Mr. COLD WELL:

I was just going to

suggest that the hon. member has been given a considerable amount of latitude and a great deal of time. While I am not objecting to that, I think that if we are going to accord this extra time to the hon. member for The Battlefords (Mr. Gregory), when some of the rest of us wish to overstep the time limit we should be granted a similar privilege. I just draw that to your attention, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. GREGORY:

The words to which I take exception are "political heeler" and "rotten political system in the west." For one moment I should like to defend the members of this house who come from western Canada, including myself. I feel that these words are a reflection upon the election of every hon. member from western Canada. It is something to which I think I should be entitled to make reference. In doing so, I wish to include all hon. members from western Canada, whether they be Conservative, Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, Social Credit, Liberal or what-not. To use the terms "rotten political system in the west" and "political heeler" seems to me to be creating the impression that every western member comes more or less under the shadow of that accusation. There is in that expression something sinister which I for one wish to resent, especially since it may refer to my particular constituency.

In using those terms, did the hon. member refer to government employees? Did she refer to paid organizers? Did she refer to voluntary workers who are willing to give their time for the welfare of their political party? Did she refer to all of these in her reference to a rotten political system? Government employees may be either provincial or dominion. Provincial employees may be inspectors under the Old Age Pension Act, under the relief act, or in connection with provincial revenues or resources or highways. They may be auditors in connection with education or other branches of the government. They may be federal field men, agricultural or otherwise. These would all come under the term "government employees." All governments require such employees. Not long ago we had in Saskatchewan a government made up of every "ism" that was ever heard of-I refer to

The Budget-Mr. Gregory

the Anderson government. That government found it necessary to employ inspectors and auditors. The present government finds it necessary to have such employees. Any government, regardless of what political colour it may be, finds it necessary to have such employees travelling throughout the province. I do not know of a single instance in which these men have had time to engage in political work. They have a full-time job, and that is what they are paid for.

Does her remark refer to paid organizers? Every party, be it Liberal, Conservative, Cooperative Commonwealth Federation or Social Credit, has or has had paid organizers. I know one paid organizer of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation who now sits as a member of this house. There is nothing wrong in that. The Social Credit party had an abundance of paid organizers in 1938 when Mr. Aberhart and his followers invaded Saskatchewan. I must have met two dozen of them in the city of North Battleford, and they radiated from there in all directions. There is nothing wrong in that.

Was she referring to voluntary supporters? There is nothing wrong in that. No one had more voluntary supporters than the hon. member for North Battleford. In addition to that, there were many communists, Cooperative Commonwealth Federation and Social Credit members who worked for the two years leading up to that famous united reform or united front convention which nominated the present member for North Battleford. Disgruntled Liberals formed a large part of the active workers. They were disgruntled because they did not have jobs. They were disgruntled because they had not been able to obtain grazing and timber leases. They were disgruntled because they had not been able to sell things to the government at exorbitant prices. AH these people who, for various reasons, were disgruntled, were actively working for the election of the present member.

I should like to say a word or two with respect to this famous convention. There was much going to and fro; there was much going backwards and forwards; there was much fluttering in the dovecotes of the ranks of the communists, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, the Social Credit party and the disgruntled Liberals for the two years leading up to this particular convention.

Mr. COLDWELL:

The hon. member

includes the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation. I should like to inquire if he believes that the official Cooperative Commonwealth Federation was represented there?

Mr. GREGORY:

The hon. member is a

little impatient. If he will just be patient he will have an answer.

Mr. COLDWELL:

We have been quite

patient, for twenty minutes I believe. In the years I have been here I have never known of a speaker being given as much latitude in time as the hon. member has been given. We certainly have been patient with him.

Mr. GREGORY:

All these people were

very busy for nearly two years. In reply to the question asked by my hon. friend of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, may I say that that party became so tainted by evil communications, so hybridized in that constituency, that the provincial leader disbanded the organization for the constituency and repudiated the group. When that constituency elected two or more delegates to go to Saskatoon to the provincial convention of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, they were refused admission. I wish to pay a tribute to the official Cooperative Commonwealth Federation and the Social Credit parties of Saskatchewan for being so desirous of keeping their political stock uncrossed and untainted.

I have not finished with the remarks of the hon. member with respect to the rotten political system in western Canada. Under our present system each political party stands for something, each political party has certain principles which it attempts to follow. Thus, we have Liberal principles, Conservative principles, Cooperative Commonwealth Federation principles and Social Credit principles. Each member of these groups has these principles as a chart to guide him on his course. He can do no other if he is honest with himself and true to his constituents. In my judgment, that is a good political system. Under it we know in what direction a member of this house will go. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, what you think of a system under which disgruntled Liberals, communists, Conservatives, members of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation and. the Social Credit groups meet together in convention to nominate a candidate.

I ask you what chart had been given to that candidate? I ask you, what course should a member follow if elected by such a convention? Would it not lead to confusion and chaos in this house if such a course were followed generally? Would it not destroy representative parliamentary and responsible government? Would it not lead to the very thing which I quoted a moment ago, a rotten political system? I am only depicting the exact conditions which prevailed in North Battleford constituency, and I can best describe

The Budget-Mr. Boucher

the system by using the hon. member's own words, a rotten political system in the west- or that part of the west known as North Battleford constituency.

May I close with this last remark? We must be on our guard at the present time against subversive elements in Canada. It is commonly asserted that there is more communist money abroad in Canada at present than in peace time, and I believe it, because I have seen the evidence of it everywhere in Canada. It would be well to guard against being made an unconscious tool by communists or other subversive forces. In my judgment, a public speaker at the present time has a duty far transcending any other and that is to exhort the people, encourage the timid, direct the energetic, and stimulate the patriotism of all in the stupendous task of bringing victory to our cause by work, by enthusiasm, by enlistment, if you will, by saving our cash and giving it to the government. Everything else can wait, because everything else is futile if our arms do not prevail.

Mr. G. R. BOUCHER (Carleton):

Mr. Speaker, in these days of stress and national emergency I take it to be the bounden duty of every Canadian to do his utmost to assist those in authority in the whole-hearted prosecution of our war effort.

Parliament is now discussing a budget, the largest and heaviest ever placed upon the people of Canada. We have just concluded our discussion of a war appropriation act calling for $1,470,000,000 for war purposes, and I believe that that, too, was the largest war appropriation act ever placed before the House of Commons. As a result, every loyal Canadian must, I am sure, be seized with a sense of the emergency that is facing us in these days. The whole world is in such a situation as to call for the utmost endeavours and the greatest efforts of all mortals to save democracy and even our civilization. In my humble opinion the people of Canada are in a mood that says in the loudest possible voice to the government: Carry on the war effort and provide the men and materials needed whatever the cost may be, but take he'ed that your taxation measures are equitable and the burden just. By that yardstick I believe we should judge the budget before parliament to-day.

I am also of opinion that the policy adopted by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) of pay as you go, so far as that is practicable, is a sound one, but it must necessarily involve a great burden of taxation, one that must make us all sit up and take notice.

Many of us believe that the government has spent large sums of money not altogether economically, not with perfect efficiency;

nevertheless we feel that they are doing their part in this war and that we must give them our support. It is our duty therefore, I take it, to say nothing and do nothing that will interfere with or hinder or delay our war effort.

I see many commendable things in the budget. It calls upon those drawing an income to pay a heavy income tax, but I believe that the people of Canada who are receiving an income are even more anxious to pay taxes than this government is aware. I believe that they are of opinion that so long as the money is wisely spent to further our war effort, the taxes will be paid and the war prosecuted. Rather than condemn the government for exacting too many taxes, I believe that the people of this country are more inclined to say: Make a greater effort, even though it may cost more.

There are one or two matters I should like to draw to the attention of the house in connection with this budget. I feel that the middle-classman, the man with a small income, is being called upon to pay too great a share of taxation. I believe that the man with a small income should be given more consideration, and that certain groups of our people should be relieved. Just recently I was consulted by one of my constituents, and I should like to bring the point he raised to the attention of the Minister of Finance. He is a young chap with a small income. He found it his duty and his privilege to take into his home his sister-in-law and four children, recently arrived as guests from England. That, of course, casts a great responsibility upon a man with a small income. Even though it is a pleasure to him to do it, it seriously handicaps his opportunities. So far as I am aware, no provision is made in the budget whereby this man could get exemption from income tax on behalf of those four children and the mother, even though he can receive no assistance from his brother in England on behalf of the family. I would ask the Minister of Finance to take this case into consideration and see if the same exemption cannot be granted in respect of the four children and the mother as is granted in the case of ordinary dependents. I think that would be a proper gesture towards those generous-minded citizens of Canada who have come to the rescue of friends from overseas in time of trouble.

So far as the tax on gasoline is concerned, the government might have gone even further and limited the consumption of gasoline in order to save foreign exchange, and perhaps made the tax even higher on gasoline used solely for pleasure purposes.

But coming as I do from a riding that is largely rural and agricultural, I can see that the tax as now set up, of three cents a gallon,

The Budget-Mr. Boucher

places a heavy burden upon the farmer. The provincial legislature, in imposing a tax of this kind, saw fit in its wisdom to exempt from taxation gasoline that was used as fuel for power machines on the farm, and I think the Minister of Finance might very well adopt the same course with his tax. I believe everybody will agree that the agriculturists throughout our country are bearing a very undue burden at the present time and that they are a heavy casualty, not only of the war, but of the economic conditions in which we find ourselves.

Just recently I was reading a book written by our late Governor General, Lord Tweeds-muir. It is called "Memory Hold-the-Door", by John Buchan, and I came upon a paragraph dealing with youth and middle-class people which, I think, applies very well to the farmer in the broader sense. May I ask the indulgence of the house while I read a paragraph from the chapter entitled "The Other Side of the Hill":

In my lifetime I seem to note a change which is a graver thing than our other discontents, which, indeed, is in a large measure the cause of them. The outlook of youth has been narrowed, doors have been sealed, channels have silted up, there is less choice of routes at the cross-roads.

This affects principally the middle class. Let me define that odious word. At one end of the social scale is the plutocracy, whose sons will be sufficiently well dowered to indulge their fancy. If they enter a profession they have the security of means behind them. At the other end are the wage-earning classes, who in their health and wealth are largely the care of the state. Between come the "middling folk" in many gradations; their characteristics are that they have to earn their living, since they have no accumulated fortunes, that the state has little responsibility for them, that they have a reasonable average of culture and certain strong traditions in customs, manners and conduct. The class contains most of the knowledge and skill in the nation. Also, since our nominal aristocracy has been so copiously diluted, it contains most of the older stocks, the people with the longest proven descent.

For this great class the world has become more rigid than I remember it. A young man seems to me to have fewer avenues open to him, and fewer chances in these avenues. I leave out of account the preeminence of mind or character which we call genius, for that will always hew out a course. I am speaking of youth of reasonable capacity and moderate ambitions, which seeks a calling with hope and daylight in it, which is capable of a great effort of patience but must have a glimpse of some attainable goal.

I ask hon. members to reflect upon these passages as they deal with the agriculturist in Canada to-day. The man about whom we have heard so much during this parliament, the man who is, after all, the lifeblood of the nation, the agriculturist, who comprises 35 per cent of our population and is calculated to be earning about eleven per cent of our income.

For this class, particularly, I appeal with what vehemence I can, and, I might say, in every way I can, for the consideration of this house, and at the moment, particularly, of the Minister of Finance. I believe that in the imposition of the taxes, particularly the tax on gasoline, one means of coming to the assistance of the agriculturist would be by exempting him from payment of taxes on the gasoline and the oil he uses in his power machinery.

With the indulgence of the house I should like to express in a few words my opinion of what the true condition of agriculture is, particularly in my county. It is not a wheat growing county; it is a district of mixed farming, dairying, stock and poultry raising, butter and cheese making, the production of eggs and poultry. In the past ten years, according to my observations, great improvements have been made through the splendid cooperation of the departments of agriculture of both dominion and provincial governments. The quality of the farmer's products has been wonderfully improved. I believe that the consumer has greatly benefited through that improvement in quality. But I fear that the cost of the improvement, of the raising of the quality, has been borne by the producer, and that the governments, possibly through thoughtlessness, have failed to enhance the price to correspond with the increased cost of production.

Just recently I had an illustration of this condition brought before me so far as the egg-grading act is concerned. I should like to discuss it for a moment as emblematic of the type of discrimination or neglect which, in my opinion, this and other parliaments have shown towards the agriculturist. A new egggrading regulation was introduced in my district the first of the past month. We have had egg-grading regulations before, and the government, through its efficient employees, sponsored the establishment of a pool in one particular area of my riding. The government representative, with the egg and poultry regulation act in his hand, organized an egg pool. A meeting was held and directors were elected. He advised the farmers to elect a manager, pay him a salary, have him bonded for honesty, and ask him to send a return in to the government every week. He was compelled to give a return to every farmer whose eggs he graded. The return given to the farmer must show the quantity of eggs, the quality of the eggs, the name of the man from whom they were purchased, and the price paid. These things were compulsory. The report to be given to the Department of Agriculture-entirely optional, not by any means compulsory-provided that he report

The Budget-Mr. Gershaw

weekly the quantities sold, the grades of those quantities, not the price at which the eggs were sold, but the quantity sold.

A year elapsed in the operation of this particular egg pool, and here was the result. An auditor was engaged, with the cooperation of the Department of Agriculture, and he made an audit of the transactions of the past eight months. He found out, from what prices he could ascertain-and most of the prices he could not learn-that there was a big discrepancy. He came to the Department of Agriculture to find out what should be done. They could not ascertain to whom the manager sold the eggs, what the grading was, or what the prices received were. There was no compulsion upon the manager to give a report to the Department of Agriculture, and there was no way of punishing him if he rendered a wrong report.

Let us compare that situation with the legislation in operation so far as tradesmen are concerned. In the same week in which this matter came to my attention a carpenter came to my law office to ask me to defend him on a charge in the police court. He had, by statutory enactment, to send in a report to the local council, with a penalty if he failed to do so, giving the name of each man he hired, the place he worked, the hours he worked, and the pay he received. According to his own statement to me, he had paid a carpenter sixty cents an hour when the minimum was greater, and he was forced to pay the balance. Compare these circumstances; contrast the protection given to barbers, painters, decorators, plumbers, tinsmiths, with the protection given to agriculturists by way of legislation, by way of penalty for breaches of requirements or requests of the Department of Agriculture-for instance, in the grading of eggs.

In my opinion those things clearly indicate why agriculture has lagged behind in the progress of the times and why the farmers feel-and I have no doubt about it-that they are not getting for their labour the returns to which they are entitled. We in this part of the house urged that greater consideration be given, but the government did not see fit to comply with that request. However, I ask them now to pay some attention to this matter and grant some relief so far as the tax on gasoline is concerned.

I do not wish to delay the house any longer, but I would point out to hon. members and to the country at large that, according to my conception of public opinion to-day, the people of Canada feel that the government has not gone far enough in that they

show utter lack of courage and leadership in prosecuting this war. The people in my riding, in every part and parcel of it, are as it were champing at the bit in their desire to see a greater war effort put forth; and I as their spokesman wish to add my approval of the budget so far as it has gone and my exhortation that a greater effort be made, even though the cost be greater.

Mr. F. W. GERSHAW (Medicine Hat):

First of all, I wish to congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) upon the budget, which has been well accepted in the country and certainly by the members of this house. In order to avoid repeating what has already been said, and in view of the latitude which you, Mr. Speaker, have so graciously allowed in this debate, I shall confine my remarks almost entirely to rehabilitation problems. At the moment we all realize that the war is the overshadowing issue. It is being waged in the air, on the sea and on the land. It is being waged in offices, factories and workshops, and in the remote parts of the country men are saving their money to buy war savings certificates, women are working long hours to provide comforts for the soldiers, and even children are bringing their pennies to school as their contribution. No sacrifice is too great to help the valiant forces of democracy in this great struggle. It is true that the months ahead may be dark, but beyond that darkness there is the light of victory. Let us hope that with that victory there will come better social conditions, more equality of opportunity and happier homes undarkened by fear of unemployment and poverty.

Surely it is only the part of wisdom to prepare at this time for living conditions for the tens of thousands who will be released from war work and for the strangers who will come to our land. Some of the plans I will mention will cost a little money, but many of them can be carried out practically without expense.

First of all, look at the live stock industry. The tending of flocks and herds is the first industry of which we have any record, and all down through the ages it has been the principal occupation of mankind. Western Canada supported great herds of buffalo in days long gone by. We know this because of Indian records and because there are deep paths that can be seen to this day on the hill sides, paths made by great herds of buffalo as they wended their way to watering places. As the buffalo disappeared, large numbers of cattle spread over the western prairies; while there was the open range, ranchers prospered and were happy; and the romance

The Budget-Mr. Gershaw

of the west, with all that it means in the way of early characteristics and sentiments, owes its origin to these early adventurers. They lived their lives in the open and were generous and sociable. No one was ever turned away hungry from their doors. In fact, their attitude to life was expressed in the words: Ask why the eagle soars in air

And builds on high his craggy nest;

Ask why the fishes swim so deep Then ask me why I love the west.

It was this whole-hearted, open-handed mode of life that made the west a place where the smile was a little brighter and the welcome to strangers a little more spontaneous. As time went on, this industry fell on evil days, and support was needed in order to assure the stability and the security of the rancher. A great deal has been done along these lines, and if the policies are pursued and pursued vigorously, benefits will be reflected in every line of Canadian activity.

Recently a writer by the name of Mr. C. M. Short, in discussing conditions in Europe, pointed out that grain production was being expanded there in spite of the terrors of war, but that the herds were being depleted, and therefore we can look forward to a market for breeding stock, meats and dairy products in those countries when the war is over.

To illustrate how tariff conditions can ruin an industry, I would point out that the greatest blow to the ranching industry came in 1930 when the Hawley-Smoot tariff was imposed by the United States. It placed a tax of $3 per hundredweight on all cattle entering that market and weighing over 700 pounds, and S2.50 per hundredweight on those weighing less than 700 pounds. During the preceding five years the average number of cattle shipped to the United States was 142,123. When the blow fell in 1930, the export to that market dropped to 19,483, and during the next five years it declined until it reached the low level of 9,936. It is true that at that time great efforts were made to develop the far-away British market in competition with cattle from Ireland and other countries, but only 30,670 were annually shipped. The industry was not sustained; prices fell from 2 to 3i cents a pound, with losses to ranchers, and herds could not be kept up.

Then in 1935, with the change of government, and greatly to the credit of this administration, the successful United States-Canada agreement was consummated. Duties were cut from S3 to $2 and then to $1.50 per hundredweight, and a generous quota was arranged for Canadian cattle. There was great rejoicing. There was joy in the homes

of the cattlemen of the country because they felt they would be able to arrange a standard of living befitting people in their walk of life. However, it happened that after 1935 the succeeding years were years of drought. Prairie grass curled up under the blistering rays of the sun; forage crops failed to grow; streams that had never failed before dried up, and these summer conditions were followed by such hard winters that the cattlemen were not able to supply the United States market and, in some instances, relief measures had to be taken.

At that time the late Hon. Robert Weir was Minister of Agriculture, and I should like at this time to pay a tribute for the contribution he made to agriculture. He brought forward the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act to rehabilitate the drought and soil-drifting areas. Two years later, under the present minister, the scope of that act was enlarged to include land utilization and land settlement with all that that involved in the way of land surveys, gathering of records of practical experience, soil analyses, and so forth, over a wide area roughly bounded by the Palliser triangle and including a great part of three large provinces. This study of conditions was founded on the bedrock of actual experience by getting information from ranchers who had lived there up to fifty years, and also upon the cultural results worked out by the various experimental farms. It was not a method of teaching the farmer how to farm or the rancher how to ranch; agricultural improvement associations, shelter-belt associations and grazing associations were founded so that the knowledge of those engaged in the industry could be assembled and be made use of by those concerned. Soil surveys were made over 100,000,000 acres of land; community pastures were established and water conservation was encouraged. If any man had a ravine or a gully or a small stream running through his farm and felt that the spring run-off of water could be kept there, he was and still is given free engineering service and advice as to how best to construct that dug-out or stockwatering reservoir or small irrigation system which he might wish to make. In addition, he was given a fixed sum for every cubic yard of earth he moved in bringing about that construction.

This meant a great deal. It meant that he could have a garden, he could have milch cows, his home could be made more homelike. Some 17,000 of these structures have been made, and although the needs of the war are great, I believe that a mistake was made in reducing the vote for the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, because it meant that this work could not be extended as it should.

The Budget-Mr. Gershaw

It is true that bonuses are given, but the money is soon spent, whereas the construction of works such as these is of a permanent nature and will be a blessing to those living on that land for decades to come. Long and bitter experience has convinced us that the rainfall cannot be depended upon. There will be wet years, but there will be many dry years too when the grass will fail, when milch cows cannot be kept, when food for stock cannot be saved. Therefore, if every cattleman and farmer could have a reliable supply of water to provide dairy and garden products for himself and his family, he would be in a much better position. The value of these things cannot be estimated in money.

Through the west some larger irrigation schemes were undertaken, and partly constructed, and those should be completed as soon as possible; that could be done at comparatively small cost. As has been pointed out by several hon. members, we are in great danger of losing our Share of the waters of the international streams, and there is great need for action and action in earnest so that our share of these waters shall be preserved for future generations. In southern Alberta there are great drought-stricken areas, and impoverished people are living on that land with a low standard of living. In the springtime from the hills and mountains small streams are running down, and their water is not being made use of, although so vitally needed. Eleven million acre-feet of water which is the precious heritage of the people of that country is flowing to the ocean unused. There are about 506,577 acres of land irrigated, and there could be three times that amount of land irrigated in that country. The climate is suitable, the soil is fertile, experienced management is available; the one thing that is needed is water storage facilities.

There are some 52,000,000 acres of nonwheat land in the west. I was surprised to learn that 10.000,000 acres of that land had been settled, but that the settlers had been forced to leave because they could not make a living and that 10,000,000 acres are now abandoned land. In order to deal with that, Hon. Doctor Motherwell, when he was Minister of Agriculture, started a ranching experimental station at Manyberries. There they have studied every branch of ranching practice, methods of re-grassing, relative values of different grasses, costs of producing range cattle and sheep, the use of salt, relative increases of weight for different classes of cattle, carrying capacity, ways of dealing with poisonous weeds, rotation of grazing and many other matters of that kind. In that ranching experimental station they have developed the value of crested wheat grass which has saved

many farms in this country and which to-day is being used extensively for runways on our different airports.

Annually at that place there is a great gathering of ranchers and farmers. They come for many miles in order to observe and learn the results of recent experiments which have been carried on. A great deal has been done for the sheep industry by this government. One action they took about a year ago meant an increase of six cents in the price of every pound of wool produced in Canada. A little more encouragement would help our sheepmen to produce a much larger portion of the wool we use in Canada. We have tremendous overproduction of wheat, but we are hardly filling our quota of cattle in the United States market and are producing only 12-4 per cent of the raw material used for our sugar. I hope the minister will still find it possible to make some concession as to the tax burden on sugar made from home-grown raw material, because it is along these lines that the greatest possibility of development exists.

Then we have the oil industry, and in Alberta particularly it is an important industry. Many new oil fields are being found. Just recently there was discovered at a place called Princess in Alberta, a promising well. Four or five other wells are being drilled around there, a great number of people employed, and the Standard Oil of British Columbia have spent a good deal of money without having asked anyone for a Canadian dollar. Such enterprise is worthy of support. Markets should be found for the oil that can be produced, and encouragement should be given by federal and provincial governments to encourage the search for more oil and the development of more oil fields.

On account of the tremendous magnitude of our war expenditures, Canada is very short of United States dollars. Our imports from the United States last year were valued at $953,000,000, much of course-more than half -being aeroplane engines and war material; our exports to the United States amounted to only $475,000,000. Strenuous efforts have been made to save United States exchange by expanding our exports, by increasing our gold production, by taking over the gold of the Bank of Canada and private holders, by the ten per cent exchange tax, by prohibiting the import of certain articles from nonsterling countries, by refusing money for pleasure travel in the United States, and particularly by the good-neighbour declaration which we heard from Hyde Park only a short time ago.

The Budget-Mr. Gershaw

One of the things that is being done to some extent should, I think, be done to a greater extent; that is, encouraging the tourist industry. False rumours have hurt that industry. In parts of the United States it is said that we are charging 90 cents a gallon for gasoline; that we are rationing our butter; that military supervision is very strict, and so forth. We know these things are not true; yet we know also that the tourist industry, which yielded an average of $230,000,000 annually for the last ten years, brought in only some $S7,000,000 last year. One of the ways to encourage the tourist industry is that which has been undertaken by junior boards of trade and rotary clubs; that is, writing to friends in the United States and inviting them to come to this country. Another way would be by establishing good roads. This is a policy that must be pursued if we are to have these welcome visitors in our midst. In years gone by, this government provided grants for the construction of the trans-Canada highway. Later, it provided money for the construction of roads in order to relieve unemployment. Still later, some roads were constructed in our national parks, but it is hardly worth while building roads in the parks if the roads leading to those parks are impassable. Therefore I do believe the government should consider the advisability of carrying on this work to a greater extent.

Much has been said about the wheat industry and the unfortunate position in which the farmer finds himself. He is in an unfortunate position. In 1913 a bushel of wheat would buy a certain quantity of goods. To-day that bushel of wheat will buy only 59 per cent of that quantity. The farmer is getting a very small proportion of the national income, so that it seems necessary to provide certain bonuses and grants. These have helped out in a great number of instances, but at the same time I believe it is quite impossible to distribute bonuses in an absolutely fair way. Some farmers get too much, while others get none at all. It creates bitter feeling when one man who has had a crop failure finds that he cannot get a bonus because he happens to be in an ineligible township, while at the same time he sees a man living not far away, who has had a good crop, enjoying a bonus as well. In addition, some are denied the bonus for technical reasons which they cannot understand. I believe that much bitterness and bad feeling are engendered, that resentment and loss of faith in the fairness of government measures are brought about. I believe the system of bonusing, while it greatly helps some and is

TMr. Gershaw.]

perhaps the best immediate solution, is not the fairest way to help the farmers.

If some attention could be given the matters I have mentioned, we would be preparing for the day when the war is over and new conditions will have to be met. Such activities as the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, the ranching industry, the sheep industry, the oil industry, the beet sugar industry, irrigation, and particularly the construction of market roads and transcontinental highways, will help people to support themselves and bring back the old, self-reliant spirit of the early pioneers. We should look forward to and plan for the post-war period, and we must remember that people will never live in peace and happiness while we have the festering sores of unemployment and poverty. Wherever there is a sense of injustice, envy, fear and resentment, there will be upheavals. The great aim of science, religion, invention, finance, politics and education should be directed to and concentrated on bringing about a strong and healthy democracy which, in the words of President Roosevelt, implies an equality of opportunity for youth, jobs for those who can work, security for those who need it, the ending of special privileges for the few, civil liberties for all, and, above everything else, the enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in an ever-wider and constantly rising standard of living.

On motion of Mr. MacKenzie ONeepawa) the debate was adjourned.

On motion of Mr. Crerar the house adjourned at 10.57.

Tuesday, May 6, 1941.