. my some text, desire to drag us

. but if we are to judge from the

j opposition, the hon.

ubelburnc-Yarmouth (Mr. Ralston), , it 1| nothing more than s partisan, ' fault finding preamble such as has

‘ occasion in this chamber; in fact,

‘ in the house in order that the re-

‘ Ir can I see how it can be much of

' “f ‘l Political party over which it

i v21. 1.934 . .

Liberal Pre-Electionl xttavagances Revealed In I718 Budget Debate

Mn W. Chester S.‘ uMcLure, M. P. Exposes Manner In; JVhich Liberal Pork-Barrel W as Rolled From Coast lTo Coast During The‘ “Happy Hunting Season” Oi

MacKenzie King's Regime.

mlhmg indictment of Liberal mlootion extravagance was made an‘, House o: Commons on May I, w, w. Chester B. MoLure, up, Following is the text as re- amed, ,5 reported in iilansard: . m w. Chester 5. MoLurc vqucens): Mr. Speaker, before I ed wllh my remarks on the budget 1 wish with my first words w convey to the Minister oi Flu- ‘m (My, Rhodes) my sincere Iympgthy in his recent sad be- ent. wllesrllort time ago we had deliver- ed w u, p, budget speech, and in my view, after listening to the dew, prising thereon, there seem- ed to be just two lines of thought m m; minds and utterances oi the different speakers. The government gpukers carry us up into a new dawn oi commercial DWKNS-‘l. While m" oi the opposition, with the

down into the valley oi humilia- tion. rhe vitally important thought however, as expressed in tho budget |p¢cch oi the Minister of Finance. was the fact that the country is pow well advanced on the high road of economic recovery, and I m happy to say that this is borne out by facts, figures and present flay conditions as they exist through out Canada. The official opposition. an the negative side of the budget, leem to think nothing has improv- od. and take objection to the bud- get in Ill its different phases. It ls, o! course, the duty of the position to criticize; criticism when it ll constructivo and reasonable In par- lilmentary debate is part of our democratic form of government:

form oi criticism displayed by the Authorized critic oi the Liberal member for

been delivered on more than one

it might be termed the sequel in the cbstructionist tactics displayed

lief measure might not pass. The kind oi criticism thus far directed against the budget is of nohelp to Canada's financial standing; neith-

s political baliyhoo for the Liberal party.

It wouldbe a long task to review the different speeches that have Rm made by opposition speakers on the budget, but the line oi crit- icism was definitely set out by the authorized critic, the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth. They have outraged every phase oi the bud- let. but what they are opposing ll a budget speech that was remark- able not only for the manner of its presentation but for what it con- tained ior this country. 1t is oi such vast extent and vital importance to the dominion, and comprises so many topics that seem to create consternation among the opposition, that one even hesitates to enter the debate at this time.

lbllowing the introduction of the budset speech the hon. member for flhelbume-Yarmouth in a. lengthy Illmh. made a very strong and bit- ter condemnation of the govern- aheut. As I have said. it would be

llllcult to follow that speech lhmlllhout. but having listened to ll Ind read it again I wish to make 1115i 00c criticism of. it: his speech might be well sized up as o, p011“.- "J- Partisan. dramatic extravagan- f: 011 an immensely stirring.

“WM-Provoking subject like the b fillet. He presented his terrific lmadside in the form of an ironic fist act speech with the idea of mm"! the house and I-lansald finders believe this country was 3°- “l? l° lliflvfi$—nnd you can believe mail; not. The hon. gentlemans re- did s and criticisms throughout Minot add anything to the repu-

°li for intelligence and vision

“his Pfllliromc desire to preside. m": Wjll not pcrmit me 1o follow menltlilll the remarks oi the hon. b". but there are some points all!!! criticism to which I desire to 1 attention.

thnlfsléfitance there ~ were some clearior at the hon. member shied come‘ . whether consciously or un- "d hMlv- at page 2624 of Hans- ‘nce Efilklts the Minister of I-‘in- ‘peuhliih regard w his budget m" - (‘Specially his estimate last out m” l‘ Suiblus, which turned branch be a deficit‘. IFrcm that he mlmcs off nnd crticizes the Prime to l‘ (Mr. Bennett) with regard Ilkellgtious budgets. But I should r m lzuint out to ihs hon. mem- these l‘; ivsaeclally in times like ‘my ‘or a difficult to estimate ex- lom l‘ bildilet. as trade condi- mkhtme by no means normal. I been oxmlnd him that there have "mm d‘: occasions on which esti- Wum d a not work out exactly. I "mm grwhto his attention an es- h, ex endu“ W“ government oi m p u"! f0!‘ the Montreal mmfiegthe hlm- memb:r was u. 0y bu" "18 crown at that time. o; HEM if"? 101' in expenditure mm" o? ‘fléle millions, bug u p, n munonfll the cost was nine- ms dines and more. But there deflelw mrence between the two knows how sh Dresont government mm! but 1 a deficit last year cc- hm {and n tlge case oi the Mon- me m" iiznnv ody knows where or eleven million sol-

l." Wflilt 1m] memmve. k ess the opposition ‘ruumy snk 1:10;. kmehpublic would

MY- Duif: P M‘ M ‘Ge Mr. Pltfield.

Mll- W. CHESTER S. McLURE, Ml’.

foundland eating kippers. Again at

page 2624 the hon. member for shB1blIID6-YBHnOl1th,d€8.l1Xig with debt and interest, gives a. statement concerning the public debt, and then states that the increase in the interest payable by the people oi this country amounts to $2.50 per head, and that the interest load which has been put upon the people since this government took office is practically $25,000,000 per year. He states that under the Liberal regime they had surpluses, and re- peats the statement from the fam- ous Dunning budget speech that Canada. had a. surplus of $257,000,000 between the years 1025 and 1930. I am reminded that in appealing to the electors during the campaign oi 1030 that was one of their stock arguments. Let us see the story oi this $257,000,000 reduction oi debt which they claim. The Liberal gov- emment received during that time $45,000,000 from repayment 0f loans and $102,000,000 interest on bank de- posits and investments, making a. total of $147,000,000 which came due and which certainly applied on debt --what else was there to do with it? Then there was a further $110,- 000,000 that they also claim they paid in reduction oi debt. This came out of taxes. Why should it not have gone to reduction oi debt? I might ask why they did not re- duce it considerably more, in view of the large amounts ol taxes they took from the people at that time. During the six years from i925 to 1930 inclusive I find that the taxes collected by the Liberal government were in round figures as follows:

1925 $293,003,000

1926 . . . 328,030,000 1927 . . 347,000,000 1033 365,000,000 1929 . . . 394,000,000 1030 375,000,000

Making a total of over $2,100,000.01» in those six years. Ii we compute this on the systems the hon. mem- ber for Shelburne-Yarmouth used, instead of being $2.50 per head it amounts to $2.10 per head oi taxes collected from the people to pay for the Liberal government's program of extravagance during those years.

Liberal Campaign Pledges

Then the opposition critic veers away from the budget to prclection promises, and goes back to the campaign oi 1930. When he refers to those campaign speeches and promises I should like to remind him that the govemment in which he was a minister came into power in 1021 pledged to reduce taxation. But what do we find? Instead of a. reduction in taxation they increased taxes; they took from the lrcpla of this country more than $100000,- 000 additional in taxes annually. Yet the opposition critic was a minis-

-ter in that government; so I think

he has no reason to talk about el- eoticn promises.

‘The hon. gentleman aitempted to show by a. long parade of figures that debt and interest were incl-eps- ed by the Conservative party, and on page 2624 made what appar- ently he considered a conclusive argument. Referring to the Minis- ter of Finance he said: “My hon. friend may say that this govem- ment's position 1s due to railway deficits." ‘Then he proceeds:

“Let me remind him that during the Liberal administration current deficits on railways were paid out of revenue, and were not added to the public debt."

This is new. and worth looking into. I am rather glad flit 1101\- member mentioned these railway deficits, because as I indicated at the beginning I did not intend t0 correct all his misstatements but only to add a few facts which the ‘hon. members had omitted from his remarks. From time to time the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. l-Ieenan) and many oth- er hon. members oi the opposition have criticized this government and the Minister of Railwfll’! with 11- gard to the railway problem. always blaming it on this party. It would have been just as well to leave out of this budget debate that, suppos- cdly telling argument. We know that the railway extravagance auth- orised by the Liberal government

“m1 Ha my be n mp-

gfrom 1022 to 1030 was treme

The railways were run purely as n political machine for the Liberal party, and railway construction and various other schemes cost the country over half -a. billion dollars, so that today we are saddled with heavy interest payments. These have been met and are being met by this government, and the credit of our country has been maintained at s. high level.

Years of Extravagauco

Then from time to time the op- pmitlon criticize us with regard to the increase in ta-ntion. The ans- wer is that this is the result oi the extravagance of the late govern- ment, and is necessary to pay their bills and the interest on the debts they created. We are taxed perhaps more than we should be to meet these requirements. But we might refer to some oi their expenditures in connection with railways just to show that the opposition critic might have left this question out of the debate. Perhaps the most extra- vagant year oi all was 1029i that might be termed their pork barrel year ior election expenditures. Per- haps we shall be better able to ap- preciate the Canadian National railway problem ii we look at the expenditures made by the Liberal government and consider a. few of the things the hon. member ' for Shelburne-Yarmouth omitted to mention, to show that the admin- istration oi which he was a mem- ber had no idea of how to finance. You might say that they had no more idea. of the finances oi this country or oi the proper way to protect the public treasury than you would expect from a bunch oi drunken sailors. I might quote the words oi the Vancouver Bun of October 3, 1032, which, speaking oi a. Liberal ear-minister, had this to 58y

4.

‘e is an accessory before the fact in the economic ruination oi this country."

Ylllng ‘Up the Debt

Yes, my hon. friend the opposi- tion critic neglected to say that the government of which he was a member placed an annual interest burden on the taxpayers oi Canada amounting to many millions of dol- lars, and that the greater part of the $57,000,000 that we must pay annually in interest on railway bonds is the result oi the misman- agement of the present Liberal op- position. Let me contrast for a. moment the political interference oi the two governments in regard to railway matters. There has been absolutely no interference by the present government in the admin- istration of the Canadian National Railways, but I do not think we could say the same thing with re- gard to the Liberal government. In support oi’ that statement I would refer to paragraphs 61, 142, 143 and 154 oi the Duii report. There you will read of the political interfer- ence under the Liberal government, when legitimate expenditures were ignored and the officials were forc- ed to squander the money of the people in order to keep the politi- cal Liberal machine going in high gear. Let me read a part of section 154 of the Duff report, which says:

"It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the directors and management oi the Canadian Na- tional were amenable to public in- fluences and pressure which it would have been in the public in- terests to have withstood.”

This portion of section 154 is well written; it is in good English, but translated into the vernacular of the day it simply means, “The Can- adian National was run as a. politi- cal machine ior the Liberal party," and my hon. friend from Shei- burne-Yarmouth was a minis er o! the crown in the government of that day.

More Railway Extravngance

Let us go a little further wflh regard to this railway extravagance. In 1029 they bought at tremendous cost fourteen million railway tia which, if laid end to end. would ex- tend several times across Canada. “I wish I had time to say more about these railway tics, but this was only one of the many reckless expenditures that were made. Sec- tions 140 and 154 oi the Duii re- port contain a severe indictment of the political expenditures made by hon. gentlemen opposite. In 1029 their committals cost the taxpayers of this country $270,000,000; in ud- dition, the ordinary annual 5111101195 for 19291 cost $132,000,000 and in that year they also purchased branch lines costing over $40,000.- 000. These branch lines were bank- rupt: they never had paid and never would pay, and I doubt if their operating income would be sufficient to pay the interest charges. Then we had the Montreal terminals committal, to say nothing of the hocol 5nd steamship undertakings.

I havo hoard Liberals. both on public platforms and in this house, endeavour to blame the railway management for this waste oi pub- lic money, but the fact stands out like a sore thumb that the contract of the general manager expired on April 4, 1928, and was not renewed until September, 1929. The clear in- ference is that s, club was held over his head slid that ii he wanted his contract renewed these extravaflni

expenditures had to be made in or- der to assiskths progren of the ubenl pllticllemlohhlo.

11m CHARLOTTETOWN gunnmm

w/xlplup MIglwrtIP/yn

GENERAL ELECTRIC

LOWEST 005T REFRIGERATION

Domestic and Commercial Models for Every Need

Electric.-

G-E Refrigerator in

Top Models.

homo stance.

NEW MODERN DION in both Ho! Top and

OREihanorteandal-lalfmillioaovlrfirs cantellyouwhycneoutofeiveryihroo electric refriqerolorsinusetodsyis a

suon-s-noa provides handy, cairn storeqs butter, cheese, small bottled qoods, fruits, etc. l ILL-Erin CREDIT!‘ with thick air-tight Hoolfnnd unusually efficient insulation. Ensures long liloT-"md economics! operation. ’ '* manuals erm- mzuzun n easily oissuogguc won't rotsiufoododorl. Cannot chip, pool. or nub, TEMPERATURE CONTROL, eonvenlintly located, permits foster or slower freeing. LDJUSTBBIAE SIQNE. Upper shelves romovsblq Bottom shelf “telescopes” b accommodate roasts, gin. vnolrrsfiim clusvm included u no oxirs out."

General Electric offers you lowest can! refrigeration. II loves you more than you pay. A few dollars dovmpuis l

m

your home. _; _

AmsHdownpaymentwillputsGenerslElecfrioinyolu

Modemiz: Your Home With

General Electric Servant: ‘ Rsmcusross-Horrom-r Rmcss 1- RADIO! sun RAmo-raons-Horromr Arruaicu Wssmans nun IaoNsss-Taucuaon Cutn Emsou Mama ANEILI ' Suumurs AND Fans-Warns Hanna",

Made in Canada " v-ni

CANADIAN GENERAL ELECTRH]CmIMmH¢i

Prlncely ‘Salaries

Now for a moment I should like to deal with salaries and wages. Hon. gentlemen opposite have said that under this government labour- ers havc not been receiving fair wages. Let us see whether the lab-

pourer was protected nndor the Ilib-q

eral regime, or whether they looked after the high salaried man. We had one man drawing a. salsrycf $157,000 annually, with another man in the railway receiving $62,000. He was the director of expenditures; he had to see that the money went to the proper channels. Then an- other agent of the same bunch who was employed in London re- celvcd $25,000 annually. and there were many other salaries ranging from $20,000 to $30,000. These are the people who, after paying these terrible salaries, say that at present the labourer is not receiving his just desserts. '

The government made other wild expenditures. I would like to re- mind the financial ultic that they paid $110,000 annually for club dues and fees. It would seem that the whole government were playing golf or that they belonged to all the clubs throughout the country. Under the present government all these extravagances have been cut out; no one can point to any ex- penditures of the kind that went on ior several years under the Lib- oral government. Then there are one or two other salaries I should like to mention, one being that of a stenographer or private secretary who received $22,000. Do hon. mem- bers suppose that the Liberal party and the hon. member who acts as the financial critic for the opposi- tiun did not know anything about that? We will admit that $22,000 was a very good salary. Again, a policeman who strutted his stuff all over the country and was accommo- dated with a private car received a salary oi $15,000. The cos: oi the private car in which he travelled, including attendants. amounted to an additional $35,000 annually. Un- der those conditions who would o‘:- ject to being a. policeman in thw employ of the Canadian National Railways when tha; system oper- ated under the Liberal government? To indicate that tile late govern- merit did not look after the inter- ests of ordinary labouring men may I say that in those days nine- ty-six people were receiving sabr- ies of over $10000, and many more were receiving salaries of over $5,- 000. This condition, I am happy to say, has been corrected by the present administration.

"A Good Time Had By All"

In those days they had all kinds oi inspectors. For instance, in my own city oi.’ charlottelown, th: rail- ways had six or seven inspectors visit the city in one week. There was an inspector oi spikes and bolts, another o1 oils and greases. another oi safety-first devices, and several other inspectors at1ending_ to other minor details. All this work could have been done by one man. They had a good time, putting up at the best hotels and playing golf from morning till night at the ex- pense of the Canadian National Railways. I believe that if the of- ficial financial critic of the oppo-

sition had looked into these de-

tails, he would not have made the statements he did with regard to the Canadian National Raiways: certainly he would not have said that they paid their deficits out of earnings. In fact it ill behooves the hon. gentleman, as an ex-min- ister of the crown, ,to jumble or to juggle figures with regard to

these matters when, as a matter 0! flvt. the government oi whichu

for the greater part oi the debt and interest oi the Canadian Na.- tional Railways.

Directing his remarks to the Minister oi Finance, and speaking about trade conditions, the hon. member is quoted at page 2628 of I-Iansard, as follows:

"go does not seem to realize that per aps _the most important thing In this country is trade."

The Ottawa Conference

He stated further that trade had developed through its own natural channels. surely Mr. Speaker, the hon. member must have had a twinge o; conscience when he made ‘that remark, because it is not so very long ago that he was one oi those hon. members who voted against the conference trade agree- ments with thc British emPife- Dame Rumour has it that he has been severely censured by people in the Maritimes for his action in this connection. Again, at page 2629 oi Hansard he takes another wal- lop at the trade agreements when he uses the following language:

“The fact of the mutter is that any increase in trade between Canada. and the Mother Country has been due to natural and econ- omic causes."

I wonder if the hon. member will deny that the Ottawa trade 113F90- ments have developed a substantial expansion incanadirs empire trade- Liberal members will have to take back a. good deal of what they said regarding the trade agreements. Their success has been a great dis- appointment to the Liberal oppo- siti0n, and they will have to take a back flop in regard to many of their utterances in that regard. They wanted to destroy the Ottawa conference: they did not. want it to be held. They have said that if el- ected they would dfislwy W959 trade agreements. I doubt it; I do not believe they will ever have the chance, but if they do. 1 Sllggflfl