Mr. MACDOUGALL:

Are we clearly to

understand under clause 6 that there are really needy fishermen who need this assistance who are going to be excluded because they have no land to give as security for a mortgage? I may say to this committee that when I entered this house first in 1925 I was the first man from the province of Nova Scotia to advocate long term loans for fishermen. There was an act at that time which had been passed by a previous government extending long term loans to farmers, and I very strongly advocated then that loans be extended to fishermen both on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts, and I think I was supported in that contention by some other members from the province of Nova Scotia. I did not visualize at that time that we would have before any parliament this bill as it is now before this house. I am of the honest opinion that this bill will not help at least eighty per -cent of the shore fishermen of my province, if section 6 be not amended.

Mr. MACDOUGALL:

The men who have capital and can carry on the fishing industry by themselves do not want to go into debt through long term loans or any other kind of loan. The man we want to help in Nova Scotda is the man who has practically nothing except the determination to follow a humble but honest calling. If section 6 is going to remain in this bill, then I say it is not very much of a bill. I am certainly in favour of the principle of extending long term loans to fishermen, and I am in favour of the principle of this bill, although it does not even say how long the loan is going to be for, but the bill should certainly be so framed that it will bring aid to those who need aid in the province of Nova Scotia and on the Pacific seaboard as well. So far as Nova Scotia is concerned, I still maintain the position I took before in this house, that more than long term loans, we want to see that the Nova Scotia fisherman has the right to live and that his prices are not dictated by monopolist control such as we have in the province of Nova Scotia. If a resolution that I placed on the order paper had been supported by this house the shore fishermen of Nova Scotia

would have been much better off under it than they will be under this particular bill.

I may also say that we want to encourage as much as we can all those fishermen in Nova Scotia who join their cooperative unions. I wish to say frankly that our position in Nova Scotia is this: If the fishermen who to-day are suffering from economic thraldom are going to be relieved we must break monopoly and give the fishermen a chance to live and encourage their cooperative unions. To my mind section 6 nullifies the full effect of the bill. I am sorry to have to say that.

Section stands.

Progress reported.

At six o'clock the Speaker resumed -the chair and the house took recess.

After Recess

The house resumed at eight o'clock.

Mr. MACDOUGALL:

Would that not give a most distinct and favourable advantage to coke in the Montreal market. They are today selling it in Warsaw for $11.50 per ton and in Montreal for $7.80.

Mr. MACDOUGALL:

I wish to thank the minister for that information. After some study I was of the opinion that perhaps the dumping duty should be applied against coke and coal shipped to Montreal. I am grateful for the minister's explanation. This is very important to the province of Nova Scotia.

Mr. I. D. MACDOUGALL (Inverness):

I wish to direct a question to the acting Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Stirling) arising out of a resolution which I placed on the order paper this session an.d which was discussed by this house on February 6 of this year. The resolution read:

That, in the opinion of this house, in the interests of the fishermen of Nova Scotia, no permits should be granted or renewed with those who own and operate beam trawlers in in the province of Nova Scotia.

At the request of the acting minister the resolution was referred to the committee on fisheries. I find that on May 22 that committee made a report which dealt with another matter, and which contained these words:

Your committee has agred to report that, whereas the royal commission on price spreads and mass buying has investigated the subject

Weights and Measures Act

matter of the said resolution and made a report thereon, which may be the subject of discussion and consideration by parliament-

As I assure you it shall be so far as I am concerned.

-your committee is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by further investigation of the said matter by your committee at the present session of parliament.

The question I wish to direct to the minister, or through him to the chairman of the committee, is whether that report was concurred in. by all the members of the fisheries committee or whether the matter was delegated to a sub-committee and, if so, who were the members of the sub-committee.