In what way? It would be interesting to know whether there is anything definite in the mind of the minister or of the department as to what is to be done under this section. From reading it I do not know just what is aimed at.
One example might be the failure to observe grading regulations in connection with hogs, for example, or anything else that might arise in this connection. The whole point in the change of this definition is to give further power not only in connection with exports but also in connection with interprovincial trade in order to correct any abuses that may arise.
That does not say anything at all. We do not know what abuse the legislation is designed to remove or what offence is expected to be created under it or what punishment there is to be for the offence; in fact we are entirely in the dark as to what the government have in mind. Does the department intend to prevent certain kinds of meat from moving from province to province while they may be moved from point to point within a province? Is that the point they have in mind?
the objection to this section of my hon. friend from Hants-Kings (Mr. Ilsley). I think there is danger in creating barriers between the provinces. I believe what we should have in mind in Canada is the development of a national sentiment instead of the creation of different provincial territories separated and divided one from the other. If you start with small matters such as this in connection with the regulation of cattle, hogs and so on it may spread to other fields, and I think that is a dangerous principle to develop in this country.
reference is made to the recommendation in clause 11 of division 2 on page XXII of the report. So far as I can see that is an incorrect reference; I cannot find the recommendation referred to. I should like to know what recommendation is referred to so that I may see what the government have in mind.
Page XXII of the preface. Recommendations have come to the department from time to time, and the department itself has also felt, that in connection with meats it would be advisable to make available to the provinces, if they so desired, an inspection of meats for domestic purposes. A good deal of work has been done in connection with the grading of meats during the past number of years with the hope that if the consumers had some assurance as to the quality of the meat they were purchasing, through a grade placed upon it-red label or blue label beef, for example-it would encourage the consumption of meat. I think perhaps it has come to the attention of every hon. member of the house, in travelling throughout the country and stopping at hotels and other eating places, that possibly nine
times out of ten they have been disappointed in the quality of the meat served to them, particularly beef. I know that opinion is held very strongly by the live stock producers themselves, and each person who is disappointed in the quality of the meat he gets is a lost purchaser, to a certain extent, of live stock products. So far this inspection has not been pressed in the domestic market but it is felt that if the province of Ontario, for example, should wish to carry further this policy of grading meats for consumption, they should be given the privilege of doing so.
Personally I feel that because of the large percentage of our meat, for instance beef, that is consumed locally, it would not take very much of a stepping up in the consumption to take care of a great part of our present surplus for export, and it is felt that the one move that would go further than anything else to bring about that end would be to make it easier for the consumer to be assured of the grade or quality of his meat, so that the purchaser might know as nearly as possible what he was getting. I believe during the investigation by the price spreads committee complaints were registered that stores would advertise for sale red label and blue label beef. These stores would have some of that beef for sale but on some occasions, without an explanation to the purchaser, they sold beef that was not graded either red or blue label. In that way the consumer was misled, with no possibility of redress. I know there is a very strong feeling among those who are anxious to make better use of our domestic market that we should carry further the grading of beef in order to encourage thp consumption of higher quality beef and to make more difficult the misrepresentation that undoubtedly has occurred in some cases in this regard. In order to do that the definition of "export" has to be changed in order to take care of the interprovincial movement; so that if the province of Ontario decided to have compulsory provincial inspection of beef, for example, that would not be effective if beef could be shipped in from other provinces without undergoing the same inspection.