Mr. Bryce:

The reason the figure is so low is because agriculture has not been growing in aggregate in the way in which, let us say, manufacturing or mining has been growing through the period. The number of farmers has been diminishing, and not growing.

The report goes on to point out that though the total amount of farm incomes has been going down, in fact farm productivity and the income of individual farmers have risen, though not at the rate of those working in other sectors of the economy.

The hon. member, in introducing his amendment this afternoon and trying to find the causes for the high cost of living, completely excused wage increases, blaming the increase in profits for the increase in the cost of living. In all the evidence put before us by the companies in the food business we have seen that labour rates in food industries have increased more quickly than profits. Referring to a few tables, we see on page 549 that the salaries and wages for one of the supermarket chains increased 11,2 per cent from 1960 to 1966 and fringe benefits increased by 9.2 per cent, making a total increase of approximately 20.4 per cent, whereas their profits in the same period increased by 8.7 per cent. I am not excusing the food companies, but I think we have to be fair. We must agree that the matter is not as simple as pretended by the leader of the N.D.P. Different sectors of the economy have been responsible for the increased cost of living at different times. We must recognize this to be fair.

In the amendment the hon. member criticizes the government for not having done anything to produce a more equitable distribution of productivity and national income. As

10150 COMMONS

Increased Cost of Living has been pointed out by the hon. member for Medicine Hat, the amendment makes little sense if we look at the record. Since this session, which opened in January, the government has introduced much legislation to help the lower income groups in our economy such as the Canada Assistance Plan which gives assistance to the sick, the blind, the crippled and the aged, the new amendments to the National Housing Act which will help people with lower incomes to purchase houses, the medicare program, and the Company of Young Canadians to help those in dire circumstances in Canada. The government has also set up the committee studying the cost of living. It is my opinion that the very working of the committee has had a corrective effect on the price structure up to now.

I think the fact that such a committee is sitting, calling witnesses and making companies reveal their records is having a corrective effect because it makes the people who set prices in the industry think twice before taking an undue profit at the expense of Canadian consumers. Statistics released at the end of October show that consumer food prices have decreased. I will not pretend that the immediate cause of the decrease has been the work of the committee, but I am fairly certain that the committee work has been one of the causes bringing about decreased food prices.

Contrary to what the amendment implies, if we compare the record of the government of this country with the records of other governments in other countries we shall see that we have been extremely effective in providing price stability and maintaining income. Despite this record the government is still not satisfied but wants to do even more.

Mr. Bryce:

Let me try to find some of them.

In other words, he is breaking down the items included in the table. He continues:

May I pick out some of the major items? First we have the net rents received by individuals-

These are rents received by individuals, not by corporations, because the income received by corporations is included under the corporate profits section of the table. The second item is investment income of life insurance companies, including pension funds. Then there is bond interest, interest on bank deposits, trust and savings deposits, credit union deposits, mortgage holdings by individuals- not by corporations-government annuities, dividends from abroad, profits on mutual nonlife insurance companies, royalties, etc.

As you can see, Mr. Speaker, many of these items are not the type of income-producing item which it can be said accrues to the large corporation or big businessman. Much of it is income which is received through pension plans, credit union interest and so forth and has been received by the little man. So in this respect I think it was misleading for the leader of the N.D.P. to try to imply that there was an increase of 17 per cent among the members of the upper economic echelon of our society, whereas labour and wages income increased by only 7.7 per cent.

With regard to farm incomes the table which appears at page 95 of the report shows an increase of 1.7 per cent during the period from 1949 to 1965, which is a very low percentage. According to the following table, table 6, farm income is only 3.8 per cent of the gross national product, which again is a rather low percentage. The hon. member for Bur-naby-Coquitlam seemed to be implying that there was some inequity here, but an examination of the evidence given under crossexamination of the witness demonstrates that

Increased Cost of Living the situation is not what the hon. member would have us believe. On the subject of farm income the hon. member for Medicine Hat asked Mr. Bryce from the Department of Finance some questions. The hon. member for Medicine Hat asked about some years when there had been a significant decline. He said:

[DOT] (9:10 p.m.)

Does that account for why we come up with an average of 1.7 per cent?

Mr. Bryce said:

The reason for the 1.7 per cent growth is that agriculture is a diminishing part of the economy as a whole. A great deal of manpower has left agriculture and has gone into other fields. The increase in productivity in agriculture has been quite high. This income of 1965 is distributed amongst a far smaller number of farmers than the income of 1949 was.

Mr. Bryce:

I am sure that the people of the area will appreciate the co-operation of your officers and yourself in getting that established.

Mr. Bryce:

I asked the minister one question to which I have not had an answer. Could we have the co-operation of the department in the establishment of a higher grade school at Norway House? This is something that should be done right away to benefit the pupils who are coming on there now.

Mr. Bryce:

Will you not have the information later?