IfliA-vW-IW” '

I .

srt Well‘.

m mmmmg up the parliamen- 1 the Dominion flgigrcgullaiiillnlagxt‘ week Hon. Rob- Minister of aanculiure.

reviewed not only the P11500998 °I

bill but the nature of the crit- £32m which had been urged against 1g by Liberal Opposition speakers. ms gpeflflh, which was a. clear-cut ‘nunciation of the principles in- volved in this important issue, is of particular interest to our agri- cultural readers. and is reprinted herewith from Hansard of May 2: Hon. Mr. Weir: when I pervious- 1y spoke. in opening this debate, I expressed the hope that this bill would not be thrown into the realm o! controversial partsan politics. I asked most sincerely for construc- tive suggestions with reference to we bill, suggestions that would im-

____._____ iexrltory involved there is very small in comparison with ours; the dis- tance limitations are quite differ- ent and their agriculture itself is not nearly so diverse as ours, so that their problems are entirely

different. Further, the problem to be solved there is to assist the pri- mary industry of a country that is chiefly an importing one, whereas our primary indutry is concerned greatly with the problem of ex- ports and of properly regulating the flow of products abroad as well as to our ’ mestic markets.

Specific Canadian Problems Further, they have one parlia-

ment, not ten as we have. They are not confronted, as we are. with the question of provincial rights

and

title of the bill.

- (§41‘:(_X .- s_x-=s= afi-éx-‘aua-

appreciation of and constructive suggestions

r- isrerflr-r-rrvuev

for his efforts. Yoints of Agreement

15 r :rq‘='q1:.~,'-:+~n.-.s-.

s»

introduction 0f this bill.

means further

if: .1 ass; i: yfrar 51-91:»;

1.. great difficulties.

y First let us consider this-and I n: shall not attempt to answer in each >2.) case the points made with which 1., I disagree; I think it will save the ,,, time of the house if I do not trav- ,_ erse the ground I have already cov- M ered, but rather give my interpre- ‘ tation of the bill and at the same 5,‘; time, without dealing specifically with each objection taken, refer in a general way to the various types of objection taken by different

members.

f: m nylon. Marketing Act

There are those who have stated that if our bill followed the pattern of the British marketing act they would support it. I do not think any hon. member who understands the Brliish marketing act and who has an appreciation of the difllcul- tics with which wc are confronted and that we are endeavouring to solve would say that act is adapt- able to any great extent to meet our problems. In the first place the ¢¢_-i

4I*I1l-.2ii¥!r£1.'!lr>~1 :r~:~‘¢;-.rx.-_

wmcuzvs Aaomurs

Hfvlllfilssnnswzrus",4!: 1v ~

prove it and make it more possible to effect the aim as set out in the

I should like to take this oppor- tunity to express most sincerely my the conscientious that have been made by members on both sides of the house, which sug- gestlOhs. in many instances, I be- lieve will at least be of benefit to the measure. I left no doubt that there were great difficulties con- fronting tho bill, and that the first year's experience with it would per- haps do more to perfect it than any

other problems that have arisen by reason of the British North Am- erica Act. One of the chief prin- ciples in the British marketing act is price fixing. In this country there is a great body of opinion that is against price fixing includ- ing even some of those hon. mem- bers who spoke freely in favour of the British act. There is also in the British legislation provision for restricted production and I maintain that restricted production is not referred to in any particular in our bill. Therefore I say that for those reasons the British mark- eting act which is applied to meet

further suggestions that might be made. I felt hon. members onlboth sides would agree that the fact that obstacles of various kinds stood in‘ the way was not a sufficient reason ’ WMWIIUBB lll- W8 have consider- why an honest attempt should not 6d our problems and have endeav- be made u, 501W 553m 0g these dig. , cred, after study to produce a bill ilcultles and overcome these ebstac-i flint. when P885“. W111 iinfi-blc 118 les, in order that the primary pro- to set 11D lnildlille ducer might reap a greater return W11 11'1"?’ i118 P9011181‘ M6115

I think it is generally agreed. no matter on what points we may have differed in this debate, that there‘ is a very great wastage in the pres- ent system of marketing primary products and that some effort should be made to’ avoid that wast- age. I would say then, at the out- set, especially because of misinter- pretations that have occurred in connection with the bill, leading to the belief that established trade will be wiped out or interfered with. that this is the very opposite of the whole spirit that has led to the That means destruction, and destruction wastage; whereas the thing we are endeavor-ing to overcome is the wastage which we agree exists. Only those who have given a. good deal of thought to 3» the problems that I have mention- ... ed and to a solution cf them are .. really fitted to appreciate the

different conditions and different problems arising out of those con- ditions does not adapt itself to any great extent to solve the problems

that we think and overcome the special dimcultles with which we have to contend in Can- ada. in the marketing of our prim- ary products. In so far as certain principles that we have found it necessary to adopt are the same as those appearing in the British act. we have taken advantage of them because to a certain extent they have been tried out and been found successful.

The First Difficulty

,The first difllculty that confront- ed us in attacking our problems was the limited Jurisdiction of the federal government as a result of provincial rights as laid down in the British North America Act. I think hon. members who will earn- estly study the bill with a desire to see the best in it will agree with me that in it there is nothing that will confict in any way with the British North America Act. The whole bill is based on a spirit of co- operation to fill that need which I believe the great majority of the Canadian people feel, irrespective of the province in which they live, namely, to create e, more economical system for marketing the products of cur primary producers. In that connection, because of the flexib- llity that has been forced upon us in any bill we introduce, I believe we are sound in the first principle I have enunciated. I hope, more clearly than I evidently did when I.last spokm-namely, to put the power for the regulation of the marketing of the products of the primary producers lnto the hands of the primary producers themselv- es in so far as they give evidence that they are anxious to have that power to handle the regulation of the marketing of their own pro- ducts as shown by the extent to which they are prepared to organ- ize to do this. In this connection they may use their own cooperative organizations or established chan- nels of trade. I believe there is in this country a great body of opin- ion in favor of cooperative mark- eting, while there are others who are in favor of marketing by what has become known as private enter- prise. In this regard I am remind- ed of a statement made by a noted Anglican divine of Toronto whose church I used to attend regularly when I was at the university. l-le was dismissing the question of church bazaars. My colleague, the

question. This Anglican divine said in reference to

ers in this country are not par- ticularly anxious who markcis their products as long as they receive tha greatest returns from them and the work is done efllciently. In con- nection with marketlng I believe healthy competition is essential but there must be no monoilifly-

BASIS OI‘ THE BILL

‘rhebasiscifthisbiliisthata representative body 0! Pmdliwl’! will submit a. scheme that they have carefully thought out and in which they are interested in a way that no one else is. iOl‘ $116 lnlfkfli-

ing of their primary products 801119 hon. members have sumilted that n we had stated in the our that thero should be a poll and that i! producers representing seventy-ii" per cent of the production WWI in favor of a particular scheme and authority would b6 81W" 1°? t"

Aggricultaragl Minister ,Y,Sums iUp Discussion On

A Federal Marketing Bill salami Arguments t. Opposition d. Leglislation Intro- duced at“ Request _.of Farmers and‘ Producers

,17zroughou_t Canada Answered in Informative Speech By Hon. Robert Weir,

that we have in the marketing of Primary products in Canada it is not possible to insert such a pro- vision. For example. let us take one of the simplest of the primary pro- ducts-apples. The problem of mar-

In Nova scotia for the crop year 1933-34 eighty-nine per cent of the apples were exported, so that their

of their apples were exported so that their problem is chiefly a do- mestic one. In British Columbia some forty-seven per cent of their apples were exported; their prob- lem therefore is pretty well divided between domestic and export mark- eting. That ls one instance, but I could give a large number, showing why we do not consider that wc should flx any limitation as to how this scheme shall be brought into effect, lest by such definition we should make it inadaptable to dif- ferent products in different parts of the country. Further, it has been left open in order that bodies of producers may meet their provin- cial government, submit their scheme to them, and if the pro- vincial government thinks well of the scheme and allows them to form a local board with the powers given in this bill, or perhaps with differ- ent powers, we can if necessary use that board as our agent under the Dominion Marketing Act. ‘The basis of the bill is to put powers into the hands of the producers them- selves, in so far as they indicate through their own organization that they wish it. and thus there will be no conflict with provincial rights. For these reasons I believe it is scund policy to leave the pro- visions as flexible as they are. Hon. members have sugested the pos-

the extreme case stated by one hon. member, might consist of a num- ber of Chinese laundrymen. I do not know whether there is anything in our legislation setting up the railway commission to prevent Chinese laundrymen, if they were British subjects, from being ap- pointed to it, and it is just as ra- tional to expect that they would be appointed to it as to this board. The clause here is very clear; it has been referred to by so many members of the Uposltlon that I think it well to nod it. I quote section 5. sub- section 5: (5) Every scheme as approved shall state, (g) the number of persons who

shall comprise the local board and the basis of their selection.

The Primary Object

That is, the group of producers in their scheme must stdte the nature of the board that is to handle the scheme that they pro- pose. I know that in some branches of the industry they feel that the board should consist entirely of producers; others are very decided that there should be producer rep- resentation, and representation from the trade that is vitally interested in the marketing of that product, and also that consumers should be represented. But the primary object of this bill is to give power to the producers even to the extent of recommending and setting out the manner in which the board is be appointed.

The second principle of the bill is that power shall be taken to in- vestigate the spread, using the term in the general and popular de- ilnition. What we have in mind is this. Here is a product and here is the consumer, and thei cost of get- ting the product from the producer to the consumer is the spread. Therefore power is taken to ensure if necessary that there shall be no unfair profit taken, no unfair manipulation in this process that takes place, to increase unduly the cost between the time the product leaves the producer and the time it reaches the consumer. To meet that situation, if a small group of producers wish to organize solely for the production of the best qual- ity product in uniform supply, they

product. I do not think any hon.

that he did not believe m’ men or those two principles. namely, first.

i in into the hands 0i’ the 91'0- m,fi,‘jffi’iffe"fifke§°fj mfi’... :3: guvcez? the power to handle his own that is to come forward. That is

of the Lord than in any other way Pwdlwt- "id ‘°°°"‘1- “m”? m" ‘ha’ W“ '““”“°“' I think many farmers and produc-

the protection of both producer and consumer that there shall not be any artflcial manipulation by people who made no contribution either towards the production or towards the rational, honest mark- eting of the products.

Imports and nxporil

Then in the third place W6 111W Lgken power under this act to limit, if necessary. 111190"! "d exports. I do not think that any one can take objection to that. W8 have had instances which I would iuwgqelteto thehcuse. but because they are connected with individuals closely associated with members 0f the house 1 shall not do so. I shall be glad, however, to show l0 8113' hon. member a descriptklfl. 9°? 1n‘ stance, of one shipment 0i WW9 to the old coun within the last few months that ad a vary film‘

other twenmfivo fir‘ “ing T.” b‘ ‘yo r r1? t‘ . bllfelillulelhto in’; di.'_...nt prooxlna

11* :

aging effort cn the relllltiltfmlilbtff

CT T .......“..>

- t. ..t such a outlaw s1 1' ldi- I

my} u‘; m feel thai

keting apples in Nova Scotia is dif- ferent from that in Ontario and also from that in British Columbia.

major problem is one of export. In Ontario only thirty-seven per cent

sibility that the local board, to take‘

*'l‘HE CHARLOTTETOWN GUAi§l2I§_I_f{_____

would have been in the interest oi."

the producer himself had ho been

our cattle in the United Kingdom to take the best advantage of that

kt their . marmeodgussnding bestqual

Certain amendments have been prepared that will be submitted in connection with this bill._.

some hon. members: Oh. oh.

Hon Mr Weirz-oot to change the principle of the bill in any way but to clarify certain points such as that referred to by the hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) and I believe the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid). It

E

are ready and will be brought down Wllitetleleflho bill is before the com- m .

Liberal Criticism Answered

of their hands and

ed to the boards, ijection to the

member mentioned

be struck with

his that

the illustration, to scratch the fail down and than

in the erection

bers ill t type Yhouildsfee hat rmnle of that tion on the board

" .._. HON. ROBERT WEIR. MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE

Answers Mr. Kinfs Contention

I have dealt so far with criticisms Nlleatcd by various hon. members opposite. I should like for the few minutes remaining at my dispqggi to deal with scrne specific criticisms raised by the right hon. leader of the opposition King.) In fifteen different places in his speech he referred to the Principle of this bill as being re- striction of production. in one place he ls very emphatic that that is the chief principle of the bill. I would not for an instant suggest that the right hon. gentleman did not in his own mind understand that to be a fundamental principle, but I maintain that nowhere in this bill is restriction of production

to mentioned. It is simply for the pur-

P986 of regulating the products go- ing on the market. The right hon. gentleman stated that producers had to be licensed. He spoke in fa- vour o1 orderly marketing, and in his amendment put himself on rec- ord as favouring it. What orderly marketing could we have of any product in this country if we did not know the quantity of that pro- duct that was to be placed on the market in any given time? The only way in which that information can be obtained is for the produc- ers to submit what they expect to produce, the acreage seeded, the number of head of live stock and so on. That work is done now by various branches of the agricultural industry that have approached us already with schemes they wish set up, under which they under-

iii be assured of that protection “kt t0 lii-‘Bn-‘le Ploducers of their fi‘,‘;“,‘,§;,°,‘,,‘f,§,?§“;,°,° ,,‘,‘,‘§§;,,“,“f,‘,°‘§if,§‘§nd of efficient marketing of their own product hr the very reason

that it is ‘ possible for this gov-

chumh ma“, member can object to either of cmmenhto have any orderly Infill!-

eting unless they have some know- ledge of the volume of the __roduct

Producers‘ Request

In this connection I should like to say in passing that every branch of the industry that has approach- ed us has asked only that it be al- lowed to stand on its own feet. But these are the branches already or- ganized. They do not wish any money from the consolidated rev- enue fund, but there are other branches of the industry that are not so thoroughly organized, and we feel that it is necessary, in order to tide them over until they can organize for orderly marketing, to insert some provision in this bill so that such branches may be look- ed after in the meantime. That is the only reason for that provision in the bill to which a number of hon. members have objected. Many branches of the industry are so up- set that they are not in a position to organise at once, perhaps be- cause of the number of p-toplc in- volved cr the area ccverezl by that pnrtldlllll‘ branch, and those bran-

I have dealt in a general way with the criticisms that have been develled again-attire bill; first the objection that the producer; lone control. that control is taken out put into the hands of whoever may be aPPoint- i, the ob- WDB of board that may be set up. Ithink one hon. _ that it might consist of about fifteen old decrepit Politicians. I could not help but the thought, when he was speaking. that he had in nu

mind. a very definite picture of the ma" 11° thought capable or being chairman of this board if it were in power to set it up. But I feel his opportunity in that dir- ection will be very slight. I believe he is better qualified. If I may use to uric a ligtle ‘pick mo ar ou o a 59311111118 b1l11d1118. hoping it will be destroyed, rather to take any! corgstmctive step o a u . have said before, the mix-fiend; thiablll is construction, not dc. Biructicn. and I am sure hon. mem-

not look for any posi-

(Mr. Mackenzie

ches are in the greatest need of as-

sistance. We also feel that condi- tions may arise in the fuzure, as they have arisen in the past, which will make it highly desirable for us to extend sufficient assistance. under the powers we have taken by this bill, in the marketing of that particular product in order to make such marketing profitable where otherwise it would be conducted at a loss. That is one of the chief reasons why some of the power taken under this bill may seem ex- cessive though I do not consider that power excessive at all. We are simply applying what are recog- nized as sound principles in success- ful enterprise in this country.

Authority Necessary

The least that we as a govern- ment and as members of parlia- ment, irrespective of party, can do is to use the resources of the country where necessary to assist the primary producers. In that con- nection I would say that if any persons attempted, by means of the machinery set up under this bill, to revolutionize the entire mark- eting system of the dominion in a month, in six months or in a year, undoubtedly they would do a great deal more harm than good. but we do feel that it is necessary to have this power, which will be used as any sane man would use it and as we, in our heart of hearts. all agree that it should be used, irre- spective of the opposition that has been raised.