1937-01-22

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved:: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their honours that this house will unite with them in the formation of a joint committee of both houses on the subject of the printing of parliament, and that the members of tile standing committee on printing, viz., Messieurs Barry, Bertrand (Laurier), Cassel-man, Chevrier, Damude, Davidson, Denis, Douglas, Dussault, Elliott (Kindersley), Esling, Evans, Ferron, Fleming, Fournier (Maison-neuve-Rosemount), Gauthier, Green, Hansell, Hurtubise, Hushion, Jean, Kirk, Lapointe (Matapedia-Matane), Leduc, Lennard, Little, Maelnnis, MacKinnon (Edmonfon West), MacLean (Prince), McGregor. McIntosh, McKenzie (Lambton-Kent), McNevin (Victoria, Out.), Marshall, Mills, Moore, Mullins, Mulock, Mutch, Pinard, Purdy, Reid, Ross (St. Paul's), Ross (Middlesex East), Rutherford, St-Pere, Taylor (Nanaimo), Thompson, Tucker, Tustin, Veniot, Weir, Wilton and Winkler, will act as members on the part of this house on the said joint committee oil the printing of parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their honours that this house has appointed the Hon. The Speaker and Messieurs Ahearn, Blackmore, Blair, Blanchette, Bothwell, Bouchard, Bradette, Brasset, Cameron (Hastings South), Cameron (Cape Breton North-Victoria), Campbell, Casselman, Duffus, Emmer-son, Fournier, Grant, Green, Hamilton, Hynd-man, Johnston (Lake Centre), Kuhl, Lennard,

Maelnnis, MacKinnon (Edmonton West), Mac-Lennan, MacNeil, Macphail (Miss), Mallette, Martin, Mercier, Moore, Mutch, Parent (Quebec West and South), Parent (Terrebonne), Raymond, Reid, Rennie, Ross (St. Paul's), Ryan, St-Pere, Spence, Walsh, Winkler and Young, a committee to assist His Honour the Speaker in the direction of the library of parliament, so far as the interests of the House of Commons are concerned, and to act on behalf of the House of Commons as members of a joint committee of both houses on the library.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their honours that this house has appointed the Honourable the Speaker and Messieurs Barber, Bertrand (Prescott), Fafard, Fraser, Gray, Hill, Howden, Landeryou, Maelnnis, MacMillan, Macphail (Miss), McLean (Simcoe East), Moore, O'neill, Purdy, Roberge, Sinclair, Spence, Taylor (Norfolk) and Tustin, a committee to assist His Honour the Speaker in the direction of the restaurant, so far as the interests of the Commons are concerned, and to act as members of a joint committee of both houses on the restaurant.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 8, to amend the Dairy Industry Act.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. GARDINER:: The proposed measure would not in any way affect the principle of the Dairy Industry Act. It involves three minor amendments, the first of which prevents the placing of foreign matter in milk or cream. Previously the restriction applied only to cream, and it is now intended to include both milk and cream. The second amendment has to do with an amendment which was passed last year. Because of its position in the measure of last year the penalty which applied was much too severe. As a result the section as it was passed last year is being repealed and reenacted under section 3 of the present measure. The last section of the bill refers to a number of items such as storing, .packaging, handling and transporting of dairy products, w'hich may be controlled by regulation in the department.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:

Coronation of King George VI.
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for,
(a)	the surrender by the Minister of Finance of certain amounts of the capital stock of the Canadian National and the Canadian Northern railway companies,
(b)	the transfer and exchange of certain shares of the capital stock of the said companies,
(c)	the abandonment of certain claims against the Canadian National Railway Company,
(d)	the adjustment of certain accounts affecting government railways,
(e)	the setting up of a securities trust corporation for the purpose of preserving the priority rights of the dominion and its protection against future contingencies in respect to potential interest and other savings, and
(f)	generally for revision of the accounting set-up of the Canadian National railway system.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to guarantee approved lending institutions against losses which they may sustain as a result of home improvement loans made by them, to limit the liability of the government of Canada in respect of such guarantees to not exceeding fifteen per centum of the aggregate amount of home improvement loans made by any such approved lending institution and to not exceeding seven million five hundred thousand dollars.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, before the
orders of the day are proceeded with I should like to say that after some little thought I have concluded that it is my duty to make a short statement in view of the debate of Monday last. During the progress of the discussion the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) was good enough to extend on behalf of the government an invitation to myself to become part of the delegation
attending the coronation. Frankly I had some doubt as to whether I should make any public statement, but in view of the gracious manner in which the invitation was extended I desire to express my appreciation, not only of the thought behind the action of the right hon. the Prime Minister and the government but of the very kind and courteous manner in which the Prime Minister expressed the wish of the government in that regard. I am sure he does not expect me at this moment to make any statement as to whether or not it would be possible for me to accept his generous suggestion, but I assure him that I will advise with him. In view of the terms in which the invitation was extended I felt it would be unfair to hon. members of this house if 1 did not express my very grateful appreciation of the action thus taken.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, may I say to my right hon. friend that he must see for himself how pleased hon. members of this house are at his acceptance of the invitation.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I did not accept it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: At his manner of acknowledging the government's invitation. In order to ease my right hon. friend's mind in further considering an acceptance of the invitation. I may say to him that it is the intention of the government, with the approval of hon. members, to ask the leader of the government and the leader of the opposition in the Senate to be guests of the government, and also the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Speaker of the Senate. There will be other representatives of the membership of both houses, some of whom will be selected by the Dominion of Canada branch of the British Empire Parliamentary Association. The government has thought that it would be the wish of hon. members of both houses that those whom I have mentioned should be part of the official parliamentary delegation to attend the coronation ceremonies.



CANADIAN AND BRITISH INSURANCE COMPANIES ACT, 1932

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 3, to amend the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act, 1932.
He said:	Mr. Speaker, the necessity for
this amendment arises by reason of the fact that the province of Nova Scotia defines the
[Stage Direction]
Canadian and British Insurance
Insurance Act in its own legislation as being the insurance act of the Dominion of Canada. The provincial legislation provides also that no insurance company shall carry on in Nova Scotia any part of its business of insurance unless and until it is licensed under the insurance act, which would be the Dominion insurance act. Of course, any other province would have the right to take similar action at any time.
In the present law, as enacted and amended in 1932 and 1934, a proviso was dropped which permitted the treasury board to accept a lower deposit than the minimum set in the act for insurance companies. That proviso applied particularly to provincially incorporated companies doing business only within a single province, and had special reference to the small farmers' mutual fire insurance companies in the province of Nova Scotia.
Richard Bedford Bennett: And elsewhere.


Mr. DUNNING:: In Nova Scotia particularly. That province made necessary the taking out of a dominion licence by any company doing insurance business within its borders. The 850,000 deposit generally required is obviously too large a deposit for such companies. The old provision enabled the treasury board to set an adequate amount. It is proposed to restore the clause which was dropped in 1932 in order to permit the formation of small provincially incorporated farmers' mutual companies.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
On section 1-Registration of provincial companies.
Richard Bedford Bennett: There is a difficulty in
connection with this matter, the one which brought about the dropping of the proviso. The truth is that the proviso left a tremendous discretion in the hands of the treasury board as to the amount of deposit required, but I think the wrnrds " on the report of the superintendent," indicating that his report will determine the amount of the deposit, will overcome that difficulty. The real truth is that some companies felt that the deposits should be practically nothing because they were carrying on a very small business. To give a dominion licence to a company with small capital and which had made a small deposit was not regarded as being in keeping with the general principle of the national insurance act. The difficulty to which the minister has alluded is not an imaginary but a very real one, and as long as he thinks, if he does, and I assume he does, that the safeguard

is ample, namely, that the action taken by the treasury board shall be on the report of the superintendent as to the amount that shall be put up-


Charles Avery Dunning: And the further qualification a little further on.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, that is with respect to the amount of the reserve on the business on the 31st day of December next preceding. That would apply whether the company was large or small. It is merely a question of the computation of reserves on the basis provided for by the statute.


Charles Avery Dunning: But the deposit shall not be less than the reserve.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Deposits of all life insurance companies are dependent upon the extent of the reserve under the insurance act.


Charles Avery Dunning: But not the full amount.


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, but they have to put up the deposit called for by the act as their insurance in force increases during the year. If the company increases its risks in force by one million dollars, for instance, it has to increase its deposit with the government. The provision here puts a limit on that, namely, that at no time shall it be less than the amount of the reserve on the business in force in such provincial company on the 31st day of December next preceding, computed according to the insurance act itself. It is probable, therefore, that the difficulty that was apprehended at the time the proviso was dropped was not a very real one, and that no evil results will follow from the adoption of this section.


Charles Avery Dunning: I do not want to prolong the discussion, but I would point out that the additional deposit required under this subsection must be not less than the whole reserve required by law. That is, in the case of these small companies, the whole of their reserve on the business in force must be deposited. That, I think my right hon. friend will agree, is an additional precaution against abuse. As I think he knows, in practice it applies generally only to small farmers' mutual companies, which certainly in the province of Nova Scotia and elsewhere have rendered efficient and economical service.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, and which do not engage in life insurance.


Charles Avery Dunning: No.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Dominion Franchise Act


[Stage Direction]
Hon. FERNAND RINFRET (Secretary of State) moved the second reading of Bill No. 7, to amend the Dominion Franchise Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I merely wish to say that this bill is similar to the one we adopted last year. Its purpose is to further postpone for one year the revision of the existing list. The house discussed a bill for the same purpose last session, and I then explained that there were two reasons for doing what we are proposing to do again this year. In the first place a new electoral act is contemplated, and notice of motion has been given by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) to revive the committee on elections which sat last year, to consider a new electoral act. In the second place, there is a considerable saving to be effected !by postponing the revision. Although I am not in a position to give the exact figures, because it all depends upon the number of names entered on the list, the revision is likely to cost over a quarter of a million dollars for the year, and the printing of the list, if such printing were done, would add considerably to that amount. On the other hand, to prepare a list only for by-elections involves a very small cost. Last year we had three by-elections, and the preparation of the lists cost in the county of Wright, $2,589.22; in the county of Gloucester, $3,004.64, and in Ottawa East, an urban constituency, $7,606.02, or a total for the year of $13,199.88. That is all we had to expend for preparing the lists.
I would remind the house that at the express desire of hon. gentlemen opposite, and I think it was a very proper stand to take, we adopted last year amendments to the Dominion Elections Act and the Dominion Franchise Act. These amendments, of course, are still in force, and will apply during the course of the year. I commend this bill to the house.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Acting Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved the second reading of Bill No. 4, to amend the Weights and Measures Act.
He said:	When this bill was before the
house on the first reading I gave a brief explanation of its purpose. The proposed amendment is intended to correct an anomaly in legal procedure in the administration of
the Weights and Measures Act. Section 82 of the act provides that proceedings shall be taken before any justice of the peace, but if the penalty exceeds fifty dollars the case must be heard by two justices of the peace. Subsection 2 of the section provides that the provisions of the criminal code relating to summary convictions shall apply to all proceedings, subject to the provisions of this act. In 1935, by chapter 48, 25-26 George V, several amendments were made to the Weights and Measures Act by which penalties for offences in several cases were greatly increased. For instance, the money fine for the use of an unjust scale by a corporation was increased to $100, and due to a phrase in subsection 2, which I read a moment ago, namely "subject to the provisions of this act," the question was raised in a prosecution against a corporation whether or not a stipendiary or police magistrate had jurisdiction to hear these offences where the money penalty was $100, although in all provincial offences and practically all offences against federal statutes a stipendiary magistrate has the same authority as two justices of the peace. Under the criminal code, by the interpretation section, a stipendiary or police magistrate has the same authority as two justices of the peace. The amendment proposed, as I have just explained, is a matter of legal procedure and is designed to attach to the Weights and Measures Act the exact words of the interpretation section of the criminal code.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. IAN MACKENZIE (Minister of National Defence) moved the second reading of Bill No. 5, to amend the Militia Pension Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
Section 1 agreed to.
On section 2-Time of payment of pensions and compassionate allowances.
Richard Bedford Bennett: There is only one question I was going to ask the minister when I read this bill. At the end of section 41 there appear these words:
. . . and unless otherwise specified by this act shall continue during the lifetime of the recipient.
Such words do not appear in the section which is replaced by this section. Does any significance at all attach to these words?
Militia Pension Act


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: I think so. They refer to remarriage, forfeiture on conviction of certain offences, and the like.


Mr. CAHAN:: Well, what is the meaning of the words "in arrear"?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That is monthly after the pension is due and owing. It is the phrase agreed upon by the Department of Justice and the officers of this department.


Mr. STEWART:: It is the opposite of "monthly in advance," I assume?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I assume that under this act the pension would stop at the diate of death of the pensioner.
Mr.	MACKENZIE (Vancouver): Yes,
either at death or remarriage.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: But under the act as it was before this amendment the pension was payable in advance for the whole year?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes.


Mr. STEW  ART@: And in case of death was there any refund1?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No; that is the point. There was no statutory provision for refund in case of death or remarriage.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: And under this act the pension will stop at the date of death?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Government Harbours and Piers Act to substitute the Minister of Transport for the Minister of Marine and Fisheries; to except from the operation of the act harbours under the management of the National Harbours Board: to confer on the minister power of appointment of officers, clerks and employees; to deal with the collection and disposition of tolls and dues and to charge certain expenses against such tolls and dues.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
Mr. HOWE:: The bill contemplated by this resolution contains a number of small amendments designed to bring the Harbours and Piers Act into conformity with the practice of

the department. It is now the practice of the department to deduct from the fees collected) at the various ports a percentage, that is, to pay out of the fees collected at the wharf the fees of the wharfinger and such expenses for lighting and other services as may be required at the point.


Richard Bedford Bennett: In some cases they take
them all.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; it is a percentage. That has ibeen the practice since 1931, but it is irregular under the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, which requires that all fees shall be returned to the receiver general. Another amendment 'has to do with the appointment of wharfingers. Since 1922, under the amendment to the Civil Service Act, they have been appointed by the minister. Before that the appointment was .made by the civil service commission iand prior to that by the governor in council. This measure provides that the appointment shall be by the minister as at present. The amendments are all of that type, minor things, and none of them contemplate any new practice on the part of the department.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Will this constitute an
added personnel?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, no added personnel. The purpose is purely to prevent the conduct of affairs, in certain minor particulars, in an illegal manner.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: Do I understand that the
clause "to confer on the minister power of appointment of officers, clerks and employees" refers to the appointment of wharfingers only? What other classes of officers, clerks and employees are to be appointed by the minister at his own option?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The only appointees covered by the Government Harbours and Piers Act are wharfingers and, in some instances, their assistants. There is for instance a wharf at Port ALberni where there is mechanical equipment for loading lumber, and assistants are appointed there. This covers the administration of some 950 small wharves throughout the dominion. The great difficulty in connection with appointments is not. the selects ing of appointees but the finding of men willing to take the job. The fees are entirely fees of office; that is to say, the wharfinger must collect revenue at the dock before he can Ibe paid, and then he receives fees on a certain scale established in 1931. There is no provision for the payment of any wharfinger apart from the fees of office. This

practice is not new in my regime; I assume it has been worked out over the years as the practical way of handling this vast number of small transactions.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: I should like to know exactly what are the duties of a wharfinger. I have received a good deal of complaint in regard to one or two small docks on the west coast. There are certain places where boats call only occasionally and where there is a wharfinger, but he does not seem to have anything to do; whereas there are adjoining wharves where there are no wharfingers, although a large number of boats call and a considerable number of passengers are taken on and off. I wish to know, first, what f . wharfinger's duties are and, second, why it is that these fees are charged at certain points and not at others.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Wharves built by the Public Y orks department are upon completion turned over to the Transport department for administration. The Government Harbours and Piers Act authorizes the governor in council to establish a fixed range of fees which are set out in the act and which shall be charged for the use of government property. As I say, there are about 950 of these docks, and we are able to get wharfingers to act only at about 400; in other places the business as prescribed by the act is not sufficient to pro' ide a remuneration adequate enough to attract anyone to assume the duties of wharfinger. In some few instances the fees are considerable. There are docks where the revenue runs up to S12,000 or $15,000 a year, but there are only six of these. The total net revenue of the dominion for all docks amounts to between $90,000 and $100,000 per annum.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Outside the harbour commission proper.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; these are purely small docks. It is the duty of the department under this act to administer them in a definite manner as set out in the act and we do our very best to discharge that duty.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Perhaps I have not made my point clear. I am thinking of some very small points. What actually is the duty of the wharfinger at such a place? I have had complaints that he does nothing, but collects a fee, whereas at an adjoining point two or three miles along the coast there is another dock where large boats call and there is no wharfinger and no fee collected. Settlers feel that it is a hardship to pay this fee for landing when the man who is standing around does no work for it, and if they go a few miles further down they can land without paying any fee.
Harbours and Piers Act


Clarence Decatur Howe: The duty of the wharfinger is to collect revenues for the government. Unfortunately these docks have not always been built as a result of any careful analysis of business returns, but they have been handed over to us and we have done our best to find wharfingers for all the docks. It is our duty under the act to appoint a wharfinger to every government dock, but there is a wise provision in the act that they can be paid only from fees of office. There are docks at points where the fees of office are not sufficient to induce anyone to accept the position and in that case we are quite helpless. Where we do appoint a wharfinger his duty is to collect revenue and he retains a portion of it-perhaps all of the first collections-and a portion of the larger collections for his services in looking after the dock and attending to traffic. If there is a light on the dock he tends the light; and he reports to the department the condition of the dock and the business over the dock. In some instances it is an exceedingly small business, amounting to $5 or $10 a year, while in other cases, as I have said, it is as high as $12,000 or $15,000 a year.
.	.. 

 vy nere are most
pa^engers landed at Gibsons Landing or at Roberts Creek? Why is it that at Roberts Creek there is a wharfinger and at Gibsons Banding there is not?


Mr HOWE:: I have not in my mind the details in connection with all those docks. I suppose that in one case we have found a man who will accept the position and in the other we have not.
. Mr. WOODSWORTH: Can we have that information when the bill is before us?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I give that example because it seems to me that the minister's statement is quite contrary to the actual practice as it has been represented to me.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I can assure the hon. gentleman that letters go out from our office every day asking men to accept these jobs.


James Shaver Woodsworth: One other question. If at one time these appointments were made by the civil service commission why should not that practice continue?


Clarence Decatur Howe: For the reason that though the civil service commission might advertise for wharfingers as much as they liked, unless they were a good deal more successful than we, they would get no applications. We have to beg people to take these jobs. There are only five docks in the dominion in connection



Supply-Agriculture-Seed
with which applications have been received; everywhere else we are constantly asking members of parliament or our agents to help us find wharfingers. This is not a case of the man seeking the job.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Is there any established scale of fees or charges or is it a matter of the individual wharf?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The scale of fees is definitely established by governor in council.


Mr. GREEN:: Will this act apply to harbours such as New Westminster and Sorel, which are not under the National Harbours Board?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It does not apply to a harbour where a harbour authority is set up. It does not apply to New Westminster; it does apply to Sorel.


Mr. MacNEIL:: Will the minister explain whether in all instances steamships docking are charged side wharfage fees?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, that is the basis of the charges for steamships at these docks. There is no charge for fishermen and similar traffic. AH the wharfage collected at these docks is side and top wharfage.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Howe thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 9, to amend the Government Harbours and Piers Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
Seed, feed and fertilizer control, including grants to seed fairs, etc., also grant of $18,900 to Canadian Seed Growers' Association, $422,000.
Mr. PELLETIER:: What is the explanation of the increase?


James Garfield Gardiner: 
Mr. SENN:: Before we proceed any further with these agriculture estimates would the minister make a statement as to the agreement arrived at between the provincial ministers of agriculture and himself at a conference which I believe was held late last year? If we are to discuss these items usefully we should know whether the activities of the federal Department of Agriculture are to be increased or curtailed1. I do not know whether the minister would desire to deal with them one by one as we come to the different items or whether he would prefer to make a general statement. I think we should know what changes are proposed in the activities of the different branches of the department.


James Garfield Gardiner: I had expected some time during the session, and I am prepared to do it to-morrow or at any time, to place on the table of the house the full report of the conference that took place between the provincial ministers of agriculture and myself a few weeks ago. That conference was the result of discussions which took place a year ago last December when the dominion-provincial conference was held in Ottawa. At that time we discussed very fully the matter of overlapping; it took I think about one and a half days to discuss it. After going into the details in connection with the activities of the different branches of the federal department and of the provincial departments the conclusion was that there was not any serious overlapping. There are of course inspectors of the department at Ottawa who are making inspections in connection with say the grading of dairy products, and there may be inspectors in some provinces doing the same thing. But the reason for the two sets of inspectors relates largely to the constitutional aspect, which requires the setting up of different

Supply-Agriculture-Seed
administrations owing to the fact that civil rights are under the control of the provinces, while interprovincial and international trade is under the control of the federal authority. When certain products are exported from Canada, or moved from one province to another, we must inspect. If we go inside the province to inspect products which are produced and sold within the province we may run into constitutional difficulties. Legislation which did not take these facts fully into account has been upset in the courts. The only practical way we have found of overcoming difficulties of that kind is to have federal legislation governing inspection say of dairy products within a province, covered by similar provincial legislation, and have the provinces appoint our officials to do the same work. The same officials would be doing the work in connection with international and interprovincial trade.
We have 'been able to avoid a great deal of overlapping in this way. As I have said, we discussed the matter fully a year ago and as a result of a resolution passed having to do with marketing, the conference was called this year. According to the agenda presented to the conference the only subjects dealt with were matters having to do with marketing. The question of overlapping was not discussed.
I assume it was considered that it had been fully discussed at the previous conference. While as chairman at the conclusion of our deliberations I threw the meeting open for full discussion, the matter now raised did not come up.


Mark Cecil Senn: I mentioned overlapping because newspaper reports carried the suggestion that it had been discussed. The minister has explained that by concurrent legislation or by the provinces appointing men who are really federal inspectors and graders to do their work they have been able to overcome some of the constitutional difficulties. There are many graders and inspectors grading seed for the seed branch. Have any of the inspectors been appointed by a province, and if so is such province paying any proportion of the salary?


James Garfield Gardiner: Probably the best way to answer the question would be to say that the constitutional difficulties which arise in connection with some matter does not necessarily arise in connection with seed. This vote is for the administration of the Seeds Act, the Feeding Stuffs Act, the Fertilizers Act the Agricultural Pests Control Act, the Inspection and Sale Act and the Hay and Straw Inspection Act, all of which regulate the quality and control the sale of seeds, feeds fer-
31111-13J
tilizers, binder twine and hay and straw in Canada. The provinces do take certain action in connection with seed, but I do not think there is any overlapping in connection with the matters of which I have been speaking.


Mark Cecil Senn: I do not believe the minister has fully answered my question. After all, seed is sold within the provinces; so is hay, fertilizers and every other item he has mentioned. How is it possible for inspectors to enforce their grades and, if necessary, to take^ civil action within the province in connection with purely provincial trade? Further, the minister has not stated whether the provinces bear any proportion of the cost of inspection.


James Garfield Gardiner: No, the provinces do
not bear any proportion of the cost to cover the activity of which I speak. There would be some difficulty in our entering the provinces and enforcing grades, where the action of our department was contested. There would be difficulty if the transaction were entirely within the province.
Mr. SEJ*N:	I know that inspectors go
around to the different seed stores in my constituency, and all through the province of Ontario. If the seed is not up to sample, and if we are selling seed which is not in accordance with the provisions of the act, action is taken. It seems to me that up to the present time they have been successful m carrying appeals to the oourts, and fines have been imposed.


James Garfield Gardiner: I believe the Seeds Act does make possible the doing of things such as the hon. member has mentioned. Perhaps ninety-nine and probably one hundred per cent of our people realize that this practice has to be carried out, and there has been no contestation of the point. Something might
happen, if the matter were taken to a court___
I am not in a position to say that, but so far they have agreed to conform to the terms of the act, and to carry on accordingly.


Mark Cecil Senn: Would the minister give us some idea of the conclusions which were arrived at last year by the advisory council?
I believe they met during the summer and made certain changes in the regulations in connection with the grading of seed. Can the minister tell us what changes were made?


James Garfield Gardiner: All the action taken by the department arising as a result of the recommendations are embodied in amendments^ the Seeds Act which I shall bring down in a few days. They are quite extensive,
Supply-Agriculture-Seed

and cover almost the whole line of activities under the Seeds Act. Those will be brought before the house for discussion when the bill is presented.


Mr. BEAUBIER:: The Manitoba seed fair is usually held in conjunction with the winter fair at Brandon, but last year it was held in Winnipeg on the premises of the T. Eaton Company. I should like to know why it was moved from Brandon to Winnipeg.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am informed it is a provincial fair, and we have nothing to do with the location of it. We do give a small grant to it. I am not in a position to give a reason for the change.


Mr. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):: What proportion of the grant is to be given to seed fairs, and how many seed fairs have we in western Canada?


James Garfield Gardiner: The total amount for grants, subsidies and contributions is S84,900, but I have not before me the detailed amounts. However, if the hon. member wishes, I shall bring down the information.


Ernest Edward Perley: What are the requirements for a grant to a seed fair? What must the fair board do?


James Garfield Gardiner: I believe the same question was asked a year ago, and at that time I placed on Hansard the information which is now in my hands. Perhaps the quickest way to give hon. members the required information would be to read it:
With a view to assisting provincial departments of agriculture in promoting the production, conditioning and distribution of superior seeds and fertilizers, subventions are made available and payable from the parliamentary vote for the seed branch in amounts and for the purposes as follow:
Total subventions available to a province
1.	The total subvention available to a province within the dominion fiscal year shall not exceed the sum of twelve hundred dollars unless more than one million acres are under cultivation in field crops within the province, in which case the subvention may be increased pro rata tivelve hundred dollars for each additional million acres under cultivation as reported by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics for the previous year, provided that the total subvention shall not exceed twelve hundred dollars pro rata per hundred thousand of total population as shown by the latest available federal census return.
2.	These subventions shall be for the purposes and in the amounts hereinafter specified, but shall not exceed one-half the total amounts paid as cash prizes or grants by the provincial departments of agriculture.

3.	150 for seed crop competition.
Seed crop competitions have been discontinued in most of the provinces. As a seed improvement agency they are believed to be less eftec-tive than the combined seed crop and cleaned seed competition. Subventions shall not exceed $50 for each seed crop competition, the total not to exceed twenty-five per cent of the amount available to a province.
4.	$200 for a combined seed crop and seed competition.
Each combined seed crop and seed competition in which the seed used must be a registered grade or grade No. 1 certified as to purity of variety, trueness to type or freedom from noxious weeds, shall be eligible for a subvention of $200.
5.	$50 for a local seed fair.
Local seed fairs continue to be serviceable in a few localities and may participate in these subventions to an amount not exceeding $50 for each such seed fair.
6.	$250 for district seed fairs.
District seed fairs are organized in some provinces to meet the needs of groups of counties where local seed fairs are not held, the larger fair being held at different points within the district during successive years. Subventions not exceeding $250 may be paid on account of each such district seed fair.
7.	$600 for a provincial seed exhibition. Subventions on account of each provincial
seed exhibition shall not exceed $600.
8.	$600 for seed cleaning machines.
The results of seed drill surveys and other investigations make clear the need for more efficient cleaning and grading of seed. This purpose may' be served to best advantage by well equipped cleaning plants that may- be conveniently available to farmers at reasonable charges. The total cost of efficient cleaning machines of medium capacity, for itinerant seed cleaners, not including poweT equipment, warehouse facilities or motor trucks should not exceed the sum of $1,200. Subventions amounting to not more than one-half the cost of such machines, but not exceeding $600 towards seed cleaning machinery at any centre, may be paid, provided that the control of the service and the charges for the use of these machines, is subject to the approval of the minister of agriculture for the province, tor a period of seven years from the date of purchase.
9.	$300 for machines to grind limestone or mix fertilizer.
In several important farming districts the character of the soils and of the production therefrom indicate that the use of agricultural lime and of fertilizer is of paramount importance. The cost to the farmers for lime and fertilizers may be substantially reduced if the necessary appliances for the grinding of limestone and the proper grinding and mixing ot fertilizer materials are made available to organizations of farmers at convenient centres. Subventions amounting to not more than one-half the cost of such machines, but not exceeding $300, towards a machine at any centre, maybe paid provided that the control of the service and the charges for the use of these machines, is subject to the approval of the minister of agriculture for the province, for a period ot seven years from the date of purchase.

Supply-Agriculture-Seed
10.	50 cents per ton for agricultural lime freight charges.
Because there is an absence of suitable limestone in some districts where agricultural lime is needed, subventions not exceeding fifty cents per ton may be paid to cover not more than one-third of the railway freight charges on agricultural limestone provided that the minister of agriculture for the province contributes an equal amount for the same purpose.
11.	The minister of agriculture for the province may utilize the total subvention for any or all of the purposes mentioned, except as provided in section three.
12.	Subvention accounts should be submitted to the seed commissioner, Ottawa, through the office of the seed branch district inspector for the district in wrhich the subvention was earned, by the minister of agriculture for the province, or his authorized representative, before the end of March each year.
These are the regulations setting forth the purposes of grants made under this particular vote.


Ernest Edward Perley: How many cleaning machines are in operation in Saskatchewan, and how many receive grants?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not in a position at the moment to give the number of machines in use in the different provinces.


Ernest Edward Perley: I understand that quite a number go round the country.


James Garfield Gardiner: I have not that information available at the moment, but I can bring it down later if required.


Ernest Edward Perley: How many local seed fairs receive grants in Saskatchewan?


James Garfield Gardiner: There are 160 and some odd agricultural societies, of which about half have seed fairs. I cannot give my hon. friend the exact number that receive grants.


Mark Cecil Senn: Must a fair be a seed fair
only before it is entitled to a grant? Is the subvention paid to a fall fair at which seeds are shown?


James Garfield Gardiner: If a fall fair operates a seed fair the grant is made in connection with the seed fair.


Mark Cecil Senn: Is the lime upon which the freight is paid purchased in Canada only? Where do the machines for grinding the lime come from? Are they all purchased in Canada or are some purchased in other countries?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not certain that it is compulsory that the lime should be Canadian lime, but it happens that it is. I
am not in a position to state definitely that all the machines used are of Canadian manufacture. There would probably be some doubt about that.


Mr. LENNARD:: Does the minister consider it fair to the other seed merchants in the Winnipeg district to have a seed fair held on the premises of the T. Eaton Company Limited, which company is in the seed business?


James Garfield Gardiner: I would not care to express an opinion with regard to action taken by the provincial government.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Does this item cover subventions to seed fairs throughout Canada?


James Garfield Gardiner: In so far as they are seed fairs. The subventions are paid in connection with seed fairs of all kinds.


Gordon Graydon: Can the minister inform the committee as to the number of junior farmer seed competitions held in Ontario last year?


James Garfield Gardiner: Those are carried out under the auspices of the province. We have no detailed information.


Gordon Graydon: How much was disbursed by the federal authorities for these competitions in Ontario?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have not that information available, but I could get it.


Mark Cecil Senn: I have heard the Prime Minister state on different occasions that no money should be voted by this house when its expenditure was to be under the control of a province, but the minister now states that he has no information to give us because these competitions are conducted by the provinces. In other words, the money is expended by the provinces and voted without any information being given. Does the minister think that that is in accordance with the settled policy of the administration?


James Garfield Gardiner: With regard to certain expenditures there have been statements made similar to that referred to by the hon. member, but in this case the practice is one which has been carried on for many years, not only in this department but in other departments of the government. It is true that the administration of these fairs is controlled by the provincial governments, but we have made full inquiry into and full inspection of all the different activities. We have satisfied ourselves that the money is being properly spent and for a good purpose, and it is only when we are so satisfied that payments are made.
Supply-Agriculture-Seed


Mark Cecil Senn: The minister gave the whole amount spent. Would he state what proportion of the vote was expended under provincial inspection and management last year?


James Garfield Gardiner: In every case where we contribute it is a fifty-fifty arrangement.


Ernest Edward Perley: What was the amount granted to the Manitoba seed fair which was held on the premises of the T. Eaton Company in Winnipeg?


James Garfield Gardiner: The maximum amount they could get would come under the provincial seed exhibition, and is S600. They do not all get S600; it depends upon whether they earn it or not. I am not certain that we have this particular account in, but probably we could get the information in the office. The outside amount would be $600.


Ernest Edward Perley: Did the department have any advice as to the change from Brandon to Winnipeg before the grant was made?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am informed that we received no advice at all, that the change was made by the province without consulting us.


Mr. FAIR:: I should like to bring to the attention of the committee one of the clauses of the Seed Grain Act in reference to seed grain shipped from one province to another. Under the provisions of the act the shipper of grain is bound to abide by the decision of the dominion grain inspector. If a car of grain-I have in mind at the moment a carload of oats-is found not to agree with the sample submitted to the seed branch at any point of inspection, the shipper of the grain has no right whatever under the act to have the grain resampled and inspected. The decision of the seed branch is final. Now it is quite possible for samples to get mixed at the point where they are being tested, and as the shipper has no appeal he is at a great disadvantage. I should like to see the act amended so that a retest could be made on another sample drawn from the grain that is in dispute.


James Garfield Gardiner: As I said a few
moments ago, it is our intention to have the act before the house very shortly for amendment, and this matter could be discussed at that time. Wherever application is made for resampling, the department, I am informed, does resample. It is not the practice to insist that only one sample shall be taken and that no resampling shall be done. Wherever application is made, resampling is done.


Robert Fair: I should like to have had this information a few years ago. Under the act as it was at that time there was no chance to have the grain resampled. The decision of the seed branch was final, and I know that great injustice was done at that time to the producer of some pretty good seed grain. If the act is being amended I hope it will be amended in that respect.


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not think that that particular amendment is coming up, but the matter could be discussed when the act is before us, because of course the whole act will be up for consideration once the bill is in the house. What I want to say now is that while the act does provide that the decision of the seed branch shall be final-because there has to be some finality in matters of that kind; somebody has to have the final say-yet in practice I am informed that the branch does resample where there is any dispute with regard to the sample that has already been taken. They may resample, and after that, of course, the decision of the seed branch must be final.


Robert Fair: I quite agree that their
decision should be final at some stage, but I do not believe it is commonly understood that the act as it stands allows resampling, and I think resampling should be allowed.


Mr. COLDWELL:: May I ask the minister what is included under the term "fertilizer control"? Does this apply only to lime? And further, what amount of this appropriation is going to be used for fertilizer control?


James Garfield Gardiner: I understand that there are five provinces, the maritime provinces, Quebec and British Columbia, which have used lime. The other provinces, I understand, have not used lime. The subventions go to the province, and it is the province that determines the amount that shall be used for fertilizer purposes. The subvention is divided among seed, fertilizer and other activities by the province, under an agreement with the federal government.


Major James William Coldwell: 
James Garfield Gardiner: I assume my hon. friend has in mind the soil survey in Saskatchewan?


Major James William Coldwell: That is right.


James Garfield Gardiner: That soil survey was
started I think about 1926. It is not a survey that was started by the federal department. At that time there were overages which had resulted from the operation of the wheat board during war time, and these overages were disposed of in this way: a certain percentage was returned to Saskatchewan, a certain percentage to Manitoba, and a certain percentage to Alberta, the three provinces from which the greater part of the grain came. In Saskatchewan, if I remember rightly, the amount returned was about a quarter of a million dollars, something over
S200,000.	That money was set up in a fund, and during the last ten years only the interest from that fund has been spent for the purpose of making a soil survey. The capital amount of the fund is still intact, but the interest derived from the fund has been used for this purpose. The dominion government and the university of Saskatchewan have cooperated in the making of that soil survey, and to-day all the settled sections of the province from one end to the other have been mapped and you can read on that map almost the exact quality of the soil from one end of the province to the other. The last check-up which I made was at the time of the conference we held a few weeks ago, and they are now going to show the amount of moisture that falls in these sections as well as the soil conditions. They are working out now the productivity of the soil, basing their decisions somewhat upon the moisture as well as upon the nature of the soil itself. From those maps the provincial department of agriculture, with our own department here, are at the moment trying to work out some scheme of rehabilitating, if I might use that term, the drought areas of Saskatchewan. In the present estimates there is no amount for the handling of that problem, but I expect later on in the session to bring down certain special supplementaries to provide some funds for carrying on activities in connection with rehabilitation. While the developments have not extended so far in respect of the drought areas of Alberta and Manitoba as they have m respect of the drought area of Saskatchewan, they have nevertheless gone a considerable distance, and the same activities that are carried on in Saskatchewan will be pursued in the other two provinces as well.


Major James William Coldwell: In view of what the minister has said I am not going to follow up the matter further now. I am very glad to
have that statement, and later in the session we shall have an opportunity of getting some more information.


Mark Cecil Senn: One of the most important activities of the branch, and one that I think is too little used, is the field inspection of seed crops for registration. Perhaps the minister can tell the committee what regulations are in force in regard to that inspection, how much money is used for the work, and the location of the areas where fields are inspected for seed purposes.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am sorry that in the statement I have before me the information is not divided' up as the hon. member has asked' for it. Part of the service is provided for in the first item, "communication services," at a cost of S2,500; part of it in personal services, which is to provide largely for inspections, S215.000; and part of it in transportation of persons, 852,148. These amounts cover the other item, but some other costs are included as well as the matter of personal inspection.


Mark Cecil Senn: I was trying to get a statement from the minister as to the regulations and what is necessary before a field can be registered in this way. It seems to me that the public are not acquainted with this service, and they might very well know more about it. If the minister would make a statement as to what is necessary and as to the usefulness of it, it would be of value to the country.


James Garfield Gardiner: These regulations are all laid down by the Canadian Seed Growers1 Association, which is an organization outside the government itself, or outside the department. We make a grant to that association, and their regulations are subject from time to time to change. I have not at the moment a copy of the regulations under my hand, and I imagine it would take some time to go over them.


Mark Cecil Senn: The federal Department of Agriculture, rather than the Canadian Seed Growers' Association, furnishes the certificate, does it not?


James Garfield Gardiner: No. It is the seed growers' association, not the department, that gives the certificate.


Ernest Edward Perley: Is 818,900 an increase in the grant to the seed growers' association?


James Garfield Gardiner: It is the same amount as has formerly been paid.
Supply-Agriculture-Seed


Mr. TOLMIE:: We have been expending large sums of money for many years oni this seed work. Is there any definite information in the department as to the direct beneficial results that come from the work?


James Garfield Gardiner: There is, of course, much information available. I am not in a position to say that there is at the moment a printed document from which the information could all be obtained, but I am quite sure that	one could be	provided, as the hon.member,	from his	familiarity with the	department, will understand. Those of us who are familiar with farming generally can recite many of the benefits that have come through the grading and the registering of seed and through	the work	of	persons who are	developing from time to time better seed in the different districts of the various provinces.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I was inquiring for the information just for the purpose of getting it into the pages of Hansard and in that way impressing	on users	of	seed throughout	the
country a fuller realization of the benefits to be derived from the use of better seed. I am sure the hon. minister and all of us who have been associated with agriculture fully recognize that it would be very beneficial to get something definite in. the way of figures, or otherwise clearly indicate those advantages. I wish also to ask whether our exports of grass seeds and clover to European countries and other places have increased or decreased in recent years.


James Garfield Gardiner: There has been a considerable increase. I have before me the figures in some detail; I do not think it would take too long to go over them. The export of grass seed from Canada to the United Kingdom averaged, from 1930 to 1934, 54,000 pounds a year; for 1934, it was 96.000 pounds, for 1935, 10.000 pounds, and for 1936, 389.000 pounds. The percentage of increase for 1936 over the average for the years from 1930 to 1934 was 720-4 per cent; for 1936 over 1935, it was 3,890 per cent. That is a considerable increase in percentages, but, after all, when one considers the figures the amount is not as large as one might expect it to be. To the United States the average export from 1930 to 1934 was 1,676,000 pounds, a year; for 1934, the export was 871,000 pounds; for 1935, 4,629.000 pounds, and for 1936, 4.111,000 pounds. There is a slight decrease in 1936 as compared with 1935. To other countries than the United States and the United Kingdom, the average from 1930 to 1934 was 402,000 pounds a year; for 1934 the export was
336,000	pounds; for 1935, 241,000 pounds, and for 1936, 412,000 pounds. That is a little less than double for the other countries for 1936 as compared with 1935. I think it would be best to put the table on Hansard just as it is, and if that is satisfactory to the committee it will be done. Perhaps along with that, the imports should be inserted. These show a decrease. I suggest that the figures be taken as read, and the two tables be put in.
Seed Table 1
Exports of Grass Seed From Canada Crop Years 000 Lbs.
Average 1930-1934	1934	1935	1936	1936 % of 1930-1934	1936 % of 1935United Kingdom	. .. 54	96	10	389	720-4	3,890-0United States	. . . 1,676	871	4,629	4,111	245-3	88-8Other countries	. .. 402	336	241	412	102-5	171-0Total	. .. 2,132	1,303	4,880	4,912	230-4	100-7
Table 2
	Imports of	Grass Seed by Canada				
Average 1930-1934	Crop Years 000 Lbs. 1934	1935	1936	1936 % of 1930-1934	1936 % of 1935United Kingdom.. ..	.. .. 37	10	107	62	167-6	57-9United States	.. . . 7,589	4,331	517	1,86S	24-6	361-3Other countries	,. .. 141	114	200	187	132-6	93*5Total	.. .. 7,767	4,455	824	2,117	27-3	256-9

Supply-A gricult ure-Seed


Mr. THOMPSON:: On what basis are grants made to the different seed fairs? Does a fair held in connection with an agricultural society receive the same grant as individual fairs held independently?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have already read the regulations in that regard, but in answer to the second question I would say, Yes; the grants are paid if the seed fair is held in conjunction with the county fairs and meets all the conditions. If that is done the subventions are paid.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Have exports of barley from Canada to the United States increased very much since the removal of prohibition and the resumption of brewing in that country? Canadian barley was in great demand at one time.


James Garfield Gardiner: I have under my hand figures with regard to the imports and exports. The average export of barley from Canada to the United States by crop years from 1930 to 1934 was 200,000 bushels; in 1934, the export was 223,000 bushels; in 1935, 9.296,000 bushels; in 1936, 879,000. The amount is considerably reduced in 1936 as compared with 1935.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: What is the principal source of sugar beet seedi?


James Garfield Gardiner: None of it is produced in Canada; most of it comes from European countries. We get some from Germany and some from the southern states.
Mr. SEN'N: Can the minister give the committee any information with regard to convictions registered under the different clauses of the act in connection with adulteration?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have not that information at the moment but it can be brought down. Perhaps the hon. gentleman would put a question on the order paper.


Mark Cecil Senn: It is not a question of knowing exactly the amount. I should like to know whether infringements of the act are falling off, whether there is a better condition in the trade in that respect, or whether there is any attempt to evade the act.


James Garfield Gardiner: The number of prosecutions is very small, being not more than thirty last year, which would indicate that the trade is carrying out the intent of the act particularly well.


Mark Cecil Senn: There are two conclusions to be drawn from that statement; one is that the trade is trying to conform to the act and the other is that the act is not being enforced. Personally I believe that the trade is trying to live up to the provisions of the
act, although there are always unscrupulous dealers. The act should be rigidly enforced, because the public and honest dealers ought to be protected against those who are violating its provisions.


James Garfield Gardiner: The same staff is carrying on that has been enforcing the act for some time, and it is quite active in seeing that the act is enforced. When the legislation having to do with seed control comes down, it will be found that one of the matters that we are trying to tighten up is the very one referred to.


Mark Cecil Senn: One of the grave difficulties under this act is the inspection of hay and straw at destination. Frequently farmers [DOT]or shippers send: a carload of hay or straw to a central depot, and after it is on the track and in the cars it has to foe disposed of quickly ; otherwise there are demurrage and other charges. In the event of the man to whom the hay or straw is consigned refusing to take it, the farmer or shipper suffers severe loss, especially if the price happens to have dropped. Some protection should be given the shipper in that respect, because he is at a very great disadvantage after the hay has been removed from his own station and is lying in another depot, perhaps in Toronto or Montreal. He has no recourse if the consignee stands back and says that the hay is not up to grade. The department might very well make provision to protect the shipper in that way.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is at present no compulsory grading; it is done upon request. I fancy that some difficulties from a constitutional point of view would be experienced in connection with many of these sales. But there are some cases where when trouble arises it is not reported promptly to the department. If it is reported then inspection is made and everything possible done to get over the difficulty. I am sure the hon. member will realize that there are conditions especially during the winter months, affecting the shipment of hay and other fodder in this country. Sometimes the hay or other fodder is baled with a little snow in it, and if it goes where it gets warm it suffers damage. At other times when the weather is right it will go through without any damage. It is very difficult to grade and maintain the grades of a product of that kind. But the department is doing everything possible to provide protection to shippers and purchasers.


Mark Cecil Senn: I was not suggesting that the inspection should be made and grades established at point of shipment. I realize that
Sup-ply-Agriculture-Seed

there may be times when hay is shipped that should not be shipped, and when it is not up to the grade represented. I think if some action were taken by the department it might assist not only the shipper but the consignee. The department might very well consider some amendment to the act, particularly as there is, I believe, a special act dealing with hay and straw, to see that both parties are more or less protected, so far as this can be done under the constitution.


James Garfield Gardiner: I am sorry to say that the matter which is being discussed is not regulated by the seeds act. It is governed by the hay and straw inspection act, and it is not the intention to bring that act before the house at this session.


Mark Cecil Senn: But I understand that any inspection which is made is made under the Seed, Feed and Fertilizer Control Act.


James Garfield Gardiner: No, under the hay and straw inspection act.


Mark Cecil Senn: But is it not done by inspectors of this division?


James Garfield Gardiner: The same inspectors, but they are enforcing a different act.


Mr. DOUGLAS:: Does the department contemplate making available grass seed and other coverage crops for farmers affected by soil erosion? The southern part of my constituency is bounded by the international boundary. Across the line the Americans are fighting the same problem as we are, that of drought and soil erosion. Large areas there have been sown to crested wheat grass. It is yet to be seen whether the effect will be beneficial or not. Not only has the seed been made available to the farmers there, but they have actually been financed in the operation of sowing the seed. Does the department contemplate taking any step of that kind?


James Garfield Gardiner: One of the chief activities under the Prairie Farms Rehabilitation Act is doing the very thing referred to by the hon. member. We are buying grass seeds in considerable quantities and distributing them in those areas. But we do not assist in the seeding; the farmers do the seeding themselves. We advise them in regard to the seeding, and have officials of the experimental farms in the vicinity of those areas, and officials under the Prairie Farms Rehabilitation Act supervise the activities to a considerable extent. There are as well in those areas, organizations, for instance, agricultural associations, which have been formed to 
take in considerable districts-I think there is one just south of Weyburn extending south toward	Estevan-and those organizations
supervise much of the work, hold meetings from time to time and discuss the best methods to be followed in re-grassing and other activities that have to do with the reestablishment of those districts.
Perhaps we could discuss this matter better when we come to the special votes for the Prairie Farms Rehabilitation Act, which will come down later in the session.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Entomology, including investigations and inspections relating to destructive insects and pests, |407,000.
Ernest Edward Perley: Could the
minister report on the situation in the western provinces, particularly Saskatchewan, in respect to possible outbreaks of cutworms and grasshoppers this year?


James Garfield Gardiner: Perhaps I might read
a short review I have before me of the conditions existing:
Re grasshopper situation on the Canadian Prairies, 1937
From egg surveys during the autumn of 1936, following the widespread drought of the year, the general grasshopper situation for 1937 is much more serious than that for 1936, and an increase of approximately 9,500,000 acres of infested territory was shown to be present, making a total area threatened with grasshoppers in one intensity or other of some 53,000,000 acres
Increases occurred in all categories, there being some 280 square miles increase in the "very severe"' zones, 6,600 square miles increase in the " severe," 6,890 square miles increase in the "moderately infested" and 1,000 square miles increase in the "lightly infested," taking the three provinces together.
The outbreak threatened in Manitoba is extremely slight compared with former years, and it is not expected that a control campaign will be necessary.
In Saskatchewan the increase is very material both in intensity and in area, and a widespread control campaign will be necessary, particularly in the northwestern part of the province, in which heretofore severe outbreaks have not been suffered.
In Alberta the promise is, if the weather is favourable for grasshoppers over a large area, that outbreaks will be as severe as any suffered during the last five years, and a widespread control campaign will be necessitated.
The prospect is that definite organized control campaigns will be necessary throughout some 12,090 square miles-7,680,000 acres-of country.
I	do not think it would be fair to read this statement without comment, because it might be taken as a pessimistic prophecy as to what the crop this year might be. Those of us who have lived in western Canada and attempted to grow crops there realize fairly

Supply-Agriculture-Insect Pests
well that our grasshopper infestations have not invariably started their ravages in the southeastern part of the prairie sections, usually starting in the first year in the southern sections and gradually moving northward and westward. The present movement of grasshoppers started in 1931. It has been going on ever since. As this report indicates, the most difficult infestations to handle are now u.p in the northwestern part of Saskatchewan and on into the northern part of Alberta. Therefore, looking back over the years it would seem that we are at the end rather than the beginning of a movement against grasshoppers. However, it is most important that people be informed as to the *dangers. There is always the possibility that weather conditions may help the farmer in his fight against the grasshoppers, while on the other hand they may assist the grasshoppers. We are in no position to prophesy as to what future conditions may be.


Mark Cecil Senn: I should like to know whether the federal department carries on investigations of methods of eradication of the corn borer. I know the government of Ontario has done something in the matter. Is there any overlapping, and what is the situation so far as the corn borer is concerned?


James Garfield Gardiner: We do research work,
but the actual administration is carried on under the Ontario Corn Borer Act. We try to control any movement of the pest from one province to another. I am informed that the com borer has been on the increase in the last two years, but that the problem is not nearly as serious as it was about 1925.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: To what does the hon.
member attribute the increase?


James Garfield Gardiner: Mostly to weather conditions. Like most other pests, the com borer thrives under certain weather conditions.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Is it extending far beyond the points in Ontario where it was found a few years ago?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, it is extending
through eastern Ontario into Quebec, and even into the maritimes, where corn is grown.


Mark Cecil Senn: Are any preventive measures
being taken by provincial governments? I understand the federal department is doing some scouting and inspection work in some of the maritime provinces.


James Garfield Gardiner: Quebec has legislation
similar to that in Ontario. I understand there is no legislation in the maritimes, but there is not so much corn grown there, and no serious problem at the moment.


Mark Cecil Senn: What is the probable Loss
occasioned to the farmers of Ontario or of the dominion by the infestation?


James Garfield Gardiner: Speaking from memory I would say that the corn crop in the southwestern part of Ontario was at one time about
14,000,000 bushels, and the com borer did such damage that it threatened to wipe out production in that area. The introduction of the legislation in Ontario has resulted in a successful battle against the pest, and production seems to be on the increase in that province. I believe they have the pest fairly well under control. However, weather conditions sometimes cause it to increase and at other times to decrease.


Mark Cecil Senn: Can the com borer be spread by the importation of corn from other countries? Is there any regulation or provision which would avoid a difficulty of that kind?


James Garfield Gardiner: It can be carried in the corn, and all com coming from any country or district in which there is any degree of infestation is under examination by the department. This is for the purpose of controlling the spread of the com borer.


Mark Cecil Senn: Seed corn or feed com?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am told that all com *may be under examination.


Mr. MARSHALL:: In the light of the
fact that the grasshopper pest is serious, does the minister think a reduction in the estimate is warranted?


James Garfield Gardiner: The matter of controlling grasshoppers is handled by the provinces. We have set up a research service, and our officers assist the provinces in methods of fighting and so on. However, the actual financing is done by the provinces, so that this vote is not so much concerned with the cost of fighting the grasshopper. May I add that maps are available outlining all the infested areas, and any person interested in any particular province may secure a map which would indicate clearly such areas. Information is sent out at the same time as to how best to fight the grasshopper in the area in question.


James Alexander Marshall: Where does the minister expect to make a saving of S8,100?


James Garfield Gardiner: Perhaps I would do well to read a summary of increases and decreases. The first is suballotment number four, in which the increase is SI,000. It provides for an addition to Canada's contribution for 193738, to the Farnham Royal Parasite Laboratory, following the recommendation of the Imperial
Supply-Agriculture-Insect Pests


Mr. BARBER:: Has the minister a report of the investigations which have been carried out in connection with the ravages of the pea moth, which have been very serious on the lower mainland of British Columbia?


James Garfield Gardiner: The pea moth is encountered mostly in British Columbia and the maritime provinces. The method of fighting this pest which is being developed at the present time is by the bringing in of parasites. These parasites are being brought in from England, through the Farnham Royal Parasite Laboratory, to which the grant goes which was referred to a moment ago. That organization is interested in the dissemination of all this sort of knowledge and as a result of cooperation between this and other countries of the world we are able to obtain these parasites and put them to work to destroy the pea moth.


Harry James Barber: Is the experimental work carried on at the Agassiz farm?


James Garfield Gardiner: Part of it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Have we made any arrangement with the American states south of Saskatchewan and Alberta in connection with locusts and grasshoppers? This matter was brought to my attention just recently in South Africa. Locusts and grasshoppers sweep down from Swaziland into the union territory and I was told that unless some arrangement was made with the adjoining countries we would be labouring in vain in trying to deal with the situation. A few years ago I was told that great numbers of these pests came

up from the Dakotas and Montana and proved a great menace to our crops. At that time I think it was suggested that the two countries should cooperate. I was wondering if anything had been done.


James Garfield Gardiner: There always has been considerable cooperation between the United States and Canada. I understand that there is under consideration a bill before congress to provide $2,500,000 for the fighting of grasshoppers in the central western states. There is always very close cooperation between the agriculture authorities in the United States and the department here.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I was wondering if any action had been taken to prevent grasshoppers or locusts going from our country into the United States, or coming from the United States into Canada. It is a question not so much of general cooperation as of the actual taking of steps to deal with the matter.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is very difficult to do that. I am quite sure that the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett), like myself, has noticed from time to time in the west that when the grasshoppers are moving they can be seen at almost any height. Even when they are not travelling thick enough to darken the skies, as they sometimes do, they can be seen at great heights. I think it was only two years ago that an aeroplane in North Dakota to the south of the Saskatchewan boundary was forced to land because of grasshoppers. It would be really' very difficult to control the movement of grasshoppers between the two countries.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Any action that was contemplated would have to be taken before they reached that stage of development.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think it has always been recognized that the grasshoppers start in the central prairie section of the United States and move north. We have always some little warning of their approach. I am not aware of any serious movement from the north to the south, although at times there has been some movement.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That happened two or three summers ago.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is cooperation in the methods used to fight the grasshoppers at a certain stage in their life, rather than in trying to deal with them after they start moving.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Has there been any evidence in Canada of the Mexican pin worm affecting tomatoes?

Supply-Agriculture-Insect Pests


James Garfield Gardiner: I am told that the pin worm is a new pest of southern range. It has not as yet become established in Canada. It is under investigation by the department.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Is the minister referring to the Mexican pin worm?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes. It is not really a pest in the sense in which we use that term, but it is being investigated with the idea of preventing its becoming a pest.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: What progress has been
made in protecting the spruce trees of New Brunswick and other places from the sawfly
pest?


James Garfield Gardiner: The fight against that
pest is being carried on in the same way as the fight against the pea moth, that is by introducing parasites. Some 20,000,000 of these parasites were introduced into areas in eastern Canada last year. We have an army of 20,000,000 parasites fighting the sawfly pest.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Is there any evidence that your army has been victorious?


James Garfield Gardiner: These parasites feed
only on the pest and we have recovered numbers of the parasite which was imported. This would indicate that the parasites are becoming established and we hope they will assist in a decrease of the sawfly pest.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Do they appear to be in
as good condition as when they were sent out to capture the enemy?


Gordon Graydon: According to the last
report of the Department of Agriculture mosquito control projects would come under this item. Can the minister indicate what progress has been made in the last year in this connection?


James Garfield Gardiner: All our work along
these lines is advisory. We carry on research work and advise the different municipalities how mosquitoes may be destroyed. The actual work of destruction is earned on by the municipalities.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Has any progress been
made in connection with handling the jumping flea beetle?


James Garfield Gardiner: As a result of research
in the department there has been developed a
nicotine dust which has givpn good control. I think they are found mostly in British Columbia.


Harry James Barber: Another pest found in
British Columbia is the earwig, in connection with which I believe the minister was questioned last session by the late former member for Victoria, Mr. Plunkett. Can the minister give the committee any information.


James Garfield Gardiner: This pest is now being fought in exactly the same way as the other two I mentioned, that is by the introduction of parasites.


Mark Cecil Senn: Would the minister inform us as to the method of inspecting nursery stock coming into the country? What is done with the stock when it is found to be disease infested? At what ports is the inspection carried out, particularly of stock from Europe and Asiatic countries?


James Garfield Gardiner: Any one bringing nursery stock into Canada must first obtain a permit from the branch. This stock is examined at all ports of entry where such shipments are admitted. If it is found necessary to do so, the nursery stock is treated in order that there may be no danger of any pest being introduced into the country. This work is checked up as carefully as possible.


Mark Cecil Senn: Is it possible for the inspectors to detect fungus disease of different kinds and discover insect pests on shipments of nursery stock?


James Garfield Gardiner: It is very difficult to inspect nursery stock for plant diseases but it can be quite easily inspected for insect pests. The department has a knowledge of the background of the well known diseases of plants that are imported, and where these are discovered, as they sometimes are, the proper measures for dealing with them are taken.


Mark Cecil Senn: It would seem to me to be almost impossible for the inspectors to inspect all the nursery stock that comes in at certain seasons of the year. I have seen them come in; the roots are wrapped in moss and dampened, and carload after carload of that class of goods comes in. I cannot understand how it would be possible to inspect all these cargoes at all efficiently. I would ask the minister to give us some explanation of what is done in that regard.


James Garfield Gardiner: Bulbs and nursery stock of that kind are not all inspected individually, of course, but samples are taken and an inspection is made. The inspectors of the

Supply-Agriculture-Animals
department examine millions of plants every year for parasites and insects that may be destructive of plant life, and wherever plant disease is discovered, that is dealt with as well.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health of animals, administration of Animal Contagious Diseases Act and Meat and Canned Foods Act, $1,819,700.
James Alexander Marshall: Would the minister explain the very large decrease in this item?


Mark Cecil Senn: There is a very serious reduction in the item, which is one of the most important in the whole vote for agriculture, and I think the minister should give a very full explanation of how this reduction comes about.


James Garfield Gardiner: I think hon. members will recall that last year we brought down in the main estimates approximately the same amount for this purpose as we are bringing down this year. It is very difficult at this time of the year to determine what districts it may be necessary to go into to open up what are called anti-T.B. areas, and. that is where the greater part of the expenditure is made. In the supplementary estimates last year we found it necessary to ask for a further appropriation of three-quarters of a million dollars. That is included in last year's vote indicated in the estimates, and must be considered when taking account of the reduction in the vote. I am not in a position at the moment, and probably shall not be until very much later in the session, to say to what extent it will be necessary for us to be active this year in fighting T.B. in new areas, but we have provision in this vote for doing everything that has been carried on previously, with the exception of the opening up of new anti-T.B. areas, and that is entirely a question of how far with the money that is available from the treasury we can go in extending the area in which T.B. is being fought. We spent a considerable amount last year partly because of the necessity of going back over the same areas again, and also because of the fact that we took in areas like that around the city of Toronto, where there was a very considerable number of dairy cattle and where there turned out to be a very considerable number of reactors. That is probably one of the most expensive areas we would have to deal with in Canada, and as that was done last year it is just possible that we may be able to get along with less than the amount spent last year. But later in the session I may have to report to the house that more money is required.


Mark Cecil Senn: I agree that the work of
cleaning up T.B. in these areas is very important. Would the minister tell the committee how many areas are at the present time fully restricted, with fully accredited herds, how many are under accreditation or inspection, and how many applications have been made for other areas to be taken into the scheme?


James Garfield Gardiner: I have under my hand
a list of the fully accredited areas. In Prince Edward Island the entire province is covered, comprising the counties of Kings, Queens and Prince. They now have a percentage of less than -5 per cent of reactors there. In New Brunswick the following counties are accredited areas: Charlotte, Madawaska, Queens, Sumbury, York, and that comprises the whole province. In Quebec nine counties have been covered, or about half the province. In Ontario, Carleton county, Kenora district, Leeds county, Prince Edward county, Russell county, have been covered. All these I have mentioned are fully accredited areas. The whole province of Nova Scotia has been gone over once, but it is not accredited until the retests are made.


Mr. KINLEY:: Does that include the island of Cape Breton?


James Garfield Gardiner: No.


John James Kinley: Then that is not all Nova Scotia.


James Garfield Gardiner: No; I apologize to my hon. friend. I should have said the mainland. In Manitoba the accredited areas are the rural municipalities of Pembina, Portage la Prairie, Rhineland and Winchester. In Saskatchewan the accredited areas are the rural municipalities of Blucher, Cory, Lost River, Montrose, Morris, Park, Vanscoy and War-man. One of the reasons why it may be found unnecessary to spend as much money this year as last is that last year in many instances we were covering new areas with the first test. This year we Shall probably be making retests in districts from which the greater number of reactors have already been cleared, and on the second test we should not have so much compensation to pay out for stock destroyed.


Mark Cecil Senn: I also asked the minister for
the number of applications from other districts.


James Garfield Gardiner: New districts tested this year are six counties in New Brunswick, five in Quebec, eight in Ontario, and ten in Manitoba. I am informed that these are practically all the applications we had this year, and the applications are now pretty well up to date.

Supply-Agriculture-Animals


Mr. HARTIGAN:: How many years is it
since the first test was made in Nova Scotia?


James Garfield Gardiner: It was in 1927.


David James Hartigan: That is ten years ago,
and I suppose after that >was done the departmental officials lapsed into their usual approximation to a Rip Van Winkle existence, because since then no further effort has been made.
As far as Nova Scotia is concerned, it has received very little attention in any line, as regards expenditures or otherwise, from the federal Department of Agriculture. There has been sold to the people of Nova Scotia, even in the cities, milk coming from barns from which certainly, in the interest of public health, it should never have been allowed to be retailed in the cities. The federal Department of Agriculture has never bothered itself to take the least interest in this matter, although it has been appealed to on various occasions to protect the health of the people. Let me give one example: Ten years have elapsed from the time of the first test being started, and the second test is not yet under way. That simply means that a great deal of money has been thrown away; the first test is practically useless. This is the type of service for which the people of Canada are paying large sums of money.


John James Kinley: With regard to Nova
Scotia, as the minister says the first test was made in 1027. There was considerable opposition to it, so much so that local authorities did not include the island of Cape Breton, and, as I understand the situation, the island has never been subject to the test. Tests are made in conjunction with the local government, and it is hardly fair to say that the officials here have been derelict in their duty, because it was suggested that public opinion down there was not strong for a second test, although I am told opinion is growing now in its favour.


James Garfield Gardiner: The hon. member is right in saying that there has been some little difficulty about covering Nova Scotia. Cape Breton has never applied, and of course the counties must apply before they are brought in. The other part of Nova Scotia was established as a district, and I understand that the law does not now provide for changing a district once it has been established. The whole province is the district. I understand that the Department of Agriculture have always been willing to proceed in Nova Scotia, and I am certain that they have been willing this year, because the department has written to Nova Scotia expressing a desire to go ahead with the work in that province.
So far we have not been able to make satisfactory arrangements to proceed. There has to be, in connection with this activity, as with many others, some cooperation between the province and the federal authority, and there has been some little difficulty about getting the matter carried out in Nova Scotia to the satisfaction of the county interested, the provincial government and ourselves.


John James Kinley: In 1927, when the test
was carried out in Nova Scotia, the price of cattle was so high that it looked like confiscation to take a farmer's cattle at the valuation established by the old regulation that had been standing for so many years. Since then the condition has become such that a farmer will get more out of the test and sometimes fare better than he will by selling the cattle, so that it is more acceptable, and I think the farmers are again becoming more interested.


Gordon Graydon: Would the minister give us details as to the number of cattle that were tested in the Peel county area which is under the tuberculosis restrictive regulations, since the test was begun last year; also how many reactors there have been so far to that test?


James Garfield Gardiner: In Peel county, 16,106 cattle were tested. There were 2,954 reactors, or 18-34 per cent. The compensation amounted to $93,230.


Gordon Graydon: Could the minister give us any information as to whether the tuberculin test is to be proceeded with in the two northern townships of Caledon and Albion, in the county of Peel, which I understand have not as yet been tested?


James Garfield Gardiner: At the present time those townships are not prepared to have the test. There is a petition from them, but the townships have expressed a desire not to have us proceed. I think the main reason for that is, it is a feeding district and in view of those interests they are a little bit concerned about having an interruption in the entry of feeders into that area.


Mr. McNEVIN:: Has the department
received a request from the southern townships in the county of Victoria?


James Garfield Gardiner: Victoria, Ontario?


Thomas Bruce McNevin: Yes.


James Garfield Gardiner: No, not yet.


Thomas Bruce McNevin: In view of a remark made by the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) regarding the amount
20S
Supply-Agriculture-Animals

of money spent on the health of animals in proportion to the amount spent on the health of the people, I think it should be pointed out, though it may be generally known, that this expenditure is made, after all, in order to protect, the health of the citizens of the country and not just that of animals.


James Garfield Gardiner: A very important reason why we are fighting tuberculosis in cattle is to prevent human beings from getting it. The whole matter is a health movement.


John James Kinley: Is not that a debatable question?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am not a medical authority, but most people contend that is the case.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: On what basis is compensation given to the farmer whose stock must be destroyed because it shows an unfavourable reaction to the tuberculin test?


James Garfield Gardiner: It is two-thirds of the maximum value. The maximum value for grades is $60 and for purebreds, $150, which makes the maximum one can obtain for a grade, $10, and the maximum one can obtain for a purebred, $100. The cattle are all valued.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Who evaluates the grade?


James Garfield Gardiner: Our veterinary inspector.


René-Antoine Pelletier: How much of this work was carried on last year in Alberta?


James Garfield Gardiner: No areas in Alberta applied last year. Indeed, I understand no areas in Alberta have at any time applied for this service, and none was given last year or any previous year.


René-Antoine Pelletier: In view of the large
reduction in this item I am wondering whether the result will be a lessening in any way of the inspection that is kept over meats and canned food products.


James Garfield Gardiner: No, there is no lessening. As a matter of fact I think the hon. member will find, by an examination of the details of the vote, that it is increased, one of the reasons being that a new plant has been opened in Edmonton. Six new plants have been opened across Canada. Under our regulations all these have to be inspected, which requires a larger, not a smaller expenditure.


Mr. LEADER:: I associate myself with the remarks made by the hon. member for Victoria, Ontario (Mr. McNevin) in protesting -rather mildly, nevertheless protesting- against the remarks we sometimes hear in

this house to the effect that we grant so many hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars -though this is rather an exaggeration- for health of animals while neglecting the health of human beings. As the minister so well pointed out, this work is undertaken for the protection of human lives even more perhaps than it is for the protection of our animal life. I do not think the government is extending the operations of this work as fast as it should.
There is another disease which, in my opinion, is a greater menace than tuberculosis not only to the live stock industry but as well perhaps to the human race. I refer now to Bang's disease. This disease is spreading at a rapid rate in Canada and is assuming considerable proportions in the United States; altogether it is regarded as extremely dangerous. I wish to read a brief passage from a pamphlet sent out by the department, Bovine Infectious Abortion or Bang's Disease of Cattle. This pamphlet points out that the disease is causing heavy financial loss to the live stock and dairy industries and is a serious factor in public health problems. It goes on to say:
A few years ago cattle were thought to be the only susceptible animals. To-day we know that this was an erroneous view and that other lower animals are subject to infection. Nor is man immune since the causative microbe attacks him, producing a serious illness known as undulant fever and on this account bovine infectious abortion is no longer only of interest to rural and cattle raising communities. The city and town dweller must give the problem a measure of attention.
I have read this passage because I view with deep concern the decrease in this grant in connection with the Animal Contagious Diseases Act. I am, however, full of hope, from the remarks made by the minister, that in a supplementary estimate to be brought down later more money will be granted to cope with this disease. The department is offering to cooperate with the farmers in the eradication of the disease. It will undertake to cooperate with breeders who are willing to sign certain documents, agreeing to adhere to the rules. That is quite proper. But although the department fully realizes the danger of the disease and is willing to cooperate towards its eradication, it has not yet come to the point where it is willing to offer compensation to the live stock man who, for the sake of his family and others as well, is ready to have his animals slaughtered when they react to the test.
The government's recommendation is that the most effective way to get rid of the disease is to test animals and, if they react,

Supply-Agriculture-Animals
to have them slaughtered. This is a hardship to live stock owners because, without compensation, the animals slaughtered represent a total loss. I believe the day is coming when the government must assist live stock owners by means of compensation in the same way as they are being assisted now in connection with bovine tuberculosis. Some people may think, as one hon. gentleman said this afternoon, it might be more profitable to have the animals slaughtered than to rear them. That is altogether a fallacy. I have had a great many years' experience in raising live stock, and while I have suffered considerable loss from bovine tuberculosis it has never occurred to me that it was cheaper or to my advantage to have cattle react and be slaughtered rather than to carry them on; the reverse is the case.
I understand that the United States are spending huge sums on investigational work in connection with this disease. I know that they are also compensating owners whose cattle are slaughtered. In the very near future, if any real remedy is to be effected, the Canadian government must also compensate live stock owners who submit to the slaughter of their cattle. I am pointing out the danger of this disease, and it is my opinion that the government should appropriate more money for investigational work.
There are two questions which I wish to ask the minister. First, is it the intention of the government to curtail operations in connection with the work for the eradication of tuberculosis in cattle? Second, has the government any intention of offering compensation to owners of live stock when their cattle are slaughtered under the Bang's test?


James Garfield Gardiner: The department does not intend to let up in its fight for the eradication of tuberculosis among cattle. It is possible that what may be done this year may cost less than what was done last year owing to the fact that part of the area we are going over is one that is being retested, so that the number of animals affected will not be so great in proportion to the total number tested.
As regards Bang's disease, I can only say that it is pretty much in the position that bovine tuberculosis held some years ago. When governments first started their fight against tuberculosis among cattle, I think I am safe in saying that ninety per cent of the cattle owners were opposed to any such policy. As they acquired more and more experience in connection with it, and as more information was made available, it became a more or less popular policy to carry on that work.
Governments are more or less controlled by public opinion even in connection with such a matter as the fighting of tuberculosis among cattle. The answers I have given to questions regarding certain areas wanting to come in and others not wishing to do so are a fair indication that not one hundred per cent of the people are yet convinced with regard to tuberculosis. The attempt to eradicate Bang's disease, so far as our information goes, is comparatively new. The agitation with regard to fighting the disease has been effective only within the past few years.
As regards expenditures in the United States, I understand that the authorities there took advantage of the fact that they were going out to destroy a certain number of cattle anyhow under a certain policy evolved in that country a few years ago. They were going out to destroy diseased cattle and they took advantage of that policy to go ahead with the eradication of Bang's disease. My information is that they are spending something like S10,000,000 for that purpose. We in Canada are compelled, if we wish to ship breeding cattle to the United States, to have the cattle tested at the border. When we test them and find reactors to Bang's disease, these cattle are not condemned in the sense that cattle suffering from tuberculosis are condemned; we simply mark them. My experience in the year I have been in office is that it is rather difficult to continue even marking them. At the beginning we had a mark which was a large "B" on the cheek, and anyone walking into a barn and seeing a cow with that mark would know that it had reacted to the test for Bang's disease. We have ceased to use the large "B" on the cheek and now put a small "B" on the ear. That is because public opinion has not yet developed to the point that, in many instances, the people will even stand for our marking the cattle. We shall probably have to work along in pretty much the same way in regard to Bang's disease as we previously did in connection with tuberculosis in cattle. We shall have to convince at least a fair percentage of 'the people that the test we make is pretty nearly infallible, and does indicate whether the animal has the disease. Having convinced them of that fact, we may be able to proceed to do some other things in connection with fighting Bang's disease that at present we cannot do. But we have no intention of ceasing the fight against Bang's disease; we intend to go on by stages as

Supply-Agriculture

public opinion permits, and to educate public opinion with regard to the matter, limited only by the amount of money this house will vote for the purpose of fighting the disease.


Harry Leader: My information is that the test is not infallible at all, far from it. That is one reason why I think the government should undertake further investigation in cooperation with our neighbours to the south. It is very important that this investigational work should be carried on without * cessation.


Harry James Barber: I understand the scientists to the south have developed a serum which some veterinarians in Canada claim has proved very successful, but they complain that the department will not permit it to enter this country. They tell me that it has been tested south of the line and is working very successfully. Why the department will not permit it to enter this dominion they do not understand. Would the minister explain that?


James Garfield Gardiner: I understand a vaccine
is under investigation in the United States, and they are attempting to develop it, but it is still in the research stage. It will be a cure for the disease rather than merely a means of diagnosis. It has not yet been proven that that serum is successful in curing the disease. I understand it is not officially used in the United States. That may be subject to correction; there may be some states in which it is. We are conducting work along the line of diagnosis.


Harry James Barber: Is it not the intention
of the department to give that serum a trial? I understand several herds across the line have been successfully treated. When one veterinary on the lower mainland undertook to carry out an experiment on a herd in that section he was not permitted to bring the serum across the line.


James Garfield Gardiner: Under the biological
orders there is a general regulation which prevents bringing into Canada a serum containing any living organism. It is under that regulation that this serum is not permitted to enter this country at the present time. I do not know that I can say more than that the department is keeping the closest possible check on investigations going on in the United States, and as soon as any method is proven to be effective it will be taken advantage of in Canada.


Thomas Alfred Thompson: What provision has the department for supervising the sale of tubercular cattle after they have been examined 
and branded? We know the drovers go through the country picking up these cattle; we see them shipped off to the abattoirs, and it is stated that in many cases these diseased cattle are slaughtered and sold for human food. What supervision has the department over the slaughter and sale of these condemned animals?


James Garfield Gardiner: The marked cattle
spoken of are shipped only under licence to abattoirs; those abattoirs are all properly inspected, and the carcasses are properly inspected there. If it is found that the diseased parts are not detrimental to the use of the other parts of the carcass for food, probably the whole animal is not condemned. But in cases where there is any danger whatsover the animal is condemned and no part of it is used for human food.


Gordon Graydon: I understand that under
the United States Milk Import Act certain additional requirements have to be complied with by dairies and other shippers sending milk to that country. I should like to know in what respect those requirements differ from the ones which a dairy must comply with under the ordinary Canadian regulations.


James Garfield Gardiner: The ordinary Canadian regulations are mostly municipal; they vary a great deal throughout Canada. But if it is desired to have further discussion in regard to this item I shall suggest that the committee rise.
Item stands.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Dunning the house adjourned at six o'clock.
Monday, January 25, 1937