Mr. ROWE:
Yes, but he has not been close to farmer problems in the last many years, as other men have been who have been dependent upon farming and upon farming alone.
Mr. ILSLEY:
There are many farmers
on advisory committees. I will get a list of them.
Mr. ROWE:
Yes. I have a list of them, but they are not trusted on the main committee. ^ They are on advisory committees, and their advice is not listened to. I could point to a thousand who are on advisory committees; you will meet them in the country later. The farmers are up in arms because of the novel policies that are carried out by men who are merely theorists without practical experience.
Mr. ILSLEY:
No representative of any
industry is on the wartime prices and trade board. They are all civil servants. They are not representing any industry.
Mr. ROWE:
What about your dollar-ayear men? I have no objection to the dollar-a-year men. There are some excellent men-
Mr. LACROIX (Beauce):
You should
have objection to dollar-a-year men.
Mr. ROWE:
My hon. friend perhaps has had
some experience with some of them which I have not had; but I believe, despite what the hon. member for Beauce (Mr. Lacroix) says, that there are some able men who are giving their service to the country. Perhaps there are some who are not as good as might be desired. But I do not believe that these boards are any better off, so far as agriculture is concerned, for having civil servants on them. I do not know that a civil servant who has been receiving from $6,000 to $8,000 a year, while farmers have had mortgages on their farms in the last ten years, is as well qualified to meet the problem of production at the present time, as the man who is going through the sweat and toil of actual experience, without help, and who has had to put up with these difficult years. From the point of view of our war production it is high time the government listened to the men who know what it costs to produce a bushel of wheat or a pound of butter rather than say haphazardly when beef goes a little high, "we will put a price on it." Butter is now fixed at 35 cents a pound-
Mr. GARDINER:
It is not fixed at that; that is the ceiling.
Mr. ROWE:
Yes, and it can go as low as it likes.
Mr. GARDINER:
There is a floor under it too.
Now the minister is going to bonus it.
Mr. GARDINER:
No, I am not going to bonus it.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):
He was against bonuses in 1935.
Mr. GARDINER:
There is a war on now.
I was against a lot of things.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):
The minister had a political war on then.
Mr. GARDINER:
My political wars have been about as successful as yours.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):
Probably more so.
Mr. ROWE:
I do not intend to pursue the issue further. I warn the government, if they do not want the most important branch of our production to go down in
The Budget-Mr. Rowe
dismal failure, to beware of fixing prices, while the farmer has rising costs which, by the very nature of the industry, the government cannot fix. I am not asking the government to fix the hired man's wages when he can get more money at the factory, but while the farmer has that uncertainty, do not impose on him another uncertainty which will cripple his ability to produce what is so essential to victory and equally important in peace.
The minister has a difficult task. Probably the most painful thing a minister has to do is to impose more taxes. I realize that the government must give some consideration with regard to taxing enterprises to the limit of what they can stand, or even "killing the goose that lays the golden egg". I am alarmed at the amount that is being spent for ordinary services, despite the war requirements. It is necessary that the nation be assured that the money is spent honestly. I am not charging that it is not, but the next thing to dishonest spending is reckless and extravagant spending for civilian purposes and services that we could do without at this time.
I give this suggestion to the minister in all sincerity as a solution of the problem of avoiding diminishing returns, namely that in the taxation of industry there might be some exemption made for post-war rehabilitation, research and so forth, so that they can be ready to give employment to the thousands of returned men after the war. Such action would go a long way to warn enabling industry to equip itself to compete in post-war markets and provide openings for our returned men, many of whom will be skilled mechanics.
I compliment the minister upon the compulsory savings feature. I mentioned it in the house some time ago. He did not think as much of it when I mentioned it as I did when he put it into effect. But I give the minister a further suggestion. I urge him to give further consideration to the exemption of life insurance premiums. I compliment him upon exempting the premiums of those who are of more mature years, but I urge and plead that he give consideration to the young men getting married now. In these days of uncertainty, surely if you, Mr. Speaker, and I are entitled to exemption, what about the boy who has not a home to live in, who cannot find one even if he could afford to pay for it, especially in Ottawa, and who takes to himself a wife? He has to pay all the income tax we have to pay and, if he wants to put 83,000 on his life in order to give his wife a little security, he does
not get the same privilege as those who have carried insurance for years. I do not think we should be exempted if the same privilege is not extended to him. I think upon further consideration the minister will include that.
I realize that he might be afraid of people taking out large policies, but that could be overcome by regulation, limiting the amount or limiting it to men of a certain age.
Mr. ILSLEY:
Does the hon. gentleman think there would be any objection on the score that the government would be giving a tremendous impetus to the life insurance business by such a measure as he suggests?
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):
That is not the point.