian Commercial Corporation for expenses in purchasing materials, etc., on behalf of Dept, of National Defence-Dept, of	548	776	1,005Fraser Valley, B.C., Flood Area-	4,500 5,000	3,000Grant for emergency relief and rehabi-	Repairs to Federal Government structures and telegraph and telephone	424	1,125
Total Special Expenditure...	17,358	31,926	63,141	34,813	40,818
Government Owned Enterprises					
Losses charged to Consolidated Deficit Account- Prince Edward Island Car Ferry and	688	888	932	1,220	1,2218,962	15,885	33,533	42,043Canadian National (West Indies)	4611,370	2,933	4,31886	114	137	238	83Total charged to Consolidated Deficit Account	774	9,964	18,324	37,924	48,126Loans and advances non-active-	560	718	371	1,739	4,219
Total Government Owned	1,334	10,682	18,695	39,663	52,345
					
Other Charges					
Write-down of assets chargeable to Consolidated Deficit Account- Reduction of soldier and general land	36	232	3	(") (") 20129	2,097 63	1,000 45	Yearly established losses in seed grain and relief accounts- Department of Resources and Deve-	45	54	Cancellation of Canadian Farm Loan	1	Canadian National Railways Securities Trust Stock-reduction due to retire-	1,308 25,000	1,885 75,000	Provision for reserve for possible losses on ultimate realization of Active Assets	25,000	75,000	75,000
(ls) Included in ordinary expenditure.

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS-Concluded
(thousands of dollars)
-	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Estimated 1949-50$	$	$	$	$Other Charges-Cone.	Provision for reserve for conditional benefits under Veterans' Land Act... Assumption of part of Newfoundland debt under Terms of Union	464	2,663	4,505	5,631	6,600 62,293Canadian National Railways Securities Trust Stock- Net change in Dominion s equity in Canadian National Railways	22,631	Transfer from Capital Account to Con-	158	2,243	
48,177	29,386	83,711	83,919	143,913
					
Grand Total Expenditures		5,136,228	2,634,227	2,195,626	2,175,892	2,437,545
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
FIVE FISCAL YEARS (In thousands of dollars)
Fiscal Years Ended March 31
1947
1949
Estimated
Working Capital Advances to Crown Corporations
Canadian Arsenals Ltd	
Canadian Commercial Corporation	
Canadian Wool Board	
Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation	
Crown Assets Disposal Corporation	 Export Credits Insurance Corporation- Capital Surplus	
Cr. 6,947
Cr. 7,819 1,293
2,000
2,500 Cr. 6,457
15,638
2,500
2,500
1,000
Cr. 3,000
Cr. 19,341 Cr. 345
2,500
Cr. 14,911 Cr. 108
Cr. 3,016 Cr. 1,085
Cr. 11,473
11,681
Cr. 14,686
Cr. 11,519
Cr. 7,101
Loans to, and Investments in. Crown Agencies
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
Capital	
Loans	
Central Mortgage Bank Capital Stock...
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation...
Canadian Farm Loan Board	
National Harbours Board	
Railway and Steamship Companies	
Crown Plants	
Other Crown Agencies	
Other Loans and Investments
Provincial and Municipal Governments. United Kingdom and Other Governments-
United Kingdom, Australia and New
Zealand-Air Training Accounts....
United Kingdom

British Commonwealth Air Training Plan-Settlement	
United Kingdom-Loan under The War Appropriation (U.K. Financing)
Act, 1942	
United Kingdom Financial Agreement
Act, 1946-Loan	
Export Credits Insurance Act	
Other (U.K. and Other Governments) Canada's subscription to Capital of-
International Monetary Fund	
International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development	
Miscellaneous-
Loans to veterans under the Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land
Acts	
Dominion and National Housing Acts
Loans	
Balances receivable under agreements
of sale of Crown Assets	
Other miscellaneous loans	
Net Total of Changes in Loans and Investments	
25,000 Cr	250'
22,500
68,000
99,500
Cr.
Cr.
Cr.
Cr.
2,401
43,164
4,997
6,613
Cr.
Cr.
Cr.
Cr.
2,000
151
20,521
41,101
14,767
Cr. 20 81,717
1,250
1,050
4,067
4,500 1,700 20,273 Cr. 20,422
2.500
4,615
Cr. 1,498
53,837
Cr 74.838
106,790
79,195
104,053
Cr. 4,350
249,504
200,000
63,946
Cr. 2,530
Cr.
Cr. 63,629
Cr. 5,376
Cr. 3,852
67.412
111,497
36
18,677
14,721
Cr. 95,800
640.000 267,983 Cr. 165,415
299.970
48,750
55,202
Cr. 111,285
368,000 130,934 Cr. 5.712
Cr. 29,487
37,000 68,196 2,060
Cr.
Cr.
16,250
37,522
21,901
9,927
120,000
10,964
5,336
22,499
5,658
18,521
13.503 Cr. 10.550
Cr. 1,972 Cr. 1,157
Cr. 1,230 Cr. 588
Cr.
Cr
751
Cr. 334,927
1,051.111
368,951
92,476
146,171
Cr. 292,563
987,954
461,055
160,152
243,123

The Budget-Appendix

[Stage Direction]
Date of Maturity
1950,	May	1.
	July	1.
	Sept.	1
	Nov.	1.
	Nov.	1.
1951,	Feb.	1.
	June	15.
	Nov.	1.
1952,	Feb.	1.
	Nov.	1.
[Stage Direction]
1953,
[Stage Direction]
Mar.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1954,
[Stage Direction]
Mar.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1955,
[Stage Direction]
May
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1956,
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1957,
[Stage Direction]
May
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1958,
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1959,
[Stage Direction]
Jan.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
I960,
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1961,
[Stage Direction]
Jan.
[Stage Direction]
15.
[Stage Direction]
1962,
[Stage Direction]
Feb.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1963,
[Stage Direction]
July
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
July
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Aug.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1966,
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1974,
[Stage Direction]
Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
Perpetual
[Stage Direction]
1950, April 6 Treasury Bills
[Stage Direction]
April 21 Treasury Bills
[Stage Direction]
May 5 Treasury Bills
[Stage Direction]
May 26 Treasury Bills
[Stage Direction]
June 9 Treasury Bills
[Stage Direction]
June 23 Treasury Bills
[Stage Direction]
Aug. 30 Deposit Certificates.... June 15 Non-Interest Bearing
Certificates	
War Savings Certificates	
Refundable portion of excess profits tax (estimated)	
Payable in Canada___
Payable in New York Payable in London....
Rate per Cent	Where Payable	Amount of Loan	Annual Interest Charge
		$ cts.	$ cts.
[Stage Direction]
f
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,500,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
33,293,470 85
[Stage Direction]
1,331,738 83
[Stage Direction]
a
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
550,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,125,000 00
[Stage Direction]
a
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
335,690,000 00
[Stage Direction]
5,874,575 00
[Stage Direction]
if
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
400,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
7,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3f
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
(>) 50,155,600 00
[Stage Direction]
1,621,932 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
0 649,969,592 50
[Stage Direction]
19,306,027 50
[Stage Direction]
If
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
500,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
8,750,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3*
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
0 50,500,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,625,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1}
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
300,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,500,000 00
[Stage Direction]
u
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
325,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,875,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
0 676,355,489 00
[Stage Direction]
20,089,767 00
[Stage Direction]
3f
[Stage Direction]
London
[Stage Direction]
2,930,121 84
[Stage Direction]
95,228 96
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
40,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,200,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
55,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,650,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
0 855,607,410 50
[Stage Direction]
25,414,081 50
[Stage Direction]
2f
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
*284,780,000 00
[Stage Direction]
7,831,450 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
1,111,261,650 00
[Stage Direction]
33,337,849 50
[Stage Direction]
2!
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
*155,850,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,285,875 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
88,200,000 00
[Stage Direction]
2,646,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4
[Stage Direction]
London
[Stage Direction]
1,967,941 43
[Stage Direction]
78,717 66
[Stage Direction]
2f
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
*161,325,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,436,437 50
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
1,197,324,750 00
[Stage Direction]
35,919,742 50
[Stage Direction]
2f
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
*293,200,000 00
[Stage Direction]
8,063,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
1,105,300,350 00
[Stage Direction]
34,959,010 50
[Stage Direction]
4
[Stage Direction]
New York
[Stage Direction]
110,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,400,000 00
[Stage Direction]
31
[Stage Direction]
New Y'ork
[Stage Direction]
52,800,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,716,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
1,315,639,200 00
[Stage Direction]
39,469,176 00
[Stage Direction]
31
[Stage Direction]
London
[Stage Direction]
2,176,198 85
[Stage Direction]
70,726 46
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
London
[Stage Direction]
*54,812,834 29
[Stage Direction]
1,644,385 03
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
New York
[Stage Direction]
165,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,950,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
1,295,819,350 00
[Stage Direction]
38,874,580 50
[Stage Direction]
31
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
54,703,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,777,847 50
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
1,691,796,700 00
[Stage Direction]
50,753,901 00
[Stage Direction]
21
[Stage Direction]
New York
[Stage Direction]
110,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3,025,000 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
55,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
1,650,000 00
[Stage Direction]
*513
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
[DOT] 75,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
384,750 00
[Stage Direction]
[DOT]512
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
75,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
384,000 00
[Stage Direction]
*512
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
75,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
384,000 00
[Stage Direction]
[DOT]513
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
75,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
384,750 00
[Stage Direction]
[DOT]513
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
75,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
384,750 00
[Stage Direction]
[DOT]512
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
75,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
384,000 00
[Stage Direction]
[DOT]75
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
100,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
750,000 00
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
*148,700 00
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
Canada
[Stage Direction]
*135,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
4,050,000 00
[Stage Direction]
15,076,607,359 26
[Stage Direction]
395,954,299 94
[Stage Direction]
*115,000,000 00
[Stage Direction]
15,191,607,359 26	395,954,299 94
		14,691,990 9fi2 86	
		487,800 000 00	9.. XROZ,
		61,887,096 41	0-41%
		15,191,607,359 26	100 00%
(') Redeemable at 100$ per cent. (*) Redeemable at 101 per cent.
(3)	Redeemable at 101 per cent.
(4)	Redeemable at 101 per cent. (E) Redeemable at 101 per cent.
* Estimated.
Amount outstanding includes $ 250,000.00 redemption bonus. Amount outstanding includes $6,435,342.50 redemption bonus. Amount outstanding includes $ 500,000.00 redemption bonus. Amount outstanding includes $6,696,589.00 redemption bonus. Amount outstanding includes $8,471,360.50 redemption bonus.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, March 29, 1950