May 10, 1932

LIB

Edward James Young

Liberal

Mr. YOUNG:

That debate is not yet

concluded.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CON

Armand Renaud La Vergne (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

The CHAIRMAN:

According to rule 293

the hon. member may not refer to a previous debate of the same session unless it is on the same question.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB-PRO

John Livingstone Brown

Liberal Progressive

Mr. BROWN:

Bill 72 proposes to give

power to the government to aid in the marketing of farm products.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Frederick George Sanderson

Liberal

Mr. SANDERSON:

That is what I was

going to point out. That bill really is for farm relief and it covers the whole question.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CON

Armand Renaud La Vergne (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

The CHAIRMAN:

But this is a different

question. The committee is in supply.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Frederick George Sanderson

Liberal

Mr. SANDERSON:

True, we have been

all over the map to-night from one end of the country to the other. I wrould point out, with all due respect to your ruling, Mr. Chairman, that there is a clause in Bill No. 72 whereby the government seek the power-and by their majority in this house they will get that p0wer-of practically a blank cheque once more to aid any industiy in the country- any manufacturing industry, any bank, any insurance company, any trust company, any corporation, with unlimited credit. They can spend the people's money and are not limited to $1,000,000 but may spend $100,000,000 or $200,000,000. The point I want to make is this-

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CON

Armand Renaud La Vergne (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

The CHAIRMAN:

Order. What the hon.

member has just said convinces me that it is not the same question, and he may not refer to that debate.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Frederick George Sanderson

Liberal

Mr. SANDERSON:

I do not want to say

much more about it. I have said about ail I wanted to say. The government, under this Bill 72, which will pass in a day or two, will have unlimited power to aid all sorts of manufacturing concerns; yet they come into this house with estimates for the basic industry of Canada and show a reduction in those estimates of $3,300,000 odd, notwithstanding the fact that, if agriculture does not prosper, no one in Canada can be prosperous. They have money for everybody but the farmers. They have money for their friends the big interests; they have money for their friends the manufacturing interests; they have money for everybody except the farmer, and the estimates which should be intended to assist the farmer are reduced by 33J per cent or, as I have pointed out, 83,300,000. As has been pointed out in this house time and again in connection with various matters that have been under discussion, the government seem

Supply-A gricult ure

to forget that the basic industry of this country, namely, agriculture, should receive the first consideration of any administration. But they are going to starve that industry and save millions for the big interests. They will get authority from this house-because they have the majority behind them to carry any measure they bring in-to starve the basic industry of this dominion. They do not appear to be at all concerned about markets for the farmers' products.

Coming back to the minister, he said tonight that he thought he would have a policy. He said, if I heard him rightly, "I discussed the matter with some of my friends and came to the conclusion that there should be a national marketing board. I was of that opinion myself and I still am, but in discussing it with some of my friends I have decided that we will not do anything until after the Imperial conference which is to be held in this city in July." Now, what are they waiting for? Why, three months after they came into power in 1930, if they had been alive to the interests of the country, if they had been alive to our basic industry, they would have formulated some policy for the agriculturists of Canada. But to-day at this late date they have no policy and the minister brings down his estimates to-night, reduced, not by ten per cent but by thirty-three and a third per cent-reduced S3,300,000-and he says, "We have no policy yet, but I have been discussing the question and perhaps after the conference we shall have a policy." Had they been alive to the interests of the farmers, the government would before now have formulated a policy which they could submit to the Imperial conference in an endeavour to obtain a market for the farm products of this country. But they are stifling the trade of the country. They talk about manufacturing in Canada, and hands are being laid off. One thing that the Conservative party has always forgotten is that prosperity in this country must come primarily from the products of the farm. If the farmers are not prosperous, no one will prosper: the manufacturers will have no business, the banks will have no business, the insurance companies will have no business. But hon. gentlemen opposite are neglecting the great basic industry because apparently they do not care. Apparently they do not care for the farmers, but I want to tell them that when the time comes for the farmers of Canada to register their votes, then independent of party feeling or party bias, ninety-five per cent of the Canadian farmers

will mark their ballots against this government and turn them out, electing some government that will at least realize that the basic industry of Canada is farming.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CON

Follin Horace Pickel

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. PICKEL:

We have heard a long

discussion this evening and great anxiety has been expressed by members of the opposition as to what our policy is. I would ask those hon. gentlemen what their agricultural policy was in regard to the dairy industry. They never had a policy; this country simply drifted in that regard. The only legislation which the Liberal government passed, presumably for the benefit of the eastern dairy farmers, was restrictive and it was very injurious to those farmers. We had a hog grading act, an egg grading act, and various inspections. At one time, in 1926, 1927 and 1928, we had four different inspections. We had a Montreal inspection, a provincial inspection, a federal inspection and a New York inspection, with different regulations governing each.

A good deal of anxiety has been expressed in regal'd to our agricultural policy. Let me say that to-day, for the first time in many years, we- have a Minister of Agriculture who exhibits a little bit of sympathy towards mixed and dairy farming. That is something we have not had in this country for many years. I would advise hon. members opposite to have patience for a short time and they will see that distinct, guiding policies will be evolved.

They are complaining about the price of butter to-day. What was it in 1926, 1927 and 1928? We used to compare it with prices in the United States. At the present time we are getting better prices for butter and eggs than farmers in the United States are receiving. In the first fifteen days of September, 1926, the United States farmer got twenty-six cents a pound more for his butter than we did on this side of the line. We got twenty-nine cents while he received fifty-five cents per pound. For twenty years the United States farmers got from seven to twenty cents a pound more than we did. This is the first time in all these years that the price of butter has been higher in Canada than on the other side of the line.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Joseph Georges Bouchard

Liberal

Mr. BOUCHARD:

Has my hon. friend

seen the last report of the Department of Agriculture under date of May 7 giving comparisons in regard to the price of butter? In Canada it was sixteen and one-half cents while in New York it was twenty and one-half cents.

Supply-Agriculture

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CON

Follin Horace Pickel

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. PICKEL:

I do not deny that report

may be correct, but I say, generally speaking for the past six months our egg and butter prices have been much better than they have been across the line.

As regards the reduction in the agriculture estimates and the references made by some lion, members opposite to different inspectors being laid off and so forth, I should like to cite what occurred in the port of Montreal from 1925 to 1930 while the Australian treaty was in force. During that period the then government maintained seventeen butter graders in that port. In 1928 one of them told me that they had hardly enough butter there to grade for their own use and yet seventeen graders were maintained during that time. The peculiar feature about that grading was [DOT]this: When we did happen to have a box or two of butter to export, the Englishmen did not accept our grading; he graded it himself. My hon. friends opposite have been making loud noises just to impress their electors; that is all they are doing. I agree with many of them that agriculture is very important and I maintain that the dairy farmer of the east is entitled to some consideration. I have nothing tp say against the wheat growers, but for the last fifteen or twenty years, what attention has been devoted to agriculture has been for the benefit of the grain growers of the west. They must not forget that for one grain grower west of the lakes there are two farmers in the east, and that seventy-five per cent of the taxes come from Ontario and Quebec. We want to do anything we can to help the grain growers, but I submit that the whole agricultural policy of the government should not be for the benefit of the west.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Jean-François Pouliot

Liberal

Mr. POULIOT:

After such a speech, the farmers of the eastern townships will be prosperous and rich. I have never before heard a member representing a rural constituency uttering such nonsense as the hon. gentleman has done.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CON

Armand Renaud La Vergne (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Conservative (1867-1942)

The CHAIRMAN:

To say that an hon. member is talking nonsense is hardly parliamentary.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Jean-François Pouliot

Liberal

Mr. POULIOT:

Well, I will say not common sense. My hon. friend spoke against inspectors. There are inspectors to classify daily products, indeed, to classify all farm products, and it is only after such a classification that the farmers can get a fair price. This is something that is known to every man, even to a doctor who lives among farmers. I have for a long time advocated the appointment of inspectors for farm products, because such inspection is most essential. Formerly farm

products and, in particular, potatoes, were not graded and the farmers got very little for their products. After inspectors were appointed, after farm products were graded, the farmers received much higher prices. The reason why inspectors should be appointed is that farm products may be graded one, two, three, or A, B, C, as the case may be, so that when the purchaser goes to the market he can get exactly what he wants, for instance, grade 1 or grade 2 potatoes and so on. In the old days that was not the case. When the hon. member for Brome-iMissisquoi was young, when a man went into a store and asked for something, he would be told by the merchant: I have not that, but you should take this and it will suit you just as well. Well, when a purchaser goes to a store and says he wants such and such, if he does not get it, he goes to the next store or to the next town in order to get it.

I must congratulate the hon. member for Missisquoi on rising to speak. We have all heard about the Tories from Quebec being dead. I might use in respect to them the term which was used during the war "debout les morts"-"Stand up, you dead." Since the election took place we have not heard fiom them in regard to butter. They have been as silent as rocks. I cannot compare them to trees, because sap comes out of trees. They are just as dumb as stones. Now they swallow what they vomited before the election. This is what all the Tories from the province of Quebec, especially those from the eastern townships, who were elected because of butter, have been doing. During the last election we heard all sorts of, not nonsense, but things that were not common sense. I make an exception to you, Mr. Chairman, because I have more consideration for you than for your colleagues in the party from Quebec.

Progress reported.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink

ARMS AND AMMUNITION

CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

I have the honour to inform the house that I have received a message from the Senate that Their Honours do unite with the House of Commons in the approval of the international convention for the supervision of the international trade in arms and ammunition, Geneva, 17th June, 1925, signed on behalf of Canada by the Honourable Raoul Dandurand on the 22nd September, 1925.

Topic:   SUPPLY-WHEAT BONUS CONTINUATION OF PAYMENT OF FIVE CENTS A BUSHEL ON CHOP 1932-33
Subtopic:   ARMS AND AMMUNITION
Sub-subtopic:   APPROVAL OF CONVENTION FOR SUPERVISION OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN MUNITIONS AND IMPLEMENTS OF WAR
Permalink

At eleven o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standuur order. Radio-Report of Committee



Wednesday, May 11, 1932.


May 10, 1932