1959-02-02

Mr. Speaker:: By leave of the house I should like to read a brief statement on not reading speeches.
At thij stage of the session I think I should recall to the minds of hon. members the well-established rule of this house against the reading of prepared speeches, except for members who are making their maiden speeches, and for certain important statements which have to be made in introducing complicated subjects, such as the budget or an involved piece of legislation.
During the first session of this parliament there were first speeches by many new members and it was perhaps not an appropriate time to invoke the rule too often. But at the present time almost all the new members- all except 11 or 12-have delivered their maiden speeches, and all hon. members might well give thought to the improvement of debate and the more expeditious handling of public business by refraining from the reading of a series of set speeches or essays.
I must say that an observer of the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne, as it has progressed during the past two weeks, might well have thought that the rule required members to read their speeches. He would have seen members preparing a lectern from which to read their speeches by placing two or three thick volumes of Hansard on their desks, perhaps even the volume in which the rule against the practice had been noted. He would have seen others reading page after page of a speech which they boldly held in their hands.
It is clear that members may refer to notes and may read quotations and, as I have said, there are some exceptional cases where reading is allowed. But it is equally clear that members must not read their speeches verbatim, and even in the exceptional cases the whole speech should not be read.
The rule itself and the reasons which support it have been well stated from time to time, and I do not intend to repeat what has been said, but rather to give members one
or two references which will enable them to satisfy themselves on the course which they should follow.
May I refer hon. members to citation 144 in Beauchesne's fourth edition, pages 124 and 125. My immediate predecessor in the chair collected the authorities and precedents in a lengthy statement which he gave to the house on the 31st January 1956. This will be found in the Journals for 1956, beginning at page 92. Hon. members will appreciate that it is not easy for a Speaker to intervene on his own initiative, and that the enforcement of the rule depends almost entirely on hon. members themselves, those who are making speeches and those who are sufficiently interested in preserving the character of parliamentary debates to rise on a point of order when the rule is being infringed.
I have been encouraged to believe that now that the throne speech debate is over, hon. members in all parts of the house are ready and willing to co-operate to the fullest extent in restoring this very sound rule and practice. Those of us who sit in the chair will do our part. We ask for your co-operation, and particularly for your indulgence when we find it necessary to intervene.


Mr. Winch:: Mr. Speaker, will you enforce that rule?


Mr. Speaker:: As I have said, I shall do my part, and I hope that hon. members will cooperate in bringing this rule back into effect.



ASSISTANT PARLIAMENTARY REPORTERS


Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance) moved:: That the report of the civil service commission respecting the appointment of an assistant parliamentary reporter, laid upon the table of the house Wednesday, January 28, 1959, be now approved.


Mr. Chevrier:: Will the minister explain the purpose of this motion?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, this is a matter that comes before the house from the commissioners of internal economy. It concerns a situation which has become somewhat serious in relation to the reporting services of both the house and its committees.
In the particular motion now before the house the individual concerned, Mr. Peter Parsons, was the only person sitting for the
570	HOUSE OF
Appointment of Hansard Reporters examination who was found to be qualified in the view of the civil service commission. He is prepared to come on the reporting staff only if started at the maximum available in this category, and not at the starting minimum. The purpose of this motion, in giving effect to a recommendation from the civil service commission and a recommendation from the commissioners of internal economy, is to start the gentleman at the maximum salary provided.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Donald Methuen Fleming: That the report of the civil service commission respecting the appointment of an assistant parliamentary reporter, laid upon the table of the house Thursday, January 29, 1959, be now approved.


Lionel Chevrier: Will the minister explain?


Donald Methuen Fleming: In this case the person recommended for appointment as an assistant parliamentary reporter and qualified for the purpose resides in Vancouver, and to induce him to come and take this position it was necessary to agree to pay his expenses in moving from Vancouver to Ottawa. The purpose of the motion is to permit that to be done. Again this is in line with the recommendation of the civil service commission and comes to the house on the recommendation of the commissioners of internal economy. Even the passage of these two motions, Mr. Speaker, will leave the reporting staff of the house and committees somewhat short-handed.


Harold Edward Winch: What is an assistant parliamentary reporter?


Donald Methuen Fleming: The gentleman in question in the present motion-


Harold Edward Winch: What is an assistant parliamentary reporter?


Donald Methuen Fleming: -will serve on the committee reporting staff, Mr. Speaker.


Harold Edward Winch: Why is a motion of the house required?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Because of the
fact that financial considerations are involved, that this is something that has occurred with the house in session, and because the commissioners of internal economy have submitted recommendations to the house. In both cases the reports of the commissioners were laid on the table of the house last week and have been printed in Votes and Proceedings.



SEARCH AND RESCUE


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the interest in connection with the position of the Danish ship Hans Hedtoft, I felt that a statement should be made at this time to indicate the stand taken by Canada and the work done by the Royal Canadian Air Force in connection with this matter. The area involved where the ship met its disaster is outside of the Canadian area of responsibility. However Canada, as a result of requests and in co-operation with the United States naval authority, has assumed responsibility for the over-all co-ordination of the search through the R.C.A.F. rescue co-ordination centres at Halifax and Torbay.
I should refer to the work done in that connection. An R.C.A.F. Lancaster aircraft from the rescue unit at Torbay, Newfoundland, was immediately despatched to join the United States air force search aircraft based at Goose Bay and Keflavik. The captain of the weather ship Bravo has been appointed searchmaster at the scene of the action. Search operations are continuing with the R.C.A.F. providing the over-all co-ordination.
While there is no certainty as yet as to the fate of the ship, I am sure that I speak for all Canadians in expressing the hope that it will yet be possible that rescue may take place, very doubtful as that is. At the same time I express on behalf of the government and people of Canada our sympathy to the government and people of the kingdom of Denmark in these trying hours. I also express our hope that out of the fears of the last two days may yet come rescue. In the meantime Canada is doing everything it can to participate in the search work that is taking place.


Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure all hon. members of this house will join in the Prime Minister's expression of admiration for the effective and courageous work of rescue which the Royal Canadian Air Force have been and are doing in connection with what seems at this time to be a very tragic disaster. We also join with the Prime Minister in his expression of sympathy for the victims, as they seem likely to be, of that disaster.


Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the C.C.F. group may I say that we wish to associate ourselves with the remarks of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. We wish to convey to the people of Denmark and to the

families and relatives of those who may be victims of this tragic disaster our most sincere sympathy. We know that the people of Canada were only too happy to have been able to participate in rescue operations, and we associate ourselves with the Prime Minister in his hope that events may yet prove that this has not been the tragedy it now appears to be.



ATOMIC ENERGY


Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to make a statement relating to the negotiation of atomic energy agreements. I think this is a matter in which the house is deeply interested. As I have previously stated in the house, these agreements are designed to provide for the development of co-operation in the peaceful uses of atomic energy and for commercial exchanges of nuclear energy materials, particularly uranium, of which Canada is of course a large producer.
Canada has already concluded two such agreements, one with the Federal Republic of Germany and one with Switzerland, and we have been in communication with a number of other friendly governments which have embarked on atomic energy power reactor programs and with which we might therefore be expected to have a mutual interest in cooperation in this field. Among these countries have been Japan and certain nations of western Europe.
I am pleased to announce today the opening of negotiations looking toward two additional atomic energy agreements. Preliminary negotiations for a bilateral agreement between Canada and Japan to provide for co-operation in the peaceful uses of atomic energy are now under way, and we expect that formal negotiations will be concluded in the spring of 1959.
With respect to western Europe, the house will recall that a treaty establishing a European atomic energy community, EURATOM, became effective on January 1, 1958. The object of the community, of which Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and The Netherlands are members, is to contribute to the raising of the standard of living in member countries and the development of commercial exchanges with other countries by the creation of conditions necessary for the speedy establishment and growth of nuclear industries. The Canadian government has approached the EURATOM commission with a view to the negotiation of an agreement for co-operation
Atomic Energy-Negotiation of Agreements in the peaceful uses of atomic energy to provide a framework for the development of such co-operation between Canada and EURATOM, and particularly for the organization of a joint program of research and development on natural uranium/heavy water power reactors. The commission has welcomed this proposal and the negotiation of an agreement is expected to begin shortly. The natural uranium/heavy water reactor is, of course, the type on which Canadian research and development have been concentrated.
We are engaged in discussions with a number of other governments, and we will continue our efforts to conclude new bilateral agreements in this field.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the house listened with great interest to the statement the minister has just made on what is a very important matter. We on this side hope the government will be able to press ahead to a successful conclusion the two negotiations which have now begun. In due course we will be interested in hearing whether they are able to initiate negotiations with other countries.
In view of the fact, Mr. Speaker, that under the present regulations we can export only a very small quantity of uranium without bilateral agreements, it is of the most vital importance that these should be concluded. That perhaps has been underlined in the last few days by the fact that one of our uranium-producing mines in the Elliot Lake district has had to suspend operations.


Hazen Robert Argue: Mr. Speaker, this announcement by the Secretary of State for External Affairs is a most happy one, because it shows that once again Canada is in the forefront in the development of atomic energy for peaceful purposes. I think in this field the government and parliament will receive the unanimous support of the people of this country. When other more powerful nations seem more concerned with the military development of atomic energy I think it is most appropriate that an industrial power of Canada's stature should be forging ahead in the field of peaceful development.
We hope that by these agreements atomic energy may be made available to more countries in the world and that as hydroelectric energy becomes less available atomic energy may be used more and more in the future to raise the living standards of people all over the world.

Motions for Papers ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY AUTHORITY ACT



AMENDMENT TO INCREASE LIMIT ON AMOUNT TO BE BORROWED

Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport) moved: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Act to provide that the authority, with the approval of the governor in council, may from time to time borrow money from Her Majesty or otherwise to an aggregate that shall not at any time exceed $335 million in lieu of $300 million which it is already authorized to borrow by section 13 of the act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources) moved: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Northwest Territories Act to provide for the appointment by the governor in council of judicial as well as of administrative officers; and to provide further for certain changes in connection with the administration of the act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 1-Mr. Pickersgill:
For a copy of "The Canadian Economic Outlook for 1958" as prepared by the Department of Trade and Commerce.
He said: I wonder, sir, if I may have permission to withdraw this motion.
Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



RECONVENING OF DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 2-Mr. Marlin (Essex East):
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government or any official thereof, and any member of the provincial governments, since November 26, 1957, with respect to the reconvening of the dominion-provincial conference.
John George Diefenbaker: Subject to the usual reservation that the provinces agree, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the reservation expressed by the Prime Minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 3-Mr. Chevrier:
For a copy of all interim reports made by the Board of Transport Commissioners to the Minister of Transport, or to the government, pursuant to the terms of P.C. 1487, dated the 7th of April, 1948.
He said: There are three such reports, Mr. Speaker, two of which I have now received and the third is being printed. With that I am satisfied that my motion has been answered, and I would ask leave to withdraw it.
Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. member permission to withdrawn his motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CANADIAN PACIFIC STEAMSHIPS


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 4-Mr. Howard:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government or any of its departments, and the provincial governments, organizations and persons, since January 1, 1958, dealing with the industrial dispute between Canadian Pacific Railway Company, British Columbia Coast Steamship Service and the National Association of Marine Engineers of Canada, Inc., the Canadian Merchant Service Guild Inc., and the Seafarers' International Union of North America, and dealing also with the operation of the British Columbia Coast Steamship Service Act.
He said: As a result of discussions with the minister, Mr. Speaker, I should like to withdraw this motion.
Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



SALE OF CANADIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIPS

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 11-Mr. Chevrier:
For a copy of all contracts providing for the sale of the vessels formerly owned by the Canadian National Steamships.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 13-Mr. Peters:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and any of its departments, and the provincial government of Ontario, its agents, commissions or agents thereof, since January 1, 1957, dealing with the establishment of a seaport at Moosonee, Ontario, including the establishment of docking facilities, dredging of a channel connecting Moosonee with the deeper waters of James bay.
Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works):: I would ask that this be passed subject to obtaining the approval of the provincial government.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion, subject to the limitation expressed by the Minister of Public Works?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 14-Mr. Peters:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and any of its departments, and the provincial government of Ontario, its agents, commissions or agents thereof, since January 1957, dealing with the establishment of airport facilities for wheel-equipped aircraft in the immediate area of Moosonee.
George Harris Hees: There is no objection to the passing of this motion, subject to the usual reservation with regard to the consent of the province.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion, subject to the reservation expressed by the Minister of Transport?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 15-Mr. Peters:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the provincial government of Ontario, the township of Teck, and other persons or organizations, regarding the establishment of an airport in the vicinity of the town of Kirkland Lake.
George Harris Hees: There is no objection to the passing of this motion, subject to the usual reservations regarding the concurrence of the province.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion, subject to the reservation expressed by the Minister of Transport?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 17-Mr. Benidickson:
For a copy of all correspondence since January 1, 1958, between the federal government and the government of Manitoba or any person or organization relating to a proposal to relay television transmissions northward into the region of Dauphin, Manitoba, from either of the existing TV transmission stations at Brandon or Winnipeg.
George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, there is no objection to passing this motion subject to the usual reservation with regard to the consent of the provinces.
Motions for Papers


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the reservation expressed by the Minister of Transport?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 18-Mr. Benidickson:
For a copy of all correspondence since January 1, 1958, between the federal government and persons or organizations resident in the Kenora-Rainy River constituency requesting or opposing the provision by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation or by other sources of television programs to serve Fort Frances, Dryden, Sioux Lookout, Red Lake and Atikokan.
Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue):: There is no objection to passing this motion subject to this understanding. When reference is made to the federal government I presume that some ministers may have had some mention on some particular phase of this matter in correspondence dealing with other matters. As I understand it this motion is limited to correspondence with myself or the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation dealing specifically with these matters, and will be brought down right away.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the explanation given by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 20-Mr. Dupuis:
For a copy of all correspondence and other documents exchanged between the Board of Transport Commissioners and the city of Sherbrooke, respecting a project for a viaduct on Acadia street, Sherbrooke, Quebec.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 21-Mr. Benidickson:
For a copy of all correspondence, and any agreements entered into between the federal government and the government of Ontario since January 1, 1958, relating to the picnic ground development and improvement winter work program.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Subject to the usual reservations, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the reservations that are customary?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Motions for Papers

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 22-Mr. Benidickson:
For a copy of all correspondence, and any agreements entered into between the federal government and the government of Ontario since January 1, 1958, relating to the access to forests winter road work program.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Subject to the agreement between the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. Benidickson) and myself, I accept this motion.


An hon. Member:: What are the terms of the agreement?


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Do you want the terms of the agreement, Mr. Speaker? There is an extensive series of documents to present. We have agreed that we will look at the files and that the hon. member will point out the ones he wants and those will be returned to the house.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the arrangement between the minister and the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 24-Mr. Howard:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the government or any of its departments and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; and between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and any other person, organization, agency or government since January 1, 1959, and having relationship to the present dispute between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and some of its employees.
George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the hon. member will allow this motion to stand. I am a little confused about the wording. There is no correspondence, telegrams or other documents exchanged between the government or any of the departments of the government and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation with respect to the strike. Therefore the return to the first part of the motion will be a nil return. The second part of the motion refers to correspondence between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and any other person, organization, agency or government. There has been no correspondence between the corporation and the government, but I am not sure what the situation may be with respect to other persons. There may be a thousand, there may be ten or there may not be any. I should like to discuss this matter with the hon. member. That is the only point on which there can be any question.
Motion stands.



EAST SAINT JOHN THERMAL PLANT, N.B.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 25-Mr. Robichaud:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government or any official thereof, and the provincial government of New Brunswick, or the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission, with respect to the signing of an agreement for the construction of the East Saint John thermal plant, for the period June 1, 1958, to date.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, as negotiations are at present under way between the government of New Brunswick and the government of Canada concerning this agreement, I do not think it would be proper to consent to the address for the production of these papers at this time.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the hon. member willing that this item stand?


Mr. Robichaud:: Yes.
Motion stands.



UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE, QUEBEC

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 26-Mr. Chevrier:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the government of the province of Quebec, since November 30, 1957, with respect to unemployment and to the making of an agreement under the Unemployment Assistance Act.
Hon. J. W. Monteith (Minister of National Healih and Welfare):: Subject to the usual reservations, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the usual reservations, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 27-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the government of each province since May 1, 1958, concerning the municipal winter works incentive program.
Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, the motion is agreed to provided consent is obtained from the provinces.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the Minister of Labour, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 28-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents or agreements exchanged between the federal government or agency thereof, and any

provincial government, trade union or other organization, regarding the wage rates which are to apply In connection with the construction of the south Saskatchewan dam.
Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Labour and the Department of Agriculture are the only ones concerned, so far as we know. We are agreeable to this motion passing subject, of course, to the agreement of the province.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservation expressed by the Minister of Agriculture, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 29-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and each of the provincial governments since January 1, 1958, concerning amendments to the Pipe Lines Act (Canada) and/or pipe line acts in force in the provinces.
George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I understand that the hon. member is willing to allow the motion to stand until it is possible to find out just exactly what it is that he wants.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.
Motion stands.



ROADS TO RESOURCES PROGRAM

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 30-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and each provincial government since April 1, 1958, regarding the roads to resources program.
Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, this matter is under discussion between the two governments. I think it would be better to have the motion stand at the moment.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the hon. member agreeable?


Hazen Robert Argue: Yes.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.
Motion stands.



SASKATCHEWAN


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 31-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents, exchanged between the federal government or any of its departments, and the government of Saskatchewan, from June 5, 1958 to date, dealing with: (1) the building of power plants
Motions for Papers
and electrical transmission lines within Saskatchewan; (2) the construction of the south Saskatchewan. river dam.
Douglas Scott Harkness: As far as the latter part of this motion concerns the south Saskatchewan river dam, it is agreeable, subject to agreement of the province, of course. I believe the same thing applies as far as the first part of the motion is concerned, but the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources can speak to that matter.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: That is quite correct, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservation expressed by the ministers, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 32-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and each provincial government since June 1, 1957, concerning the reconvening of the dominion-provincial conference to discuss fiscal matters.
John George Diefenbaker: Subject to the limitation of the customary reservations.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the limitation expressed by the Prime Minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 33-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the government of each province since June 3, 1958, dealing with federal assistance towards the construction of: (a) the trans-Canada highway; (b) a primary highway system; (c) provincial highways; (d) urban roads.
Howard Charles Green: Subject to the approval of the provincial governments.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 34-Mr. Argue:
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and each provincial government since July 18, 1958, concerning federal-provincial taxsharing agreements.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Subject to the usual reservation respecting the consent of the provinces.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
576	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen FINANCE

Mr. Samuel Boulanger (Drummond-Arlhabaska) moved:: That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give early consideration to the advisability of the establishment of an agriculture and fisheries development bank to consolidate and expand existing credit facilities for persons engaged in these primary industries and to provide sufficient capital to enable farmers and fishermen to make capital improvements required for the efficient and profitable operations of their undertakings.
He said:
(Translation):
Mr. Speaker, I deem it a duty, as well as an honour, to introduce in the house the first resolution on the orders of the day. I have noted your remarks in regard to the delivery of speeches, and I shall adhere to your instructions.
The motion I should like to introduce today reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give early consideration to the advisability of establishing an agriculture and fisheries development bank to consolidate and expand existing credit facilities for persons engaged in these primary industries and to provide sufficient capital to enable farmers and fishermen to make capital improvements required for the efficient and profitable operations of their undertakings.
We know, Mr. Speaker, that Canadian farmers and fishermen are not only an important sector of our economy, but also that they are the staunchest supporters of free enterprise. In fact, the success of our economy will depend on the position of our farmers and fishermen. For several years we have become increasingly aware that Canadian farmers and fishermen are in great need of capital. In fact, to finance a family farm on a sound basis, it requires much more capital than it did some 10 or 15 years ago. The farmer today, to be in a position to compete on foreign and domestic markets, must possess good land, modern equipment and improved livestock, otherwise he could not earn enough to provide for himself and his family. Unfortunately, many farmers in Canada have not been able to increase their income in this way, because in various parts of the country farms have become more and more split up, as one or two sons settle on their father's farm. In other cases, it has been the lack of capital which prevented some farmers from improving their situation by developing their land in that way.


That problem, in its various aspects, the Liberals have understood, more particularly under the administration of the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent. The legislative measures which they adopted to help farmers and fishermen would be too numerous to be listed here. However, I must say that we Liberals are satisfied with the work accomplished. Two of the most important acts introduced by the Liberal government are, undoubtedly, the Canadian Farm Loan Act and the Farm Improvement Loans Act. Now, under those two acts, the government has loaned over $800 million to help Canadian farmers buy land, farming equipment or livestock.
During the recent election campaigns, from 1957 to 1958, my colleagues and my leader gave an outline of the Liberal party's program with regard to farm loans and the improvements which it was to introduce in that connection.


Mr. Comlois:: Would the hon. member allow me a question?


Samuel Boulanger: Yes.


Joseph-Roland Comtois: The hon. member has just stated that the former government loaned $800 million to farmers to enable them to improve their farms. Am I correct?


Samuel Boulanger: Yes.


Joseph-Roland Comtois: Does the hon. member make a difference between amounts loaned by the Canadian Farm Loan Board and amounts loaned by the banks under the guarantee provided by the government on loans for farm improvement?


Samuel Boulanger: I must reply to the hon. minister that I clearly indicated that under those two acts, the government loaned over $800 million, that is $123 million under the Canadian Farm Loan Act and about $700 million under the Farm Improvement Loans Act.


Joseph-Roland Comtois: The loans were granted by the banks.


Samuel Boulanger: The banks loaned money under the legislation enacted by the government; in other words, the government guaranteed repayment of a certain proportion of those loans.
As I was saying, in 1957 and 1958, the Liberal party's program included suggestions for improving the Canadian Farm Loan Act, while the Conservatives promised to im-

prove or amend this act. In 1957, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) and all the Conservative members made promises to this effect, stating that the farm loan act was inadequate and would have to be revised. We have been hearing about it since 1957, but no more. The speech from the throne that was read three weeks ago mentioned for the first time that the possibility of amending the Canadian Farm Loan Act will be examined. We welcome this, and we hope the minister may soon be able to table his bill to give us an opportunity to study it.
To explain to you the Liberal party's program, with particular regard to the amendments we favour in this field, I could do no better than to read to you what our leader said during the campaign. To avoid any error, I shall read from the English version:
(Text):
As another immediate measure the Liberal party proposes, in co-operation with the provinces because it can only be done in co-operation with the provinces, to undertake a new and definite farm and home development program. The purpose of this proposed program would be to strengthen the family farm. I think it also represents a very practical Liberal approach to the problem of land use and the conservation.
These ends as I see them may be achieved only by ensuring that the farmers, particularly young farmers, have access to adequate credit. It is also important that farmers seeking this credit would, when they wish it, be given every possible assistance desired in ensuring that it be so used as to build up a strong farm business. That means offering advisory professional agricultural assistance in conjunction with the credit, though of course the applicant would have to request these services.
The types of credit suggested in this proposal are long-term for financing land and permanent improvements and intermediate term for financing things like livestock and machinery purchases. We are moved as the Liberal party to make this recommendation respecting the use of advisory or extension services in connection with farm loans because of the outstanding accomplishments of the Veterans Land Act in the field of farm credit.
We would like to see that practice extended. I think by every conceivable measure that program of supervised farm credit, that veterans program has been strikingly successful. At the present time the director of the Veterans Land Act is proposing that the amount of credit available to ex-service farmers be increased so that those farmers may be allowed to acquire a large enough farm business to have an economic unit. We strongly support that recommendation of the director of Veterans Land Act and we certainly as a government would ensure its adoption.
But a more important problem, however, and judged only by the amount of credit required is in providing credit facilities so that any farmer who can qualify for the credit would be helped to acquire a farm unit involving a total investment of $25,000 to $50,000. That means, as you know, in terms of a dairy farm a milking herd of at least 20 to 25 cows, or in the terms of a grain farm at least one section of land.
That I believe is the scale of family farm business that we want to make possible for farmers, especially young farmers who choose to raise their 66968-9-37
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen standards of living by such expansion, providing this does not mean of course that we think there is no place in Canada for the small farm. The small farm would certainly not be disturbed by any Liberal government, but when capital limitations prevent a move toward larger farms and a more adequate standard of living I suggest that these limitations should be removed.
Management skills of all our farmers large and small must be recognized and given the opportunity for full development. The purpose underlying this credit proposal is that it would lead to more efficient production and consequently lower the cost of production. In purely economic terms this means of aiding the farmer is perhaps even more important than providing comprehensive levels of support, but of course the two should go together.
As the farm industry becomes more efficient and costs are reduced the farmers would be helped by these means to overcome the effect of the old treacherous cost-price squeeze of which the farmers have been the victims.
Now, we would carry out this proposal for credit assistance by establishing a farm development bank. That agency, that bank, would control and co-ordinate all government activities in this field except those of the Veterans Land Act. That would involve, and this perhaps is of some importance, removing the Canadian Farm Loan Board from the Department of Finance and placing it and certain other credit functions under an independent bank responsible to the government, directly to the government, something along the lines that is done for industry by the industrial bank.
The rate of interest charged on these loans by this proposed bank would be as low as possible, essentially about the rate involved in government borrowing itself. The advisory services accompanying this credit scheme would be conducted by federal-provincial agencies in co-operation with this farm development bank.
I suggest that this farm development bank combined with improved research and proper land use, expresses our basic policy for the long term improvement of the position of all sections of the agricultural industry. We would like to associate with it smaller and immediately constructive measures such as allowing accelerated depreciation on granaries and other buildings used for on-farm storage of farm products.
We would like also to make it easier to improve farm homes. We think that the time has come when more should be done for rural housing than has been done in the past. We think that because of the rapid growth of our towns and cities there perhaps has been inevitably, in recent years, too much of a concentration on government assistance for urban housing. That certainly was a vitally important problem at the time and in some parts of Canada still is, but surely there is an urgent need to improve housing in the rural areas and small towns.
Therefore the Liberal government would not make a bold attack on this problem of rural housing without the flexibility of planning and standards of finance that are necessary to match the different needs in different areas.
(Translation):
You will appreciate, Mr. Speaker, that this plan that the Liberal party was and is still considering today is an entirely new concept.
It was drafted to help Canadian farmers and fishermen, to get organized, increase their holdings, buy machinery and improve their stock.
578	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
I am convinced that this resolution will be favourably received by all members who seek to raise the level of income of our farmers.
A careful study of this new legislation shows that it has many advantages; one of them would be to allow an increase of farm credit so that the farmers can get organized on a sound economic basis. Furthermore, by making more money available to them at the lowest possible interest, they could buy lands to increase their holdings, if they are too small, or they could get more modern machinery or buy cattle. The economic future of this country depends on the aid that we will be giving to farmers. If the farmer is prosperous, so will be our economy in general. Furthermore, increased farm credit would put a stop to integration, that new farming method whose consequences have been felt particularly these last few years. It is no overstatement to say that, in the province of Quebec among others, 90 per cent of the production of broilers is managed by companies, and we have just about lost hog farming; soon this method will be applied to beef cattle raising and other related stock raising as well.
It is not without reason that the manager of the Co-operative Association of the United States said:
It is not a matter of whether farmers will or will not integrate their farming operations with that of the processing of their products.
The question is whether farmers or the other categories of people or undertakings will control farm operations. In the hands of powerful companies and monopolies, this system will mean the end of family farms, which we must protect at all cost, for the economic and social welfare of the country.
Nor must we forget this other statement made by the Western United Farmers' Association, which says in part as follows:
(Text):
If the family-type farm is to be maintained, and if we are to continue to take advantage of technological improvements in food production, then capital in very large amounts must be made available to farm people. While this problem has received governmental consideration from time to time, and while certain efforts have been made to provide capital of one type or another, there has been no over-all approach to this problem. We cannot emphasize too strongly the importance of a national policy of farm credit.
(Translation) :
This resolution provides also for the availability of funds to enable farmers and fishermen to build new houses. As I said a moment ago, we know the wonderful results


obtained under the National Housing Act passed under the Liberal administration. Over a million houses were built under its provisions. Unfortunately, very few were built in rural areas and small towns.
This agricultural expansion bank project would make it possible to grant loans to people concerned, for the construction of houses on the same basis as for the purchase of land or cattle.
Another benefit which would accrue from the adoption of this new project would be the help supplied to young people who wish to settle on a farm. Nowadays, many leave the farm for jobs in cities, without any preparation. They are lured by the illusion of an easier life but very often end up by joining the unemployed.
That raises a very serious problem for Canada. In a rich country like ours, blessed by Providence with fertile soil, healthy climate and all the factors favourable to the production of goods for mankind, I say it is our responsibility to keep our young people on the farm. As stated by our leader, the Liberal party wishes to help those young people whose vocation it is to till the soil.
At the end of the last war, the Liberal party passed another legislative measure in favour of veterans, the Veterans' Land Act. Experience has shown beyond any doubt that this proved very helpful in many parts of the country, where wonderful family organizations can be seen which owe their success to that legislation. The best evidence of its value is that given by brigadier J. T. Rutherford who said:
A rural credit system adapted to current needs and well managed or supervised is undoubtedly the most efficient means at the disposal of a government to correct the discrepancy in income which exists between agriculture and other industries.
I realize, Mr. Speaker, that the improvement of the Canadian Farm Loan Act is not the only solution to the problem of our farmers.
There would be much to say concerning another item of the Liberal program which is indirectly related to the establishment of an agricultural expansion bank. I am referring to the setting up of an agricultural advisory council in each province, on which the federal and provincial authorities would be represented. Each council would be responsible for studying agricultural problems within the province, and for making fair and appropriate recommendations to

the federal government. For the purposes of the matter now under discussion, such a council would have been of great help, and it would also be helpful for many other agricultural matters, such, for example, as co-ordination of agricultural policies, research, etc.
However, in dealing with this resolution, I made it a point not to stray from my subject, because I intend to take the first opportunity to touch upon other aspects of the problem.
I have placed this resolution on the order paper because of the government's delay in introducing the new legislation it had promised since the beginning of 1957.
I have spoken more particularly of the farmers' problem, but the same arguments could be used with regard to fishermen. They also need proper credit to buy boats, fishing gear and other equipment required to improve their business.
That is why I move, seconded by the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Caron):
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give early consideration to the advisability of establishing an agriculture and fisheries development bank to consolidate and expand existing credit facilities for persons engaged in these primary industries and to provide sufficient capital to enable farmers and fishermen to make capital improvements required for the efficient and profitable operations of their undertakings.
(Text):


Mr. L. R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg):: It is
with pleasure that I rise to speak on the resolution proposed by the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger). I cannot help but believe that he was looking over my shoulder as I prepared my remarks for the throne speech debate, for at that time I suggested that the government give consideration to improving and increasing the present assistance which is made available to fishermen so they may secure additional and more advanced fishing equipment.
You might say that the resolution is actually in two parts, one calling upon the government to give early consideration to the advisability of establishing a development bank for agriculture and also for fisheries. As there are many constituencies represented in the house whose problems revolve entirely around agriculture, while only a small number are represented by those from fishing constituencies, I have decided to limit my remarks in support of the resolution to the problems pertaining to the fishermen on our east coast.
66968-9-37i
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
We have heard many suggestions since the beginning of the session of methods that should be followed to improve the lot of the western wheat farmer, the eastern farmer, the oil and gas industries, the fruit grower, the coal industry; and for the most part the suggestions that have been made by members of the Conservative party are worthy of every consideration. However, we must realize that all our natural resoures do not exist on the mainland of Canada, in our farms, our forests and our mines, and also that only our northland needs development.
We have on our north, east and west coasts one of our greatest natural resources found in the Arctic, Pacific and Atlantic oceans. These resources are the envy of the entire world. I say this without fear of contradiction, for on our west coast we have Americans and Japanese participating in the salmon fishing industry. Off our east coast, in the prolific fishing grounds off Nova Scotia and Newfoundland at last report we had-* 326 American fishing trawlers and draggers, 82 ships from Spain, 73 from Norway, 72 from Portugal, 66 from West Germany, 51 from Denmark, 38 from France, 16 from Iceland, 9 from the United Kingdom, 3 from Italy, an unknown number of ships from Holland and 6 from Russia. In fact, last year the Russians operated 6 fish trawlers approximately 100 miles off the coast of Nova Scotia. These were large factory ships well in excess of 1,000 tons. They were also a bit of a puzzle to our navy, for they remained in the same location from April 1 last and their number never varied from 6.
Canada's fleet of approximately 250 ships, which operate in the northwest Atlantic area, ranks second to the United States in reaping the harvest from the sea. For the most part these ships of all nations are in excess of 125 feet in length, with some factory ships ranging over 1,000 tons. They are capable of travelling great distances and carrying huge cargoes of refrigerated and salt fish. Some operate singly while others operate in what we call a twin operation. In other words, two large draggers travel across the surface of the ocean towing an immense net approximately one mile in length between them. Every half hour the draggers converge and the net is hauled alternately upon one ship or the other.
In my opinion, as the world's population increases it will become more and more necessary to look to the sea as a source of protein food supply. This fact is already realized by the many European countries I have mentioned and is indicated by the support given the fisheries by their various governments. In this regard groundfish collectively are the most important marine

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen resource on the Canadian Atlantic coast. They are the source of the fish for our large offshore trawlers as well as for a number of smaller inshore draggers. The quantities of fish are so extensive that even small improvements in the management of the resource or improved methods of fishing can result in substantial increases in profits.
Before any improvement can be made it is necessary to know the facts of the existing situation, and I am informed that under the present government considerable effort is being made to collect statistics on the size of catches, the type of ships and size of fishing equipment used, and the time and location of the catch. In addition, special efforts are being made to examine samples of the catch to determine the size distribution of the fish and their possible migratory habits. Studies have shown that some of our fishery resources may be more productive if exploited under certain restrictions, and in this regard I refer to the size of the mesh in the trawls and nets used. As much of the fishery is carried out in international waters, these regulations must be agreed upon through the international commission for the northwest Atlantic fisheries. This has been done, and from the reports received it would appear that this action will eventually result in increased stocks of commercial fish.
However, I believe that the decision regarding the size of the mesh in a net that should be carried by a deep sea trawler should be left with the captains concerned. I say this because they alone are in a position to judge the type of net that should be used, for they realize that it is impossible to sell small fish from a marketing point of view, and are well aware of the importance of conservation. They also know that on certain fishing grounds such as the northeast section of the Grand Banks it is necessary to use a small mesh fish net, for catching redfish. Captains must make many decisions regarding the operation of their ships, crew selection, weather conditions and possible good fishing areas, and when the value of conservation has been pointed out to them I believe they should be permitted to carry both large and small mesh nets to sea on their ships.
It must be remembered that fishing captains and crews do not work on salary but on a share basis with respect to the entire catch, which is in the true free enterprise spirit. Because of this there should be no hard and fast restrictions placed upon their implements of production. At the present time the regulations are such that a captain must state the type of fish he is going to

catch and the area in which he is going to catch them, as he is not permitted to carry nets of both sizes to sea. I believe this regulation should be changed.
I mention these facts because they indicate an awareness on the part of the government of the need for fisheries research, and I should like to commend the minister and his staff for the very efficient manner in which this research is being carried out and the information obtained supplied to the fishermen.
With further reference to the resolution, I should like to refer to the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act of 1955. This was passed by the parliament of Canada to provide short term credit to fishermen, $4,000 being the maximum amount an individual may borrow, with interest at 5 per cent. In addition, the repayment periods are from one to eight years depending on the amount borrowed and the purpose for which the loan is obtained. Through this plan fishermen have been able to secure loans from chartered banks or credit unions, thus enabling them to secure an interest in a fishing vessel or fish weir. The provincial governments of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have also set up fishermen's loan boards-


Mr. Pickersgill:: And Newfoundland.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: And Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island-to provide loans to individuals or to groups of fishermen who have incorporated companies for the purpose of constructing long liners or draggers up to 65 feet in length. In addition, a federal subsidy of $160 per gross ton is automatically paid on these ships built under the provincial loan plan. This has further assisted the individual fisherman. As a result of this combined assistance program, in the last 12 years the number of licensed draggers and other trawlers in the maritimes has increased from approximately 10 to over 250. This, Mr. Speaker, is indicative of the progress that can be made when financial assistance in the form of loans is made available to industrious Canadians.
However, this assistance was of help to more than just the fishermen. I have in my hand a directory of new Canadian fishing boats which were built in Canadian shipyards between July, 1957 and July, 1958. I might add that this list is not all-inclusive, as only boats of over 50 feet in length are included; and one of the 23 mentioned is the A. T. Cameron, built for the fisheries research board of Canada. The remaining 22, however, have all been built for use in the fishing industry, and their construction has

provided much needed work in the Canadian shipbuilding yards as well as for allied industries.
Now, for the information of the house, a study of this list shows that 17 of these ships built were long liners, approximately 59 feet long. They were built in Nova Scotia. Two of these ships were draggers, 65 feet in length, built in New Brunswick; one was a gill net fisherman built in Ontario; two were dragger-seiners for British Columbia, approximately 75 feet long. I might add further that the long line method of fishing from a 59-foot ship was first introduced into the maritimes in 1943, and from the figures I have just mentioned it can be readily seen that the method has spread widely throughout Nova Scotia. This type of fishing craft is capable of competing with draggers of comparable size and is manned by a crew of four or five men. This type of fishing gear has also been adopted by some of our large Lunenburg schooners, a picture of which appears on our Canadian ten-cent piece, and the results are being followed with much interest.
From these remarks it can readily be ascertained that the present assistance policy of the government has been of material help in improving the equipment of many fishermen operating smaller boats, and by this I mean ships up to 65 feet in length. However, in speaking in support of this resolution I must say that in my opinion this assistance policy is not extensive enough to provide the fishing industry with the stability it requires. It is for this reason that I am pleased to endorse this resolution.
I believe this policy is not extensive enough for many reasons. The present assistance plan does not apply, in respect of either loans or subsidies, on fishing boats over 65 feet in length. From experience I know that 65-foot long liners or draggers cannot profitably operate throughout the winter months, that is from December until March. Even though unemployment insurance is available for the fishermen, there are regular expenses in connection with the ship which must be met. There is in addition the important fact that as a result of extensive fishing by all nations, the fish are not as plentiful on the inshore banks and our ships must go greater distances to secure a trip of fish. One must also consider the workmen ashore, that is the men who work in our fish plants. They are paid on an hourly basis, and without a continuity of supply there is the constant threat of unemployment with the resultant hardship for their families.
Furthermore, there is the important problem of markets. Fish is a highly perishable product, and we are placing great emphasis
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen today on quality. From the fisherman who first makes the catch through to the shore processing plant, every effort is made to deliver high liner quality. As a matter of fact, under present methods fresh caught fish are kept in acronized ice, which is produced by a chemical added to the water prior to freezing. The amount used is so small that it is equivalent to the average daily human dose of antibiotics, and this is distributed over 4,000 pounds of fresh fish. This tiny amount of acronizing chemical, without changing the colour, odour, or taste of the fresh fish, is sufficient to slow down the growth of spoilage bacteria that causes the fish to lose their fresh caught flavour.
However, having once established a market, continuity of supply is again necessary if that market is to be maintained. In my opinion all these factors prove that it is now necessary to give consideration to a plan of assistance for the construction of larger boats. Fishing trawlers from 100 to 125 feet in length are capable of fishing in the north Atlantic 12 months of the year. They can travel the great distances to the Grand Banks off Newfoundland, or through the strait of Belle Isle to the Labrador coast and return, thus guaranteeing steady employment for the fishermen and workers ashore, as well as a constant supply of fine quality products for our export and home markets. However, as a result of increased building costs in the last 10 years, there has been a market decrease in new deep-sea dragger construction of the type I suggest.
The last large fishing dragger built of wood in Nova Scotia was the Cape Roseway, which started operations in the spring of 1956. This ship is approximately 115 feet long, and cost in the vicinity of $300,000. Since that date costs have again increased, for with the scarcity of fish these draggers must now operate in deeper waters, necessitating heavier deck winches and longer trawl warps. A recent estimate of the replacement cost of this ship revealed that it would be $325,000.
I believe much valuable information is presently being gained by our fisheries department through the research work carried out by the A. T. Cameron. This ship, launched last May 30, is 177 feet long and carries a crew of 25. She was built at a cost of $1,750,000, and completed her trials last November. The ship was found to have good manoeuvrability and excellent seaworthiness, and to be well suited for otter trawling. In fact weather conditions during her entire cruise were bad, with winds up to 70 miles per hour, but she was able to carry out successful fishing operations in winds up to 45 miles per hour and was classed as a dry ship. This is a term used when a ship is
582	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen very seaworthy and the high whaleback prevents the heavy seas from falling on the deck and disturbing the fishermen who are there processing the catch.
The fact that I mention this does not mean that I am advocating that this government assist private industry to construct ships the size of the A. T. Cameron. However, her design and construction plans could well be made available, and with some reduction in length to 125 feet such a ship could easily accommodate all the necessary equipment required for a successful deep-sea fishing trawler. With the setting up of an agriculture and fisheries development bank, loans could be made available of up to two-thirds of the ship's cost, with the bank taking a first mortgage on the ship as security. Because of the high initial cost, and the fact that in time of war this type of ship would be invaluable to Canada as a cargo ship, minelayer or sub chaser, some encouragement should be given potential builders by increasing present subsidies or investment allowances. Repayment could be on a 15-year basis, and with our deep-sea merchant fleet almost non-existent primarily because of the actions of those who now repose in sweet repose in the opposition seats, I believe Canadians generally would welcome this type of shipbuilding program.
I would respectfully suggest that the government give serious consideration to these proposals by setting up the suggested development bank. It could operate independently under the Bank of Canada, with a separate board of governors to deal individually with all applications received. I feel certain that groups of fishermen, and individual companies throughout the Atlantic area, would welcome the opportunity offered by this type of lending institution. Such action would in turn inject new life into our Atlantic shipbuilding and allied industries, and the shipbuilding thus stimulated would increase our production, thus enabling us to expand our markets, and would be in line with the nationbuilding policy of this government. I believe it is necessary to encourage the construction of larger ships for a further and more important reason, namely the safety of our fishermen. The Fisheries Improvement Loans Act and other plans previously mentioned encouraged the construction of a large fleet of ships under 65 feet in length. These ships, as mentioned, can operate in comparative safety during the summer, but they cannot cope with the rigours of the North Atlantic in the wintertime. However, faced with the need to make a living plus loan repayments, some try to operate despite adverse weather conditions.

The Halifax Chronicle-Herald recently carried a stirring account of the loss on Nova Scotia's east coast of the long finer Robert & Brian on January 6, 1959. Incidentally, the Robert & Brian is one of the long liners that is mentioned in the directory of new Canadian fishing boats, so it exemplifies my remarks and is indicative of the length of the life of some of these long liners. This one did not live a year.
The account describes a miracle of rescue on the sea, where the long liner was being pounded to pieces on the rocks, and the ship was saved by a ship from Gloucester, Massachusetts, which came to the rescue. The captain stated that throughout he had made wireless contact with a station at Canso, Nova Scotia, and asked for helicopter assistance, but R.C.A.F. planes at Greenwood and naval air station Shearwater, near Halifax, were grounded because of weather, with winds of 35 miles an hour and temperatures below zero.
I believe this account further points out the need for the provision of a Canadian coastguard for our fishermen. Having assisted them with loans to build up a fleet of small ships, I believe it is also our responsibility to assist them in times of difficulty. I am not advocating a full blown coastguard on the same basis as the United States. However, we have ships in the Atlantic area operating under the Department of Fisheries, the Department of Transport, the Department of Justice and the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, as well as our navy, and I see no reason why these ships cannot be directed to assist any fisherman who is broken down and in distress on the high seas by going to his assistance and towing him to the nearest land. Our fishermen on the east coast do not care what the service is called that assists them, so long as someone comes to their aid when they are in trouble. They should be informed whom they are to call when they are in distress, and this co-ordinator should have the authority to order the nearest ship of any of the above mentioned departments to the rescue. The implementation of this type of coastguard would not cost the Canadian taxpayer any additional amount, as the ships are already built and manned, and quite capable of doing this extra duty without impairing the service for which they were originally intended.
And now, Mr. Speaker, I commend the mover of this resolution and would ask that the government consider the points I have raised. It is a recognized fact within the industry that boats and gear must be improved in efficiency and in economy, not only to keep abreast of the times but also to meet

successfully the intense and growing competition from international fleets.
An examination of our present fleet, in comparison, for example, with European ships will show that we are lagging far behind in our construction of modern fishing trawlers. We must not only increase the length of our trawlers but we must capitalize on the improvements and developments perfected by scientists in recent years. Some of the changes which must be considered in our new ships, which are not now incorporated in their design, are the variable pitch propellers. A variable pitch propeller will enable a dragger to proceed more quickly to the fishing banks and return while enabling it, when on the banks, to tow a larger mesh net-or, in other words, use heavier equipment.
We must also give consideration to the new free piston engine. The advantages of the free piston system are particularly suitable for marine application, and some 29 ships are already in service or are being fitted with this type of engine. These engines burn almost any liquid fuel in order to generate a supply of hot gas, which is then piped to an orthodox type of turbine.
Another development which must be considered is the addition of refrigerated sea water tanks for holding the fresh fish. This is considered an improvement over the present method of icing the catch, and finally is the actual change in the hull design of the ship itself, with the winch placed near the stern of the ship and the trawl nets hauled astern rather than over the port or starboard side of the ship, as at present.
Some of these features are presently being used to good advantage by European trawlers, the most recent one being launched in Brem-erhaven, in Germany, named the Sagitta. However, to modernize our Canadian fishing fleet in this manner requires considerable capital. I endorse this resolution to establish an industrial development bank, for it would make available that capital which is so urgently required for the modernization of our fishing fleet.


Mr. O. J. Godin (Nickel Bell):: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of the resolution presented this day by my neighbour in connection with the establishment of an agriculture and fisheries development bank. I realize that I do not possess the copious notes that the hon. member who preceded me had and therefore I will definitely be much briefer. I would like to relate my remarks more specifically to that part of the resolution which deals with the advantage of having a development bank for the purpose of assisting our farmers.
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
In the Nickel Belt area we have three sections which are considered as farming areas: That of the French river valley, the Veuve river valley and the Sudbury basin, which sits or lies in the very centre of the Nickel Belt area and which is much renowned even throughout the world for the production of wonderful potatoes. I appreciate this opportunity to make reference to Mr. Despatie of that area in the Nickel Belt, who a very few years ago was the potato king grower of the world.
Our farms are faced with problems, and the problems, I think, can all be brought down to that of lack of capital. If there is anyone in my area who would benefit most by the institution of this development bank for agricultural purposes it would be our farmers and, may I state, Mr. Speaker, most likely the young farmers who in this day and age have so much difficulty due to the capital cost of beginning operations on a farm, which are so high.
I do not feel that I am an expert on farming, at least to the same degree as my hon. colleague, the member for Essex East (Mr. Martin), but I happened to have been born in Verner on a farm, and I do know quite a bit with regard to the situation which existed some 25 years ago. When I read about the problems of farming today I realize how times have changed and how a new and modern farm development bank would be beneficial to our people.
Perhaps I could make reference to other sectors of our communities or citizens who benefit by various laws, and with that I have absolutely no quarrel. I would like to refer to the industrial bank which plays such a great part in the development of our industries in Canada. It is most worthy, and I feel the day has come when a similar bank should be set up to assist the primary industries of farming and fisheries. I was fortunate today to receive an article which I think expresses my opinions on the subject and I refer to one printed in the Rural Co-Operator and written by the president of the Ontario farmers association, Mr. Gordon Greer, who had this to say:
We as farmers need capital to operate our selfhelp programs such as our marketing boards and co-operatives; we are going to need this capital very quickly some day and it wont be there unless we initiate a system now which will overcome our difficulty. To us, the solution is an agricultural development bank, similar to the industrial development bank set up at present for certain industries.
And later on in this article, Mr. Greer goes on to say-and I should like this placed on record in Hansard:

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
On the other hand, perhaps the request for parliament (in the speech from the throne) to review and revise farm credit legislation to make credit more effective will result in a long overdue solution to our farmers' financial problems. Perhaps it will result in a means for our marketing boards and co-operatives to obtain capital for establishing processing plants, transportation systems and warehouses in order to continue helping ourselves as we have tried to do in the past. Perhaps this will provide an anwer to our needs, but we are inclined to think the proposed change in farm credit legislation will mean only an extension of loans to individual farmers.
We fully realize that the setting up of an industrial farm development bank could possibly only be undertaken with the fullest co-operation from the various provinces. We have seen difficulties encountered even in my own riding; some co-operatives have prospered and others have encountered difficulties, and I am speaking now about farm cooperatives. We have seen in Blezard Valley the closing down of a co-operative whose ambition it was to store potatoes for the purpose of marketing them more profitably.
If I might refer to the well-known program put forward a short while ago by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson), I would point out that this program expressed the very thought which lies behind the Boulanger resolution, if I may refer to it in this way. I propose to read from this program at page 15, and since I only have a French copy before me, I will, with permission, Mr. Speaker, read it in French.
(Translation):
This party pledges to implement, with the cooperation of the provinces, a new and challenging program designed to better the lot of the farming population. To that effect, farmers, especially the younger ones, must be able to get the credit they need: long-term credit for financing land purchases and permanent improvements, intermediate term credit for financing things like livestock and machinery purchases.
To provide for those needs, we shall establish an agriculture development bank which will be responsible for all farm credit operations, rather than the Canadian Farm Loan Board; thus all transactions of that kind would come under the control of one bank directly responsible to the government. That agency would apply a large scale program to improve conditions on family farms.
Mr. Speaker, I was referring a while ago to the fact that other industries have their own bank. For instance, the one coming under the National Housing Act. We know that, so far, housing loans were granted particularly in cities and I believe that it is now time that substantial loans be granted to enable farmers to build homes in keeping with the period of prosperity we have been enjoying.

Mr. Speaker, I take pride in supporting this resolution asking the government to study the situation thoroughly so as to make possible, with the co-operation of the provinces, legislation designed to provide Canadian farmers with the credit they need for the progress of this primary industry for which our people have such a high regard.


Mr. Roland English (Gaspe):: Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago, you asked that all hon. members refrain from reading their speeches. Not only am I acceding to your wish but I shall abstain from making certain remarks, or even quote certain statements or speeches made in the past by the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) and the hon. Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean).
Mr. Speaker, I did not want to let go this opportunity to say a few words about the resolution introduced by the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger), which concerns the establishment of an agriculture and fisheries development bank.
As I have already said in the house, in my constituency fisheries are one of the oldest and biggest industries. I have known the fishermen's trade having practised it myself during my summer holidays, at the time I was a student, to take care of my school fees. I have always been interested in the welfare of our fishermen, and I have never let them down. In 1937, I was given the opportunity to attend St. Francis Xavier University, in Antigonish, to study the fishermen's co-operative organization. After a year's stay I came back to my constituency where I organized the first fishermen's co-operative in my native parish of Riviere-au-Renard.
Since then, many co-operatives have been organized in Gaspesia. You find them in almost every community. Surely the part played by these co-operative groups is worthy of being brought to the attention of this house.
First, if you compare present conditions with those of twenty years, you will note that a tremendous change has taken place. In the old days fishermen had to sell their fish to firms which took advantage of the fishermens' unhappy situation and never paid them in cash. After a hard day's work, or at the end of a week of constant work, they would be paid in kind. Now, thanks to these co-operatives, fishermen have improved their situation and enjoy the same advantages as others, including the privilege of being paid

at the end of each week, which enables them to buy their supplies wherever it suits them.
I was reading recently the 1957-58 annual report of the United Fishermen of Quebec, this organization which, as I was saying, has done and is still doing very much for our fishermen, and I have noted the following comment by the general manager of united fishermen, Mr. Desourdy:
Early in 1957-58, with fish stocks on hand worth $400,000 and with rather uncertain marketing prospects at the beginning of a new season when the catch looked promising, we had to proceed with great caution. While we had products to offer as a guarantee against our operating loans, there still remained a balance of $250,000 that we had to repay to the bank on the previous year's production, at a time when credit restrictions of 1956 were still in full force.
Besides, the abundance of stocks of frozen fish on the Canadian and American markets in December 1956 had resulted in a price cut which was still in effect and which lasted over half the year 1957. That situation even compelled many frozen fillet plants, of which six in Newfoundland alone, to shut down. The same remarks apply to salt and dried fish; during the first part of the year, certain quantities were put on sale below cost. Furthermore, the exchange on the American dollar, which was 1 per cent by the middle of 1956, gradually increased to 6 per cent in August 1957. That item alone cost us $51,000 during 1957-58.
That is why the maximum price of the advance on cod fish was first authorized at \ of a cent less a pound than the year before; later on, that price had to be cut down further in certain places, on account of production and quality factors.
At that time, the fishermen in my constituency were getting 2| cents a pound. As I said a moment ago, when quoting the statement made by the general manager of the Quebec United Fishermen, J of a cent less a pound had to be paid at the beginning of the season.
As I was interested not only in the fisheries of my constituency but in those of the whole country, I made a study of the fishing industry in the maritimes and in Newfoundland.
I found out that in Newfoundland, the price of fish was 2 or 21 cents a pound, which amounts to the average price. That price, in my opinion, is not adequate. If we want fishermen to take their trade at heart, and to continue to fulfil the role which their ancestors have played in the past, we must necessarily study their situation and do something to help them.
Mr. Speaker, I have already asked for a support price for our fish and I shall continue to do so, because the fishermen are worried. Those of the maritimes are worried also, because their problem, as I said a moment ago, is similar to that of Quebec fishermen.
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
A price support for fish would encourage fishermen to carry on and would prevent them from leaving Gaspesia to join the ranks of the unemployed in cities.
If we do something to bring back to the fishing industry those who have left it, I am convinced that we shall contribute to curb unemployment, not only in the city of Montreal but also in the province of Ontario. Many, many people in my constituency have left Gaspesia to try to find work in the cities of our province, or else in the mines of Ontario, thus swelling the ranks of unemployed. That is why I am glad to deal with the measure now before the house.
If you knew, Mr. Speaker, to what extent the cost of living has gone up for those fishermen. The price of fishing gear has increased threefold, even fourfold. Nets which we used to pay $25 or $30, are now selling at $85. The price of lines, hooks and boat building has also increased. In fact, everything has gone up, except the price of fish.
How then can you expect those people to go back to their former trade? They will reply: "It is impossible, we haven't the money to buy a boat, nets and other gear".
That is why I am glad to support this resolution. If we really want to help the fishermen, let us begin by doing something, and we shall thus contribute to curb unemployment in this country.
As I said a moment ago, Mr. Speaker, for the reasons I have just outlined, our young people are no longer very interested in this trade. However, I am convinced that if we could help those younger people, they would remain in the trade which their ancestors have always practised in our country.
In my constituency, the fishing season lasts six or seven months at the most. However, during that time fishermen must earn enough to pay the cost of their boats and gear, as well as provide for the needs of their families for 12 months. If fishing is not good, they suffer hardship, and at the beginning of each season, they always feel the same concern. Will fishing be good? Will we get an adequate price for our fish? If we really want to dispel that worry from the fishermen's minds, if we want them to take an interest in the fishing trade, and the young people to go back to the trade, we must provide them with the necessary equipment and help them as far as possible. The government must do something practical to
586	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen keep these people in their trade and encourage those who have left it to come back to it.
Mr. Speaker, before closing my remarks, allow me to quote a few figures that show that there has been a slowdown in the fishing industry, as reported in a quotation from the annual report of the United Fishermen of Quebec:
In 1957, the yield of fishing operations in Canada was down as compared to the previous year. It must be noted, however, that 1956 had been a very good year-
In 1957, the volume of the catch was only slightly less than in the preceding year, but the value of the catch showed a greater decrease.
In Newfoundland, in 1956, the catch of cod was 398,251,000 pounds, or 62 per cent of the total catch of the Atlantic provinces. In 1957, the catch was 400,800,000 pounds, or 63 per cent of the catch of the Atlantic provinces, representing an increase of 1 per cent over the 1956 catch.
In 1956, the Nova Scotia catch amounted to 125,473,000 pounds, while in 1957 it was only 115,081,000 pounds.
In New Brunswick in 1956, 38,957,000 pounds of fish were caught and 38,813,000 pounds in 1957.
My constituency, in which people engage mostly in cod-fishing, is divided in two parts because it is formed of two provincial constituencies: Gaspe north and Gaspe south. In the latter part, in 1956, the catch of cod was 34,219,100 pounds, and 38,856,900 pounds in 1957, an increase of 4,637,800 pounds.
In Gaspe north in 1956, the catch amounted to 7,877,100 pounds while it was only 5,484,500 pounds in 1957, a decrease of 2,392,600 pounds.
The Quebec united fishermen took 31,363,784 pounds of cod in 1956, while the catch was only 29,202,563 pounds in 1957, a decrease of 2,161,221 pounds.
There are many communities in my constituency where fishing is the major industry. There is for example Riviere-au-Renard, the parish where I was born, where the catch fell from 5,495,584 pounds in 1956 to 4,927,381 pounds in 1957. In Newport in 1956, the catch was 2,557,648 pounds while it was only 2,004,633 pounds in 1957.
Mr. Speaker, I could give many more figures but will pass them up. I just wanted to say a word on the subject so that you would realize that the production in the fishing industry has decreased, as a result I


think of the fact that fishermen are giving up their trade. I do not believe, as some do, that the main reason is that there is less fish, although it is a common knowledge that fishing was not as good this year as it was last year. I think that the main reason is because fishermen are discouraged and giving up the trade.
Mr. Speaker, I second with great pleasure the resolution before the house and I am sure the government will do something to allay our young people's worries and make it possible for them to find the money required to buy modern gear that will meet the present needs. I am convinced that fishing will then increase and that our people will be a little happier as far as the future is concerned.
(Text):


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to say that this group supports wholeheartedly the spirit and the purpose of this resolution. I am not necessarily saying that this is the best, shall I say, mechanical procedure to achieve the end that the hon. member who introduced the resolution has in mind. We certainly congratulate the hon. member on bringing this matter to the attention of the house at this time. I shall deal particularly, with the resolution as it applies to farmers. I can speak from experience as a very small pioneer farmer who understands the problems and difficulties of the farming population at this time and particularly those on the smaller farms. I have a great affection for farmers. I have friends in Great Britain, in the maritimes, in Ontario, on the prairies and in British Columbia who have farmed for many years.
I think the farming population represents a very valuable segment of our population. It is among the farmers that you find originality, diversity of thought, independence and that sense of real values which is so necessary in the world in which we live today. In 1956 we visited some farming relatives in Great Britain and some farming friends on the Isle of Wight. I remember walking along a country lane and meeting an old farmer with a horse and a dumpcart full of manure. He was hauling it nearly a mile from his barn to the field. I got talking to him; I can talk Hampshire, and he understood me. I said, "Why don't you get a rubber-tired wagon? You could pull five times as much a trip. Look at the time you would save." He looked at me for a moment, scratched his head and I thought

that I had him. Then he turned around and said, "No, sir, it would not work; we would have to widen the gates." That is really the type of traditional farmer you get in a place like the Isle of Wight, which is the least mechanized part of Great Britain.
I remember another Englishman, a very fine type of chap, who came to our part of the country in B.C. He lived there for many years and died only a few years ago. He would always come to me for advice when he had a sick cow or a sick horse. He came one day and said, "I am not coming to you for advice, I am going to show you something original, and something that should be adopted by all people who consider the welfare of their cows." We went into his barn and found that he had made putties for his cows out of gunny sacks because the weather was cold.
I knew another old chap who died only a year or two ago. He farmed in a very isolated place. He was a sterling character. He told me that he was a happy man. What could a man wish for more than he had been able to achieve? He said he played cricket at Lords, golfed at St. Andrew's, loved a French girl when he was 21, had a perfect cribbage hand and farmed in the Kootenay for 50 years. This old gentleman, before he died, if he wanted to come out of the isolated place on the steamer, which called at his locality around midnight or one o'clock in the morning, did not wait up for the steamer as other people did. He was original and had some independent ideas. He would carry his cot out to the side of the lake, even in the winter, and place it in the snow at the water's edge, get into bed and the steamer would come along and they would throw their search light on him, see him there, stop, get out and carry his cot on board the steamer. They did not wake him up. They would place him next to the boiler and he would arrive at Procter the next morning without losing any sleep.
These are just two or three illustrations to indicate the character that farmers have, their diversity and the value they are to our economy.
We in this group are very concerned about the maintenance and perpetuation of the efficient family farm, because we realize the value it is to our total economy, and more than that the intangible values it brings to our society. The existence of the family farm at the present is not being threatened by people like us, democratic socialists; it is being threatened by the pressures of the so-called free enterprise system which is making it more difficult day by day for the small efficient farmer to survive.
66968-9-384
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
This is not a problem entirely confined to Canada. Farmers were discussing this question in Great Britain when I was over there. It is a problem in the United States and it is certainly a problem in Canada because of the changing nature of our society and the necessity for the small family farmer to have adequate credit facilities in order to meet the expenditures required if he is going to be efficient and produce at a cost that will return him a decent living.
In this connection, I wish to quote briefly from one or two papers I have here. I am not going to read any speech. I understand Mr. Speaker warned the members against that practice. This is from the Rural Cooperator of Tuesday, January 27. There is a report here entitled:
No Axe For Small Farmer Hooked-Up Forum Decides
The report goes on to say:
The small Canadian farmer is not going to "get the axe" this year more severely than he has been getting it for the past six years. But, if he is to make a living adequate to keep him on the farm, he must have liberalized credit plus a fair price for his products.
I think those are the two essentials at the present time.
In a nation-wide farm radio forum broadcast this was the view of four panelists in Saskatoon plus that of forums tied into the broadcast from Moncton, New Brunswick, Ottawa and Barrie, Ontario, Winnipeg, Manitoba, and Lacombe, Alberta.
That shows the wide interest in the problem.
The panelists appeared before a crowd of delegates and visitors in Saskatoon for the annual meeting of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture.
I refer now to another section of the article having to do with the views of Mr. Turnbull, one of the panelists.
He favoured retention of the family farm on which the family controlled the capital, made the decisions and supplied most of the labour. "This is the type of agriculture in the best interests of agriculture. I am not in favour of the big factory-type of farm."
Under Canadian conditions I think that generally speaking most of us would prefer to see that type of agricultural development continue. I was looking at the Christian Science Monitor the other day and noticed an editorial dealing with a matter of considerable concern to the present government of the United States where they are trying to do something for the small family farm other than just provide subsidies for crops that cannot be sold under present circumstances. The editorial is headed, "To Aid Family Farms" and reads in part as follows:
Most Americans think of the family farm with pride, affection and nostalgia.

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
As far as I am concerned, I do so with nostalgia.
In these later generations it outranks the log cabin as a birthplace of presidents, and it still stands as a symbol of such virtues as initiative, integrity, self-reliance.
Since a man with a tractor can be just as incorruptible as a man with a hoe, there is no reason to doubt that these values will be perpetuated even in this radically changed world.
The editorial goes on to say at another place:
Today's family farm is, by definition now generally accepted, one which provides the living for the family and which is managed and worked by the family except for temporary help hired to meet seasonal peak needs. This farm is usually larger than yesterday's because mechanization of farms has forced the farmer to produce more in order to lower his unit costs and pay for his big investment in farm machinery.
But not all family farms could afford this mechanization, and many small operators have, for one reason or another, slipped into a marginal or nearmarginal operation which keeps them barely hanging on.
I am sure that these conditions exist in every province of Canada. As I said before, I speak with some personal knowledge of the difficulties of the small farmer. We did not enjoy agricultural credit when I was a boy. Fortunately for us we had various relatives die in the old country periodically and these windfalls kept us going until we got on our feet, but that is not a very sound way to establish agriculture in Canada at this time. I know of the need for action from talks I have had with various farmers and young men in my own constituency.
In that connection I want to deal briefly with a summary of the report of commissioner E. D. MacPhee on the tree fruit industry of British Columbia which came to my desk this morning. I was very interested in the report because I attended some of the hearings and gave my opinion on a few things that directly concerned the fruit industry in the Kootenay. Commissioner MacPhee made a wide study of the problems of the fruit grower but what he has to say about credit applies equally in other forms to the general farmer, the dairy farmer and the stock farmer. He went into the question of the necessity of long term loans very extensively at every point that hearings were held. This is what he had to say in that connection in his recent report to the British Columbia government:
Mortgage companies are not a major factor in providing long-term loans in the valleys, nor does the commissioner believe that it is to be expected that the chartered banks of Canada will relax their arrangements and terms sufficiently to provide the necessary capital for the rehabilitation of the farms. Short-term loans, whatever their value for growers of annual crops, are of little significance in an industry where the produce requires a decade to develop-

Commissioner MacPhee believes it is the responsibility of the federal government to reorganize the farm loan board and to redefine its policies in such a way that these growers are able to undertake the re-establishment of their orchards without placing them under the annual pressures that follow from short-term loans.
The conditions under which long-term loans should be given are:
(a)	The farm should not be less than 10 bearing acres, on soils and with climatic conditions that give a grower a reasonable chance of profitability.
I may say that that is the only place I differ with commissioner MacPhee in his report because I know people in my constituency who are making a reasonable living from five acres of cherries or peaches coupled with poultry farming or small fruits. I know of others who are making a reasonable living on less than 10 acres as part-time farmers who work in the woods in the winter and spend the rest of their time on the farm. I continue:
(b)	Loans should be made only to those who have demonstrated managerial capacity better than the average of their district. A few managers may have a chance on an initial acreage of as little as 7 or 8 acres.
(c)	Loans should be made for specific purposes, each one of which can be identified and valued:
(1)	Replacement of dead and damaged trees;
(2)	Top-working of trees to change a variety of low market value to more market-acceptable varieties;
(3)	Replacement of obsolete varieties;
(4)	Purchase of orchard land;
(5)	The purchase of special orchard equipment, including trucks-;
(6)	Land rehabilitation.
Then he goes on to recommend supervision and guidance such as has been provided by the Veterans Land Act administration, especially for young growers. I heartily endorse the suggestion of supervised credit because I have seen the success of the Veterans Land Act in my own constituency and other parts of British Columbia where there is a measure of supervised credit. Finally, I quote this part:
The commissioner has examined the statement of policy on farm credit issued by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, and be believes that they have substantially indicated the changes required in the farm loan board act and its operations to make this useful to the fruit growers of these valleys. Only a very small number of growers have made use of this service in the Okanagan, and none at all in Kamloops, Salmon Arm or Creston. For certain designated groups, farm loans on terms similar to those recommended in the Canadian Federation of Agriculture brief are needed and will be used productively.
I mentioned that before because it applies directly to the need for long term, low interest credit in the fruit growing industry of British Columbia and because that is a matter of serious concern to a good number of my constituents. But it is also of great interest to those carrying on other types of agriculture and I want to give a few illustrations.

Strangely enough, in the last year or so I have noticed a tendency for young men to want to go back to the family farm. I do not know whether it has been noticed in other districts. After the war industry attracted men for some period of years but because of the recession and the fact they are out of work a number of young men I know are anxious to go back to the farm.
I know a young chap who wants to take over his father's farm. It comprises 240 acres of first-class land with buildings in fair condition, but to be successful under present circumstances he requires a considerable loan over a long period of years. He has to improve some of the buildings, buy modern machinery and make other improvements to the property that are essential if he is going to produce efficiently and at a cost that will leave him a satisfactory living.
I know another farmer who operates a stock farm of about 200 acres. He has three boys growing up. The boys are all interested in farming. None of them is academically minded. They do not want to go to university or obtain higher education but they will make first-class farmers. They are interested in raising cattle, horses, hogs and sheep as a means of making their livelihood. But in order for these boys to become established on their own land under present circumstances, and there is excellent land in the district, it must be made possible for them to obtain a long term low interest loan. I think, Mr. Speaker, and I have said this before, that when we can do the things we have done, and rightly so, for people coming to this country, and spend the money we have spent under certain circumstances, we can provide these young Canadians with the capital required for them to establish themselves in farming.
I know of another chap who wants to take over his father's fruit farm. Six or seven years ago he turned up his nose at the fruit farm. He has had a bit of experience in industrial work. He received high wages for a short period and then he would be out of work for a time. He has now been out of work for a considerable time. He realizes that his father's farm is a better place than he considered it to be when he left. He wants to take over this farm, but in order to do it satisfactorily and successfully this capable, hard-working young man, must have an opportunity to obtain long term, low interest credit.
In some cases the money is required to purchase farms and in other cases to improve farms, to improve buildings or purchase machinery. I have spoken briefly to the house concerning some of my own experiences
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen and some of the conditions which exist in my own constituency. I am sure these conditions are repeated in every agricultural riding in Canada. I was pleased to note that, according to indications in the speech from the throne, the government is giving consideration to this problem. I, and other members of this group, and I am sure all members of this house, trust that before this session concludes this government will take action so that young Canadians who wish to farm, who have the capacity and ability to farm, will be able to obtain long term loans at low interest rates, and in so doing will be able to add to the total wealth of Canada and their own enjoyment, happiness and welfare.


Mr. H. W. Danforth (Kent, Onl.):: I rise with pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to speak on this resolution moved by the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) because it relates to a matter of credit and credit facilities for the primary industries of agriculture and fishing. The people engaged in these two industries make up the greater portion of the inhabitants of my constituency. In the few minutes that are allotted to me I shall not spend time in recriminations or criticisms of past legislation or governments. Certainly, we have just concluded a debate in which we heard these criticisms made by some of the intellectual giants in this house. Rather I should like as simply as I can to point out why there is a need for this credit and why the proposed legislation does not fully meet the requirements of these two primary industries.
First, I should like to take the opportunity of refuting, most strongly, any picture that may be in the minds of the Canadian people that farmers and fishermen are continually approaching the government with their hands out like beggars seeking alms. Nothing could be further from the truth. Farmers and fishermen certainly do not seek charity, but as a result of circumstances over which they had little control they are forced into a position where more credit is necessary for the successful operation of their business. All they seek is an extended source of credit at interest rates which are legal and justified, and they have every intention of fully repaying the government. I should like, in further amplification of my remarks, to deal with both agriculture and fishing, but to deal with them separately.
I am certain that hon. members will agree with me that the need of agriculture for more credit hinges perhaps on the great industrial revolution that this country has undergone in the past few years, resulting in a greater demand by industry for our labour. Since the demand for labour increased
590	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen we were faced with a consequent increase in the price of this labour. These higher wages have resulted in an increased cost for everything that the farmer bought. He found the price of everything he sold being reduced, and his margin of profit being greatly reduced.
Many people engaged in agriculture, are considered to be anti-labour, but such is not the case. The ordinary farmer does not begrudge the working man his way of life, and he certainly does not begrudge the greater earning capacity of the working man today. Any farmer who is thinking about the problem at all will realize that the more money available to the wage earner, the more money available for the purchase of his products. What the farmers across this country are concerned with is the unavailability, at times, of the necessary labour for the success of his business.
Some very strange relationships, however, do arise between farmers and some individuals in the labour force. These strange relationships arise at a time when the farmer is in dire need of additional labour. I am in a district in which the unemployment figures are high. Last fall the farmers of my constituency were offering from $15 to $22 per day in order to entice labour to their farms, but they were unable to find anyone who would accept their offer. While many Canadians are talking about the severity of unemployment, in my constituency we are faced with the desire by many farmers to encourage immigrant workers from Europe next year in sufficient numbers to take care of their problem.
The inability of the farmer to secure the necessary labour, forces him into one of two alternatives. On the one hand, he may curtail his farm operations to nearly skeleton operations, and he may seek a position in industry to augment his income, thus swelling the labour force. On the other hand, he may seek additional capital to acquire the machinery necessary to replace the labour on the farm. How is this capital to be used to aid the farmer on the farm? Farmers, as a whole, are very pliable and when faced with a situation that seems almost insurmountable they seek ways and means of going around it. Today, farmers are constantly seeking new machinery to take the place of the labour force which is no longer available. They seek new machinery that will reduce their production costs and increase their production. Although this is very sound business, it requires a large outlay of capital. Farmers, for the most part, do not have enough capital in reserve to take care of these necessary expenses.
Legislation in the past has enabled farmers to borrow up to $5,000 for farm implements, but in order to borrow this $5,000 he had to


provide a third of the cost price of these implements himself. That provision was of great benefit to farmers a few years ago, but now it certainly does not seem high enough. Many farms today-and I do not speak of large farms or farm corporations but farms of 100 to 500 acres-in my riding require from $10,000 to $60,000 worth of necessary machinery. To convert from a general farm to the new type of livestock farm requires $10,000. The purchase of a single piece of equipment in my constituency-for example, a sugar beet combine together with the necessary tractor to carry it-results in an expenditure of some $7,500. A self-propelled combine can vary in price from $4,000 to $11,000, depending on the type and size. To drain by tile 100 acres in my constituency today requires the expenditure of $10,000. An equal amount would be necessary today to establish a foundation of stock on an ordinary farm-I refer to breeding stock-either dairy or beef.
I am certain that hon. members will agree with me that in these circumstances the limit of $5,000 does not go too far in solving the problem. Here is where a greater credit provided by government to the farmers would aid in allaying the fears of the farmers with respect to vertical integration. Farmers fear the vertical integration which is taking place today, or this matter of contract farming. It is true that it is another source of credit to a farmer, but in return for the necessary expenditures by feed, fertilizer or packing companies to rebuild his buildings, to provide the necessary livestock and feed to carry on this new type of operation, the farmer in return loses control of the sale of his produce, he loses to a degree the control of management and he finds himself reduced to the rank of an employee.
This system does not always work out beneficially to the farmer. There have been instances when through misfortune farmers have lost their farms because of such enterprise. It does not always prove beneficial to the companies, although they use this means to put their products into the hands of the farmers. It does not always work out to their advantage because of failure of these farms, which is costly to the companies as well.
The question arises: if farmers are in such severe circumstances, why do they farm? Why do they not just go out and get positions in industry? Why this constant battle for more credit? May I say that the answers to these questions are varied, but I think one is to the effect that farming in Canada is more than an occupation. Farming to farmers is a way of life; and many farmers and their

families would find it very difficult to change their way of life from that of farming to that of a wage earner. May I also suggest that farmers knowing their business realize, perhaps more than does anyone else, what would happen in this country, if farm products were not available on Canadian farms.
It is true that when farm products are in abundance in other countries the purchasers of Canadian products may, in some instances, be able to purchase products which are necessary at a lower price. This happens when, as I say, there is an abundance in all other countries. But if there were not an abundance -were there a scarcity-may I point out that the results would be disastrous to the Canadian buyer.
May I illustrate? During the war at one time owing to an embargo there was a temporary scarcity of celery. This product normally sells for $1.50 to $3.50 for a three dozen bunch crate. At that time the price here in Canada rose to $28 for three dozen bunches and the celery retailed at $1 a bunch. Since that time here in Canada, to give further examples, in times of scarcity tomatoes, usually bought in any grocery store for from 15 cents to 35 cents a pound retailed at 90 cents a pound. Soybeans presently marketable at $1.85 a bushel rose at one time to $4.85 a bushel. These fantastic prices prevailed with our farmers in production. Can you imagine what would have happened in Canada to the prices without this production?
The very complexity of farming today means increased cost and more capital. Every advancement is costly. The farmer today is no longer an individual with a green thumb. He is an agricultural technician, equally at home talking soil chemistry, long range weather forecasting, market possibilities or world supply and demand. His education is costly, his training is expensive, his tools are more expensive, land values are high and his operating costs have multiplied.
This industrial revolution and the consequent change in our Canadian way of life has been too rapid for the industry of agriculture to change itself over to meet this new demand; and until it does so farmers are going to be greatly in need of extended capital. A $15,000 maximum on loans with which to purchase a farm today does not seem to be too realistic an approach. In my riding $15,000 would scarcely make a down payment on a 100 acre submarginal farm. Certainly it would not do so on a farm on which the production would be such as to enable this capital to be paid back in any foreseeable future. Agriculture does need help for more efficient and profitable operation.
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
Now may I turn for a few moments to fishing. It may seem strange for me to rise and speak on the need of the fishing industry for credit. Certainly there are very few ridings as far away from the oceans as is the one that I represent. But the facts are that my riding is the centre of one of the largest fresh water processing fish plants in the world, processing each year some 20 million pounds of fresh water fish. Of the sales from the province of Ontario each year of $7 million worth of fresh water fish, $3,500,000 worth or over half comes from my constituency.
We border on two of the great lakes-St. Clair on the northwest and Erie on the south -and fishing in these lakes is of major importance to us. Our fishermen are faced with the same problems as farmers, namely lack of money and credit to enable them to expand fast enough to take advantage of these changing times. This may be hard to imagine, but the fact is that the value of necessary equipment to some fishermen on lake Erie today exceeds the total capital outlay of all the fishermen on the north shore of lake Erie 30 years ago. Under existing legislation it is possible for a fisherman to borrow up to $4,000 on a boat, and at one time this did represent a considerable help. Today this would hardly cover the cost of the nets and accessories required, and the normal cost of a fishing boat operating out of lake Erie ports runs from $35,000 to $60,000 which is a tremendous investment.
Because of the much greater capital outlay, maintenance costs are considerably higher. Careful as they may be with them, nets have to be constantly replaced because of deterioration and there is also the constant fear that all the nets may have to be replaced due to loss by storm or ice-hazards which are to a large degree unpredictable on lake Erie.
There is a source of credit available to the fisherman which is on a par with the vertical integration on a farm. If a fisherman lacks the necessary credit for a new boat he may obtain a loan from a fish processing co-operative or from a boat builder. In many instances this is the only thing that has kept him in business. On the other hand, if these sources had been in unscrupulous hands, the fisherman would have been forced to market his fish at only one source, and been obliged to grant other concessions that would take all the initiative and enterprise out of his business and reduce him to the rank of day labourer.
Repayment of loans on these costly ships is, in addition, a long process and there is always the danger that two or three years

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen of poor catches in succession would cause the fisherman to lose his boat to his creditor, and this would represent the loss of the total savings of half a lifetime. I know one fisherman in my constituency who has operated a new boat for over four years. He had been forced to purchase a new boat because of an explosion which destroyed his old one some five years ago. He informs me that he finished paying for the old boat this year and that next year he will be in a position to begin paying for his new fish boat, a boat which is already five years of age.
There have been instances of great losses of equipment in the lakes due to storms and ice. The present regulations make it necessary for a fisherman to put up at least 30 per cent of the money for replacement, and loans on this type of equipment can only be made to the extent of $4,000. It is a fact that in many instances $4,000 would only be a start, having regard to the total expense involved. What the fishermen really need is a source of credit in keeping with the size of the industry today and also one which can process applications with great rapidity, especially if the need arises during the actual fishing season when the loss of two weeks' fishing could very well mean the difference between a profit and a loss on the whole season's work, because a fisherman can never be certain as to the actual length of the season.
While I certainly endorse the principle of an expansion of existing facilities to the two primary industries of agriculture and fishing, I am not at all certain that the consolidation of the existing credit facilities under an agriculture and fisheries development bank would be the solution of the current problems. We need a method which, while as simple as possible to operate, will yet accomplish the ends desired. Two factors are vital-larger credit, and a speedy yet accurate processing of applications. It seems to me that it would be extremely difficult to accomplish these ends if both industries were handled through the same channel. We cannot expect a local bank manager to be the final judge in every instance or to be an expert in both these great fields. It seems to me that a board of men familiar with the fishing industry must be the judge of the merit of applications by fishermen and that a similar board of agricultural experts should process farm applications.
Farmers and fishermen know full well that legislation will never at any time solve all their many and complex difficulties. They are also keenly aware that Canada, as well as other nations of the world, is in the process of undergoing great changes which can and

will bring about many alterations in our way of life. The two industries are today not merely seeking a method whereby they may exist from day to day, but are earnestly seeking ways and means of enlarging and moulding their development in order that they may assume their rightful place in our world of tomorrow.
I am certain that this will be accomplished. These two industries do not lack the necessary manpower; they do not lack the necessary knowledge; they do not lack the courage. What they do lack in some instances is the necessary capital, and I am sure that hon. members who are here in deliberation could find ways and means of providing the capital necessary for these ventures. We are not yet in a position to support the establishment of a development bank, but we certainly do support the suggestion that there is a need for more credit. In any situation where machinery is set up to look at the credit ratings of people engaged in the two primary industries of fishing and agriculture may I suggest that it would be most advisable to appoint men who have themselves been engaged in these industries, and who are experienced in them, to scrutinize the applications as they are submitted. I truly feel that, perhaps with some modifications, the existing agencies which are responsible for extending credit to these great industries could become the means of an adequate credit system.


Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland):: Mr. Speaker, I was greatly interested in the remarks of the hon. gentleman who preceded me because he comes from my native county of Kent. I wish to congratulate him for his speech in which he went a long way in supporting the motion put forward by my colleague on this side of the house, the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger).
I am very much in favour of this resolution by which credit would become more readily available to our farmers and fishermen. I am not familiar with the fishing industry but I do know that those engaged in it require long term credit for the purchase of boats and other equipment and short term credit for other aspects of their operations.
Canada has a high cost economy and we know it costs considerable money to run a general family farm. Because of the high cost of machinery and other equipment it is necessary for the family farm to consist of more acres so the equipment can be amortized over a shorter term. I can well recall a time when 100 acres of general farm land was a profitable operation but this is not so today and a farmer must have more land to operate successfully.

The availability of long term credit would provide the Canadian farmer with money to buy more land or to improve the land he already has. Many farm homes are dilapidated and long term credit could be utilized to improve these homes or to provide suitable new homes, barns and other farm buildings. This would go a long way to making more economical the operation of farms and would serve to keep many of our young people on the farm instead of moving to the cities where they swell the ranks of the unemployed. On the farm they would find life more pleasant and rewarding. At the present time in my area many young people have left the farm to go to the city. Some are able to obtain work in industries at attractive wages but frequently their employment lasts only for a period when the economy runs high and they find themselves unemployed in periods of recession. Many of these young people move to the cities because they do not have the capital with which to establish themselves on a farm.
Economic conditions on the farm have changed greatly over the years just as there have been changes in other parts of our society. In order to meet these changes I should like to see credit extended to farmers through one government agency and embodied in one act so that the provisions of this legislation would apply with respect to the larger farms in the west, the smaller farms in central and eastern Canada and the smaller specialized farms such as we have in the fruit and vegetable growing areas in Canada. To make this operation feasible the federal government would need the co-operation of the provinces. Together they could provide farmers with money at reasonable rates of interest and also provide technical assistance and other information and help with marketing programs.
I believe that the fruit and vegetable farmers must receive some special consideration. We know that fruit crops come on very rapidly and when fruits such as peaches ripen the crop must be harvested at once. If left the fruit will spoil and therefore the crop must be processed almost immediately. In the Niagara district a United States firm has bought up a number of Canadian canneries which have since closed down. The lack of cold storage and processing plants has meant that many farmers in the area could not sell their full crop. Last year many peaches in the area were left on the trees to spoil or rotted on the ground. This has had the effect of leaving much of our market for canned fruit and vegetables available to United States producers because Canadian producers were not able to process their fruit.
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
I appreciate that we are living in a free enterprise system and I know this government could do nothing to prevent the purchase of these canneries by United States firms but the condition that has resulted has been most unfair for our farmers and has served to work in favour of United States producers. I believe the federal and provincial governments should co-operate to do something about it. I believe they could be of assistance in extending credit to these growers to provide adequate cold storage and processing facilities. This would help our fruit and vegetable growers as well as provide our consumers with superior products.
I have spoken in this house on various occasions concerning the seasonal tariff on fruits and vegetables. What was realistic some twenty years ago is not realistic today because of the development of different varieties of fruit. Some fruits such as peaches which used to ripen over a period of seven weeks, let us say, now ripen over a longer period of about 12 weeks. With a seasonal tariff extending over a period of seven weeks only a portion of the peach crop is protected. With modern cold storage facilities the producers in the United States are able to keep their fruit in cold storage and bring it in immediately after the seasonal tariff is lifted.
I have received a letter from the Welland county council signed by Mr. C. H. Thompson, the clerk-treasurer, in which they go on record as supporting a resolution prepared by the united counties of Northumberland and Durham at their January session. I should like to read a part of this resolution:
Whereas certain regions of the province of Ontario have a rich agriculture potential in the production of canning crops and fruits and vegetables, and
Whereas the canning industry has meant much to the economy of these areas both to the primary producer and to the labour force, and
Whereas the controlling interest in many canning and processing plants has been purchased by American firms, and
Whereas as a result of this control, many canning plants have been closed permitting produce grown in other countries to be marketed in our country thus replacing our home grown produce and resulting in a definite financial loss to the primary producer and the economy in general,
Therefore be it resolved that these united counties of Northumberland and Durham go on record as being opposed to this American control and that we petition the Ontario Agricultural Council and the Minister of Agriculture for Ontario to negotiate for protective tariffs or other measures to remedy the situation and, in the event that the present situation is not remedied by protective tariffs or other measures, the Ontario and federal governments be asked to assist in the establishing of canning and processing factories on a producer-co-operative basis similar to co-operative storage and packing plants.

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
They wanted this resolution sent to various members of parliament and this was done,
I am not going to speak any longer, Mr. Speaker. Several members have spoken on the government side and I would like to see this resolution come to a vote. I have been in this house quite a long time. To talk this resolution out would remind me of two spent swimmers who cling together and choke one another's art.
Nearly every hon. member who has spoken on the other side of the house has spoken in favour of this resolution. If they would let it come to a vote and not choke the art of the opposition who proposed this resolution we would be very happy indeed.
(Translation):


Mr. L. J. Pigeon (Jolieiie-L'Assomption-Montcalm):: Mr. Speaker, my first words are meant for you personally, as I wish once again to pay you my most respectful compliments. Your intellectual stature and judgment are such as to make you one of the most outstanding men in this parliament.
I should also like to pay compliments and respects to the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny).
Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has been in power for only a few months, yet it has realized more than any previous government that agriculture must remain the cornerstone of our economic and national stability. Already, the Agricultural Stabilization Act has been of great benefit to the farmers. The speech from the throne has announced that we shall soon have crop insurance legislation, a measure that is several years overdue, since similar legislation has been in force in the United States for the past 20 years. All the producers, all the farmers in Canada are pleased with the speed with which the Conservative government is taking action to help the country's farmers.
However, Mr. Speaker, I was rather surprised to see the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) introduce this resolution, considering that the Liberals were in office for about 25 years and hardly ever did anything for the farmers. This resolution, I would think, should have been put forward when these gentlemen were in power. But no, Mr. Speaker, they preferred to remain seated. Most of them saw no need to concern themselves with the farmers.
Mr. Speaker, I know I express the views of the UCC and of co-operative organizations in my constituency in making suggestions concerning the federal farm credit legislation. First, the interest rate on farm loans should be lowered within the reach of the farmers,

because in my estimation, the present rate is too high. Second, the farm loan act should be broadened to enable Canadian farmers to buy agricultural implements, or any other item that serves to improve their farm, such as irrigation systems in the case of tobacco producers. In addition, federal farm loans should be granted up to 75 per cent of the value of the land, in so far as the security allows, after taking debts into consideration. The government should also, even if this meant setting up a special agency, grant long term loans to co-operative societies that need them.
I would like also, Mr. Speaker, to challenge an erroneous statement made by the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska. The hon. member said, during his speech, that the Liberal government had loaned $800 million to the farmers. I say, Mr. Speaker, that is not true. The Canadian Farm Loan Board has made $120 million available to farmers while $680 million were loaned by the banks-


Mr. Habel:: Guaranteed by the government.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: -and not by the government.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: Guaranteed by the government.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: No, it was not entirely under government guarantee, but those loans were guaranteed only in the proportion of 15 per cent, which is not the same thing. The hon. member should find out-


Samuel Boulanger: May I ask a question of the hon. member?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: If you want to, but may I ask the hon. member to allow me to get through with my remarks? If he wishes to speak, he could do so then. I did not interrupt him during his speech, and I am telling the truth. The hon. member has misled the house. The Liberal government did not lend $800,000,000-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order!


Samuel Boulanger: You did not understand what I said.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: 
Samuel Boulanger: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Will you please let me finish my speech.


Samuel Boulanger: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker, and say to the hon. member now speaking that he is not dealing with the matter before the house, he is talking of the government of the province of Quebec.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, may I point out to the hon. member for Drummond-Artha-baska that his motion tends to extend farm credit facilities. I am now talking about this matter. I am dealing with credit and giving examples. I make suggestions and I try to show the house examples of improvements that could be made to the federal farm credit system. I am talking of a kind of credit which exists in my province, the province of Quebec.
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen


Samuel Boulanger: It just happens to be that of the Union Nationale.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: There is no question of provincial policy; your leader is Mr. Lesage. At this moment, I am talking about federal policy. On May 31, 1958...


Osias.-J. Godin: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. This house cannot amend any provincial law in any way and I don't think we should be discussing the merits of a provincial legislation since we are discussing a federal law.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I am only giving an example-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I think it would be better fo rthe hon. members to restrict themselves to the motion before the house. Nevertheless, I would like to tell the hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Godin), and the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) that the comparison the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) is making at the present time between a credit board in one province and another one which could exist at the federal level is not out of order, provided the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm does not go beyond the scope of the motion before the house. I think he can go on with his speech.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
On May 31, 1958, it should be noted that the Quebec farm credit board-I want to quote some figures, Mr. Speaker, to show that the kind of farm credit we find in the province of Quebec gives good results-loaned $155 million to 54,053 farmers. Of that money, approximately $26 million were used for the settlement of farmers' sons. Of the total number of these loans, 14,152 have been paid back in full by the farmers; they have paid back $22 million through time payments and roughly $30 million before due date.
Mr. Speaker, a table prepared by the Canadian Farm Loan Board, indicating in detail by province the number of farm loans granted and the amount loaned up to March 31 1957, shows that since the establishment of that board, first and second mortgage loans were granted across the country to 46,465 farmers, while the Quebec farm credit board made loans to 54,053 farmers. Any enterprise is judged by its results. Mr. Speaker, I want to tell this house that the Quebec farm credit board has made available, in that province alone, more money than the Canadian Farm Loan Board has on a national basis. That is why, Mr. Speaker-
596	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen


Samuel Boulanger: You grant loans to get votes.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: -I would be very happy if the federal government would adopt, if possible, the legislative pattern of a province, in this case the province of Quebec. If hon. members opposite have any suggestions to make concerning a farm loan board existing elsewhere, they may rise and put them to the house.
Mr. Speaker, allow me to establish comparisons between the federal farm loan board and that of the province of Quebec. Briefly speaking, the report of the Canadian farm loan board for the financial year ending on March 31 1957 reveals that for the twelve months in question, 139 loans totalling $707,350 were approved in the province of Quebec.
Those figures must be compared with the 3,448 loans approved by the Quebec farm credit board from January 1, 1956 to December 31, 1956, totalling $13,825,075.
The maximum loan approved by the Quebec farm credit board is $9,000, and the board may loan, if the security permits and if the debts warrant it, up to 75 per cent of the actual value of the land, while the Canadian Farm Loan Board, when granting a loan, is still limited to 65 per cent of the value of the security.
A loan of $1,000 obtained from the Quebec farm credit board is repayable at the rate of $40 a year, interest and capital included, or $20 twice a year; the duration of the loan is 39J years. A loan of $1,000-


Samuel Boulanger: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm is outlining the policy of the provincial government in regard to farm loans. In my opinion, he should limit his remarks to the resolution before the house. Therefore, I submit that he is out of order.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, allow me to make an incidental remark. In his resolution, the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) talks about increasing the present credit facilities open to farmers. I am talking about federal farm credit and also of all types of credit, including the one existing in one province, that is the province of Quebec, and I am making suggestions.
(Text):


Mr. Speaker:: It seems to me that it is
relevant to a discussion of what steps might


be taken here to expand agricultural credit to know what other credit facilities are available to farmers and to draw comparisons between the proposed policy and existing legislation. I would think it was relevant.


Lionel Chevrier: May I be allowed to say
one word on the point of order? The member has been pointing to the distinction between federal credit facilities and provincial credit facilities. I think Your Honour has ruled on more than one occasion, as has the Deputy Speaker, that matters of provincial jurisdiction should not be discussed in the house. I remember one occasion when one of our members-I cannot recall who it was now-was discussing a matter having to do with provincial administration or provincial politics and was called to order. I would be the last one to prevent the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm from proceeding as he is doing except that I think that he is going beyond the intention of the rule when he establishes the difference between the two and goes on to say how much more appropriate and beneficial the one is than the other.


Mr. Hamilton (York West):: Mr. Speaker,
this is the second time this point has been raised in the last few minutes, and it seems to me that the ruling you have made certainly covers the situation at the moment. I do not know what my hon. friend has in mind when he refers to provincial legislation being discussed on previous occasions. Surely the member who has the floor should be allowed to draw comparisons between what is available to the farming community under provincial legislation and what is available under federal legislation. It may be that he is leading up to a point where he sees some improvement which may be required in the federal legislation, and I think it is only reasonable that he should be allowed to continue.


Lionel Chevrier: He is taking a long time
to do it.


Mr. Speaker:: With all due respect to the
hon. member for Laurier and his wide experience in the house, it seems to me it is permissible to make comparisons and to draw conclusions from those comparisons. It would be improper to confine one's remarks entirely to the provincial system. As I see it, it is relevant to discuss the provincial system and its results for the purpose of illustrating an argument that there should be additional or other federal provision. I hope the hon. member will do so for that purpose only.

(Translation):


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
A loan of $1,000, which can now be obtained from the Canadian Farm Loan Board, involves a yearly repayment of $66.10 payable in two semi-annual instalments; its duration is 30 years.
For the twelve months ending March 31, 1957, the Canadian Farm Loan Board has approved loans all over the country for a total of $13,978,700. The Quebec farm credit board has approved, in the province of Quebec alone, and for a period of twelve months also, loans totalling $13,825,075.
In 1956, the Quebec farm credit board has refunded $294,531.24 to the Canadian Farm Loan Board.
It has then been claimed that this meant a mere shifting of debts, and here again the use of the loaned sums must be explained. A table for the single year 1956 shows that the money spent during that year was used as follows, and I am still referring to the
Quebec farm loan act:			
(a)	for the establishment of farmers' sons and the purchase of land ....	$ 8,645,400 or	63.91%<b)	For increasing the size of farms 	289,800 or	2.14%(c)	For new construction, including houses, barn-stables, chicken coops, pig-sties 	1,649,635	12.19%(d)	For major repairs to buildings 	911,175	6.74%(e)	For farm organization and miscellaneous improvements, installation of electric power and running water, extension of cultivated land through mechanized works, etc	348,470	2.57%(f)	For mortgage debt consolidation 	1.683,920	12.45%Total 	$13,528,400	100 %
The Canadian Farm Loan Board, which was established in 1929 through legislation, loans money at 5 per cent per annum, and 5J per cent on arrears. This is too high. The act should be revised so as to reduce the interest rate and thus put loans within farmers' reach. The former government always refused to amend the Canadian Farm Loan Act. It preferred to loan the people's money to big business. It preferred to loan $80 million for the pipe line at 3 per cent interest. It had no concern for the farmers. I am confident that the present government will not waste its time for 25 years, as the former administration did, but that it will continue to work for the average Canadian, for the farmer, as it has been doing in the few months since it took office.
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
Mr. Speaker, if agriculture is prosperous in Canada, the whole nation will be prosperous, because agriculture is the economic barometer of the nation. A farmer, when prosperous, has considerable buying power. He contributes to the support of other groups of citizens. With agricultural implements so costly, it is an absolute necessity that the Canadian Farm Loan Act be amended and expanded so as to allow farmers to purchase and renew their agricultural implements. A farmer must also improve his farm machinery in order to meet the serious problem of manpower. Farm workers are getting scarcer and scarcer, and more implements are necessary to balance this. The scarcity of farm labour forces the farmer to mechanize his farm. His whole future is at stake. For instance, the number of tractors on the farms of the province of Quebec has increased from 5,869 in 1941 to 54,322 in 1956.
Mr. Speaker, as I said a moment ago, it is of vital importance to the future of the people of Canada, to the future of agriculture, to modify the Canadian farm loan system. I have given examples. I have dealt with farm credit which is in operation in our province. I have talked about the province of Quebec. I know that the members for the province of Quebec are not ashamed of their province; even the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) must be very happy now to live in the province of Quebec.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the government of Canada, the present government, will introduce the necessary amendments to improve the Canadian farm loan system. According to the figures I have quoted, the Quebec farm loan board has bettered the record and has lent much money. So, I cannot see why the federal farm loan board could not do better or, at least, just as well as the provincial board. May I also, Mr. Speaker ... May I call it six o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Samuel Boulanger: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a question of the hon. member, since he wanted to close his remarks in a few minutes?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: I am not through yet.


Samuel Boulanger: Then, would he permit me a question? How is it, since he dealt mostly with farm loans in the province of Quebec, that the agriculture in this province has ranked very high during the last decade and that, in the matter of buying and using farm machinery and equipment, lags behind the other provinces where production is lower?
593	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, I wish to answer immediately the hon. member. One cannot compare the province of Quebec with Ontario, any more than one could compare British Columbia with Nova Scotia.


An hon. Member:: Why?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: In Ontario, for instance, the farmers engage in specialized farming. There is the garden of Ontario, the Niagara valley. On the other hand, the province of Quebec leads in dairying. And I can prove with the help of figures that the province of Quebec ranks first in Canada in this field. So, one cannot make a comparison. You should not take the same stand as Mr. Lesage or Mr. Lapalme. Personally, I am here to fight the cause of the farmers, Mr. Speaker. I am amazed at the behaviour of members of the opposition who, for 25 years, have remained seated and mum, these same men who repudiated and destituted Mr. St. Laurent. I cannot understand their attitude.
(Text):
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 8 p.m.
(Translation):
Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, the provincial farm loan takes into account the social element, that is to say the family which, in general, is large in Quebec. The board has never refused a loan when the security was reasonable, even when it was a case of a large family; the existence of a large family is but an additional factor urging the board to decide in favour of the loan.
I call your attention to the achievements of the Quebec farm credit board as compared to those of the Canadian Farm Loan Board.
Le Soleil of August 14, 1939 favoured the use of the Canadian farm loan board and urged the province of Quebec to come to an agreement with that body in order to lower the rate of interest required of Quebec farmers.
It will be recalled that the government of the time, pressed by public opinion which was asking for a long-term and low-interest farm mortgage loan, had come to an understanding with the Canadian Farm Loan Board under which the province of Quebec had agreed to pay part of the interest up to 3 per cent.


An hon. Member:: What will it be?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: The hon. member interrupts me often enough but he may rest assured that I can take it. I know you have run down Mr. St. Laurent, but you won't run me down.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: Didn't you know that he is still hale and hearty?


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: You ran him down so well that when Mr. Pearson was in Quebec during the last election campaign, Mr. St. Laurent was resting in Florida and would not meet him.


Joseph-Alphonse-Anaclet Habel: You may ask yourself who is responsible for that but the present government.


Louis-Joseph Pigeon: Anyway we are not going to organize your Liberal conventions.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, may I point out that:
1.	The progress in biological control will be accelerated.
2.	Equipment will be more complicated and more expensive and the increasing shortage of farm labour will result in farm automation.
3.	Better organized biological centres and a greater mechanization will make agriculture increasingly dependent on the contribution of industrial goods and services.
4.	All those achievements will make agriculture more complicated and will increase its capital needs and managing operation.
Mr. Speaker, I will not talk about the fishery aspect of the resolution of the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger), since the federal constituency of Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm is an agricultural and urban riding. Indeed, there are tourist and
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen resort centres in the northern part of my riding where my constituents go fishing, but I think they do not need any assistance in this regard.
Once again, Mr. Speaker, I make these suggestions most humbly and I know that the Conservative government will continue to go forward as it did in the past. The Conservative government will not be satisfied with marking time, as did the former government, it will not keep still, but it will work for the welfare of the farmers of this country. But what did our hon. friends opposite do, actually? When they used to sit on this side of the house, most of them just sat; they never made representations for their constituencies, whereas today, in the few months we have been in office, most of the government members, not only those from the province of Quebec, but from other provinces as well, have made representations here for their constituencies. When they were in office, they stayed seated, but today, our hon. friends opposite crowd the order paper with bills and resolutions. My dear friends, you may rest assured that the Conservative government is aware of its responsibilities and that it will continue to go forward and consider the farmer's problems, because it has done more in a few months already than our opponents did in 25 years.
I make these suggestions most humbly, Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of my constituency and of the whole country.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: Mr. Speaker, the member for Joliette-L'Assomp-tion-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon), who has just resumed his seat, stated at the beginning of his remarks that the Liberals never did anything for agriculture.
Oh, I hear desk-pounding. Well, I would ask those who are pounding their desks to stop being blinded by their duplessist feelings and to thumb through the Statutes of Canada. They will find legislation enacted by the former Liberal administration in the field of agriculture.
Mr. Speaker, may I be allowed to mention a few of these measures that were introduced or amended by the Liberal administration? Take, for example, the Canadian Farm Loan Act, the Farm Improvement Loans Act, the western feed grain transportation assistance act, quality premiums on high grade pork, subsidies and other allowances for the improvement of cheese and cheese
600	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen factories, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, water storage, the Maritime Marshland Rehabilitation Act, the Agricultural Prices Support Act, the Canada Grain Act, not to mention subsidies on cold storage warehouses, etc.
Mr. Speaker, if I sought to go on listing the measures that were enacted on the initiative of the former Liberal administration, you would surely call me to order, because I would be carried too far from the subject under consideration.
The member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm has laid a definite charge against the mover of this resolution, the member for Drummond-Arthabaska. (Mr. Boulanger). He has charged him with misleading the house. Well, Mr. Speaker, I hope that tomorrow, when today's proceedings are published, we can find all the remarks made this afternoon by the member for Drummond-Arthabaska. We will find that in reply to a question put to him by the hon. Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Comtois), he said:
With regard to the hon. Minister's question. I must say that I clearly indicated that under these two acts, the government loaned over $800 million, that is 123 million under the Canadian Farm Loan Act, and about 700 million under the Farm Improvement Loans Act.
I see that the member for Joliette-L'As-somption-Montcalm is denying this. Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska also added the following, and tomorrow's Hansard will prove it:
The banks granted loans in accordance with the legislation adopted by the government:	The government guaranteed the banks up to a certain proportion.
And, I leave it to tomorrow's record to show that the hon. member was telling the truth. Furthermore, in view of that charge, when he is in possession of the evidence, I hope the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomp-tion-Montcalm will at least have the courage and honesty to take back what he said.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, I wish to say that I am in complete agreement with the arguments put forward this afternoon by the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) when he introduced this resolution. He has outlined to this house a new conception of credit facilities for the farmers and fishermen of this country.
Early in his remarks the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Crouse) stated that the mover of this resolution must have looked over his shoulder because he had expressed the same ideas as he himself had expressed in the course of the debate on the


address. I would say in reply to the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg that the resolution introduced this afternoon by the bon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska was on the order paper at least a week before the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg made his speech on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I wish, however, to congratulate the hon. member for his support of the idea of the establishment of a development bank to assist the farmers and fishermen of this country. I hope he will have enough influence to be able to convince his colleagues and the members of the present government that we should adopt this resolution before the adjournment at ten o'clock this evening.
The proposal which we are now discussing is in accordance with the policy of the Liberal party to undertake in co-operation with the provinces a new and broadly based farm and fisheries development program.


An hon. Member:: Why didn't you do it?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: There again is the same question coming from the other side of the house: why didn't you do it. That has been the theme of practically every speech made from the other side since this session opened. Hon. members opposite have failed to realize that they have been elected, that they are in power and that they have the responsibility for looking after the affairs of this country. Instead, they keep putting to us the question: why didn't you do it. This is another example of the confusion, the indecision and the irresponsibility of which the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) has spoken.


An hon. Member:: You are not the government now.


Hédard-J. Robichaud: You will have your turn to speak, my friend. Just keep quiet for now.
We recognize the need to strengthen and develop the family farm. Even with existing loan agencies such as chartered banks, credit unions, the farm loans board and the machinery set up under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, not to speak of other provincial lending institutions, our farmers, particularly those on smaller farms, have been finding difficulty in securing the necessary capital to operate their farms at a profit.
The purpose of this resolution has been explained by the mover, the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska, as being to establish an agriculture and fisheries development bank to consolidate and expand existing credit facilities for persons engaged in these primary industries and to provide sufficient capital to enable farmers and fishermen to make capital improvements required for the

efficient and profitable operations of their undertakings. The type of loans or credit suggested in this proposal, which would apply equally to both fishermen and farmers is, first, long term loans applicable to farmers for financing the purchase of land and permanent improvements and, to fishermen, for financing new fishing boats of approved type; and, second, intermediate term loans or shorter term loans to farmers for financing livestock or machinery and, to fishermen, for financing fishing gear, new motors or urgent repairs or replacements. The establishment of such a bank which could operate at provincial level, would also insure, through special arrangements with chartered banks, credit unions and other agencies in the short term credit field, that the need of farmers and fishermen for this kind of credit was more adequately met.
As I have said, the existing lending agencies do not meet the needs of the fishermen or the farmers. If our farmers and fishermen are to be successful in their respective areas of operation they must be provided with credit facilities sufficient to make possible the acquisition and operation of economic units. Only when family farms reach a substantial size can they earn a satisfactory standard of living. More efficient production is required if the cost of production is to be lowered in order to compete with larger units or larger farms presently operated on a business basis.
The same principle would also apply to fishermen. It is true that the Atlantic provinces and Quebec, as has been mentioned this afternoon by the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Crouse), have their respective fishermen's loan boards which are doing a good job in providing loans and credit for fishermen for the purchasing of new boats or fishing gear. However, the funds made available by these provincial organizations are too limited. I can speak from personal experience because I was secretary of the fishermen's loan board of New Bruswick during the first six years of its operation. I well recall how our activities were restricted because of the limited funds available.
In my own province of New Brunswick, for example, the fishermen's loan board since its inauguration in 1946 has loaned to fishermen an amount in excess of $3 million. Out of these loans over 50 per cent have been repaid to date and the losses on bad loans have been less than one-half of one per cent.
The new agriculture and fisheries bank, as suggested, could be responsible directly to the federal government and would involve the creation of federal-provincial agencies in cooperation with the farm and fisheries development bank. Such a bank could operate in
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen conjunction with provincial lending agencies such as the fishermen's loan boards for the use of fishermen and could provide these agencies with necessary funds to operate on a larger and more practical scale.
When we examine the annual reports of the Farm Improvement Loans Act for the farmers and the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act for the fishermen we cannot help but realize at once the inadequacy of the system. To illustrate the situation in the Atlantic provinces I shall refer to the annual report of the Farm Improvement Loans Act for the year ended March 31, 1957 which indicates that in the four Atlantic provinces including Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Newfoundland, 2,087 loans have been made for new and used implements for a total of $3,604,000. In the same year 152 loans were made for repairs and alterations to farm homes and buildings for a total of $240,078. In other words, during the year 1957, a total of $3,840,000 was loaned in the Atlantic provinces under the provisions of the Farm Improvement Loans act.
I also have in my hand the report tabled by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) as sessional paper No. 51 on the operation of the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1958. This report will show that since its inception in 1956, up to March 31, 1958, only 441 loans have been granted for a total of $485,156.22. Out of these loans only 273 were granted in the Atlantic provinces for a total of $224,262. It is evident that the application of the existing acts do not meet the need of the farmers and fishermen.
The application of the farm loan act on a national scale is also not too practical. The needs of the eastern farmer are not the same as those of the wheat grower of western Canada or the prairie provinces. The basis on which the land is assessed to fix or determine the amount of the loan should apply differently in each case. Under the present application of the act the eastern farmer has difficulty in obtaining loans and the few who qualify have their applications cut down by 25 or 30 and even by as much as 50 per cent. This discrimination alone is of a sufficiently serious nature as to justify the establishment of a bank such as that suggested in the resolution presently under discussion.
Furthermore, our fisherman and farmer require a lower rate of interest if they are to maintain and strengthen their industries. How can a farmer or a fisherman meet existing competition when they have to finance the purchase of a new tractor for the farm

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen or a new motor for the fishing boat through existing commercial loaning agencies or finance corporations at an interest rate of 12, 18 or even 20 per cent? I feel confident that every provincial government would welcome the establishment of an agriculture and fisheries development bank such as is proposed in the present resolution. Its implementation would be to the advantage of our primary producers and I urge the government to give this matter its most serious and urgent consideration.
A development bank of the kind envisaged here could also help farmers' and fishermen's groups. Such groups organized either as co-operatives or other marketing agencies have found it difficult to accumulate capital of any kind for expansion and for this reason have had to curtail their activities. In many cases results have not been as satisfactory as expected and the economic position of our primary producers is one of lagging behind developments in the industrial field. The progress of our co-operatives and marketing groups has been curtailed by lack of capital and the establishment of an agriculture and fisheries development bank would overcome these difficulties. This bank could operate for the primary producers in a manner quite similar to the system established by the industrial development bank with regard to other businesses.
We need more than an extension of loans to individual farmers and fishermen. Today we also need, as suggested by this resolution, an agriculture and fisheries development bank which as a national agency could operate in conjunction with provincial agencies and be of material assistance to our primary producers. I sincerely hope that before the adjournment of the house at 10 o'clock this evening the government and its supporters will allow this motion to pass so that definite action may be taken in this regard.


Mr. J. A. Macdonald (Kings):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to speak to this, the first resolution of this session, concerned with the establishment and extension of better credit facilities for the primary industries of farming and fishing, I do so with very great pleasure. Speaking on the estimates of the Department of Agriculture during the last session I commented strongly on the fact that the regulations of the Canadian Farm Loan Act were badly outmoded and in need of early revision to meet the requirements of present day agriculture. When speaking on the estimates of the Department of Fisheries I referred to the urgent necessity of increased credit to enable our fishermen and packers to obtain more capital to finance their 
operations in order to ensure that they will be more efficient and profitable for all concerned. As a business man whose chief occupation since the last war has been that of dealing with the problems of these two classes of primary producers in the mari-times I feel I can deal with them in a sympathetic and I hope in an informative way.
Let us look briefly at the position of the farmers today, Mr. Speaker. In that regard I wish to deal generally with those of the maritime provinces and with my own province in particular. According to the Dominion Bureau of Statistics figures released just last week, farm cash income rose in all provinces. The total for Canada was up 10 per cent over 1957 and 5 per cent over that of 1956 and 20 per cent over that of 1954 and 1955. The agricultural division of the bureau calculates that in 1958 Prince Edward Island received $28,730,000, up $4,221,000 over 1957, or approximately 14 per cent. Nova Scotia farmers received $43,622,000, or an increase of $2,667,000, while New Brunswick farmers received an increase of $3,334,000, making a total return of $48,147,000. On the surface it might appear that this is a very rosy picture and might suggest to some that increased farm credit arrangements would scarcely be needed. However, there are a number of factors to be taken into consideration in a proper assessment of the actual position of the farmer today in the maritime provinces.
Although it was only a little over one per cent in 1958, there has been a continuous rise in the cost of goods and services the farmer needs to maintain his livelihood, and these costs have increased rapidly since the end of world war II. This has been accentuated somewhat by the last freight rates increase. This time it was 17 per cent added to the nine previous increases under the former government, making a total of 157 per cent since 1947. This increase, along with the others, may have been more or less unavoidable but our big objection in the east and west has been to the manner in which those increases have been imposed. The straight horizontal increases have placed a more disproportionate burden on those outside of central Canada and particularly on the agricultural communities in those areas. The present government, in line with its consistent policy to deal fairly with all of Canada and provide assistance in regions where most needed, will finally make a move to counteract this great injustice in the imposition of former freight rate increases. Assistance to alleviate the inequities which have taken place over the past two decades will be most welcome.

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen
A great deal is being heard these days about vertical integration wherever a discussion on agriculture takes place. This system is spreading rapidly in most areas and has been taking place to a lesser degree in the maritime agriculture economy. I feel it is something which is to be greatly abhorred, and that most of our farming people are entering into those arrangements only of necessity, where agricultural credit is unavailable.
The size of our farms and the type of our economy lend themselves particularly to the family farm. It is generally agreed that for some time to come the family farm will be the backbone of agriculture in our eastern economy. Nevertheless, it is necessary that a program of horizontal integration take place whereby our farms may be enlarged and thus benefit by a reduction in unit costs.
Small farms are being abandoned rapidly in my province and good land has been allowed to become waste because those tilling the land find it uneconomic to do so. This land could be reclaimed but the longer it is left the greater will be the cost of bringing such land back into production. In order to achieve this expansion, farmers must have increased facilities to buy additional land and more and heavier equipment to till the land. Under present credit arrangements, only those who are well set up in farming are able to obtain additional assistance; whereas the small farmer is unable to obtain money for the additional outlay required.
Another great need at the present time is for some long term credit to enable young farmers to start out on their own. In the days of our pioneering forefathers many began farming by clearing the land and setting up farms, practically starting from scratch. Today this is impossible owing to the necessary outlays on machinery which the young farmer must have to begin with. Many provinces have land settlement schemes of their own but others, such as Prince Edward Island, have nothing in that field. It would possibly be more desirable if some such schemes were set up on a provincial basis, but where no provincial assistance is provided then I feel the federal government should help in some way, either by combining with a provincial program of assistance or in taking the initiative from the federal level.
(Translation):
In this connection, Mr. Speaker, I think everyone could benefit from a study of the legislation enacted in the province of Quebec, to which the member for Joliette-L'Assomp-tion-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) has referred, and which has had very happy results. During
several years, that province had in its statutes an act that allowed young farmers to borrow money and refund it on a long term basis and at a very low rate of interest.
I have obtained the following information from the Quebec farm loan board. The loans are for a period of 39J years and refundable by semi-annual payments at a rate of 4 per cent, including interest and reimbursement, that is 2i per cent interest and 1J per cent refund.
The payments are therefore $40 a year for every thousand dollars borrowed, or $20 per six month term. The amount of the loan must not exceed 75 per cent of the true value of the land and buildings. The maximum loan granted by the board to farmers does not exceed $8,000.
The losses under this plan have been negligible, yet millions of dollars were made available to a great many farmers who wished to settle on a farm. These loans have greatly contributed to the extension of agriculture in the province of Quebec, and in this regard, it can be seen that that province is leading all others. This shows what can be done when there is real interest in farm loans, and when proper steps are taken.
The government and population of Quebec deserve congratulations for this accomplishment, and I hope other provinces where no similar plan exists, and particularly the province of Prince Edward Island where I was born, will realize this and will enact legislation of this kind.
(Text):
Like every industry, agriculture must undergo a process of continual change and in that regard ours is labouring under a most inadequate and antiquated credit program.


Mr. Peters:: I rise on a point of order. It would appear that the hon. member is reading his speech, contrary to your wishes of today.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member has heard the point of order which has been made. Before I comment on it, has he anything to say?


John Borden Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, I think in your ruling today you suggested-


Mr. Speaker:: I will hear the hon. member in a minute. The hon. member for Kings has the floor. I will hear the hon. member for York West.


John Borden Hamilton: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, as I recall the words that you used today you mentioned that there might be exceptions made in connection with the first speech of a member in the

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen house. This is not this member's first speech but I think you will understand that he has been speaking in l'autre langue offtciel of the House of Commons and for that reason I think some leeway might be given.


Mr. Speaker:: I must say I had the impression that the hon. member was reading not only the French part of his speech but the English part of his speech and I should like his assurance that he is not doing so.


John Augustine Macdonald: I can explain my remarks in French to the hon. member if he wishes. I was referring to the fact that in the province in Quebec there is an excellent farm credit program which any other province could very well copy and that in fact it would be of great assistance to a province such as mine which has no program of any kind in that regard.


Mr. Speaker:: I am sorry to interrupt but I think the hon. member misunderstood me. The point of order made by the hon. member for York West was that some latitude might be given the hon. member in reading the part of his address which he wished to give in French, and I think the house would probably concur in that. But I should like the assurance of the hon. member who has the floor before he continues that he is not reading the English part of his speech.


John Augustine Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I have my notes here and have been following them closely. I shall try not to follow them as closely. It is necessary for the benefit of our economy, Mr. Speaker, that we have a much improved credit system which will provide better intermediate, long and short term credit facilities for our farmers.
The resolution also deals with credit regulations as far as fishermen are concerned. In my constituency of Kings we have a very large fishing population spread along the coast line and to our many fishermen credit is something which is very important. The same principle can be applied in fishing as in farming, that if we are going to have more profitable operations for our fishermen as well as for our farmers then it is necessary for the fishermen to have better credit facilities. This applies not only to the fisherman but also the packer. The packer's capital is often tied up and he is unable to give a better price to the fishermen because he has to sell the pack as soon as he gets the fish. The fisherman is often in much the same position in that he is obliged to sell his catch to one buyer as soon as he lands the fish. If credit facilities were available both to the fisherman and the packer, then the fisherman would be in a much better position to bargain after he had landed his fish and the packer

would be able to secure a better price for the fish he had in storage or in cans.
From figures recently released by the Department of Fisheries we note that from January to November last year the amount of fish landed in the maritime provinces was 38,576,000 pounds for a value of $3,717,000. The figures for the same eleven months in 1957 show landings amounting to 38,406,000 pounds for a value of $3,482,000. This is an increase of 170,000 pounds in the catch and of $235,000 in the landed value. This indicates a considerably better picture in the fishing industry of the maritimes, but I should like to point out again that if we had better credit facilities the picture so far as the maritimes fishermen are concerned would be considerably better than it was during the past season.
While speaking about fisheries credit and the condition of the fishing industry, I should like to express strong disapproval of and disagreement with the remarks made by the hon. member for Gloucester (Mr. Robiehaud) with regard to poaching, as found on page 99 of Hansard for January 20. If our fisheries are to be properly conserved we must have regard for the law. Any fisherman who takes a boat out knows when he is breaking the regulations and he also is aware that he is doing a great deal of harm to the fishing industry. As in any industry, we will always have people who will wish to transgress the law and make a "fast buck", shall we say, and they are usually the ones who do the greatest harm to the industry. Poachers in the fishing industry are no exception. Probably 99 per cent of the fishermen work hard to earn their livelihood and resent greatly the conduct of the poachers. I was very sorry to hear the remarks of the hon. member for Gloucester especially since he was a fisheries inspector in the past and is a former director, I believe, of the department of fisheries of New Brunswick.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I note with great satisfaction that it is stated in the speech from the throne that there will be a comprehensive review and revision of legislation concerning farm credit to make it more effective, and better credit facilities for those engaged in the fishing industry are being planned.
(Translation):


Mr. Rodolphe Leduc (Gatineau):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This afternoon you informed the house that, in the future, hon. members would not be allowed to read their speeches, and that they should speak without a prepared text. May I enquire if you intend to enforce these

instructions, or if you will allow some members to read their speeches, as the hon. member is doing at the moment.
(Text):


John Augustine Macdonald: I should like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that I was reading a section from the speech from the throne.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member has heard the point that has again been taken. Apparently he is giving the impression to hon. members of the house that he is not observing the rule. He has given me his assurance that he is only following his notes. I hope that he will bear in mind, in his concluding remarks, that some serious effort is being made in this house to avoid verbatim reading.


John Augustine Macdonald: May I quote from the speech from the throne, Mr. Speaker?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is not precluded from giving quotations, if they are of reasonable length.


John Augustine Macdonald: I wish to quote the section from the speech from the throne dealing with farm credit arrangements.
You will also be invited to make a comprehensive review and revision of the legislation concerning farm credit, in order that credit may be more effective in assisting in the development and maintenance of an efficient and prosperous agriculture.
We observe also on the order paper a resolution standing in the name of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean) concerning the expansion of credit facilities for fishermen. Special attention, I think might be paid to the excellent record of the Veterans Land Act, as carried out by the Department of Veterans Affairs. This program would be an excellent model for the further extension of credit facilities to both farmers and fishermen. Such a program, I believe, could be a model for a program of settling young farmers, which is something that Canada needs today. I am very pleased to see that this government is finally taking action which was previously refused for so long by the last Liberal government.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am going to read part of the resolution, Mr. Speaker, but I can assure you that I have no intention whatever of reading my speech. I have not even a manuscript. The operative part of the resolution reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give early consideration to the advisability of the establishment of an agriculture and fisheries development bank to consolidate and expand existing credit facilities for persons engaged in these primary industries and to provide sufficient capital to enable farmers and fishermen to make capital improvements required for the efficient and profitable operations of their undertakings.
Although I think there has been, in fact, no criticism from the other side of the house
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen about this point, I do want to say a word about one sentence in the speech from the throne which I had rather expected someone would raise as an argument for suggesting that this motion was redundant and unnecessary. This sentence reads:
You will also be invited to make a comprehensive review and revision of the legislation concerning farm credit, in order that credit may be more effective in assisting in the development and maintenance of an efficient and prosperous agriculture.
It might be, that if the speech from the throne had not confined itself to agriculture, but had included fisheries, it could have been argued that the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger) might have waited to see what the government proposed before bringing this subject forward. It will be seen that the language in the speech from the throne is very vague. We have, as the hon. member himself said, nothing on the order paper to indicate what are the government's intentions. It does seem to me that this preliminary review of the situation has served a very useful purpose, if for no other reason than that it has revealed there is a very strong feeling on both sides-indeed if anyone was inclined to a contrary view no one has expressed it here-that this kind of legislation is needed.
Although I was brought up on a farm, I do not represent what could be honestly described as an agricultural riding. I do not believe any hon. member will expect me to talk about the needs of the farmers. I do, however, represent the oldest, most historic fishing riding in North America. I belonged to a government, which I am proud to say, always attempted to keep the farmers and fishermen on a basis of equality in all its legislation. I think everyone who represented a fishing riding was disappointed to read the narrow and restricted language of the speech from the throne, which once more confirms the impression we have been getting for the last 18 months that the government as a whole-I do not say this of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean), who has taken a real interest in fisheries-is not interested in the fishermen at all.
I know it will be argued that there is an item on the order paper to continue the fisheries improvement loans legislation, but it is merely to continue it. Although this legislation has had a limited usefulness, I think all of us who represent fishing ridings, certainly on the east coast, feel that it has not come up to our hopes or expectations and that something more than that is needed. I am not suggesting for a minute that the fisheries improvement loans legislation should not continue. I do believe it is very desirable for these short term loans to use the
606	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen agencies of the banks and credit unions as far as they can be used, instead of substituting an additional bureaucracy. However, it does seem to me there is something quite lacking in our credit legislation for fishermen that does exist for farmers. We have nothing comparable at the present time in our legislation with the farm loan board.
I imagine part of the reason for that is that most, if not all the provinces where deep-sea fishing exists do have provincial loan boards which, to a very limited degree, perform functions similar to those performed in the federal field by the farm loan board. But everyone knows that for four of these provinces at any rate, their financial resources are very limited. We also know that under the British North America Act fisheries is the exclusive responsibility of the federal parliament. It does seem to me that the time has come when we should fill this gap in our legislation. I do not say we should not try to co-ordinate these things, that we should not make use of the existing facilities of the provincial boards, as that could be worked out in co-operation with the provincial governments. There is a great deal to be said for using existing institutions wherever they can be adapted to meet problems because you can go right on with what you have instead of having to start from scratch.
There is no question whatever that the technique of the fishery, as the hon. member for Gloucester (Mr. Robichaud), the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Crouse), and other hon. members who have spoken as representatives of fishing ridings pointed out, is changing very rapidly. I was very much interested in what was said for the hon. member for Kent (Ont.) (Mr. Danforth) this afternoon concerning the great changes in the fisheries on the lake, near the shores of which I was born.
I think there is no question whatever that in fishing, just as in farming, the need for capital is far beyond the capacity of most fishermen, as it is beyond the capacity of most farmers, to amass just by ordinary savings. It does seem to me that it is a real service to parliament and should be a real service to the government to have had this debate today.
There was one point touched upon by the hon. member for Kings (Mr. Macdonald) which I caught when he was speaking, namely his reference to the need not merely for loans directly to the fishermen but for loans of an industrial character. I know that to -a limited degree the fishing plants can qualify for loans from the industrial development bank, and to the extent that they cannot
[Mr. Pickersgill.l

get credit in the normal way, perhaps that is a useful agency. But it does seem to me that perhaps something more is also needed in this area.
We all read, I think with great feelings of sorrow, that on top of the terrible situation that has developed in Sydney over the coal mines, the historic fish plant in North Sydney was burned the other day. It may be that insurance will enable the owners of that plant to replace it immediately, but it does seem to me that this is just one of many examples one could give all along the Atlantic coast of the need to be sure that there is a credit structure to meet the need.
I do not suggest for a minute that all the credit should be provided by the government. I think that as far as possible it is always preferable to have credit provided in the ordinary operation of the economic system. I am quite unrepentant in that view. But I think that the rapidity and the almost revolutionary character of the transformation of the fisheries, and the importance of providing for this historic industry the opportunity to share in what we now regard as the Canadian standard of living does call for some special effort on the part of the government. Before the government brings forward its legislation for farm credit I hope that it will take a long, hard look at the views expressed by my friend, the hon. member for Drum-mond-Arthabaska (Mr. Boulanger), will include the fisheries in the same credit institution, and give to the fishermen exactly equal treatment as compared with the farmers.


Mr. F. F. Legere (Shelburne-Yarmouth -Clare):: Mr. Speaker, it is inconceivable that the use of a thing which is necessary, good and beyond the reach of those whose misfortune and lack of means make it unavailable to them should be denied by those endowed with the required capital to provide it for them. However, before we proceed to the award of this necessity it perhaps would be in keeping with sound judgment to establish whether or not its value can be measured by the yardstick of common sense, which in this case is governed by the class of individuals concerned, the number of individuals to receive such assistance, and the true need and importance that warrants its award.
Naturally, Mr. Speaker, this result cannot be accomplished without a body sufficiently endowed with the necessary funds to make it praticable once the existence of the necessary requirements is proven. In other words, Mr. Speaker, it all boils down to the question of whether or not the fishermen of Canada should be extended a helping hand in order that they may provide us Canadians with

the commodities necessary to our existence. I say they should be extended a helping hand and if you will bear with me for a few moments I shall attempt to present the reasons for my feeling.
Two thousand years ago fish were required to keep people alive, and down to this day that same requirement remains. Without having the power to foresee the future I know that this will be so until the end of time. We cannot do without the fishermen. Their reason for being is universal, and they should at all times be awarded the greatest consideration possible. Adventurers by nature, pioneers by instinct, they are hardy, rugged and honest beyond doubt, and they are deserving of our admiration. They are endowed with the patience of Job. At once carpenters, mechanics, navigators and proud possessors of an inventive genius, these toilers of the deep are a group that we Canadians should be proud to have on our side in this fight for survival.
However, to carry on efficiently and safely in their noble calling they, like all of us, need a helping hand. The nature of their work demands that they and their equipment be of the highest standard. The sea, so majestic in its vastness, so beautiful in its moments of repose yet so terrifying and dangerous in its storm-swept moments, demands of those who haunt its teeming fish expanses nothing but the best. One has but to go back in memory to recall times of anxiety for proof that the best is none too good. Sailing out of one's home port on a beautiful morning, breathing the purity of the ocean's air, and all the while happily anticipating a substantial return from the day's catch, entails visions of a good money return and an evening of happiness in the sweet knowledge that the loved ones will be well provided for. However, the dark clouds gathering on the horizon and the mournful tones of the increasing winds are simply mother nature's way of telling of her indignation over those who wrest the riches from her bosom.
In spite of the warnings the fisherman, bent intently over the work at hand, carries on, and does so in a fearless way. He trusts to the seaworthiness of his craft and depends entirely on the smooth and efficient operation of his motor. Oftentimes, unmindful of what could happen, he ventures to the windward side of a dangerous ledge and continues to fish in spite of the white turmoil of the foaming sea that beats and dashes itself on the rocky obstacles. He has his reasons for so flirting with danger, for there in the dark recesses and caves of this ledge lurk the objects of his pursuit. It is easy to understand that the fisherman in so doing is
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen taking his life in his own hands, yet he remains there, only shying away when the seaworthiness of his craft appears to be taxed beyond its limit. Never once does he think of his motor stopping due to mechanical failure, for sudden stoppage would mean the end.
In keeping with the known fact that nothing is accomplished without effort, mother nature sees to it that her denizens are provided with the necessary elements for their protection. The elusiveness of fish is well known to mankind. The fisherman must roam far and wide in search of food. The tides, the whirlpools, the temperature of the water, the direction of the winds and the season of the year are all deciding factors that chart the course travelled by fish and contribute extensively to his elusiveness. Here today and gone tomorrow is part and parcel of the daily life of every fish.


Rodolphe Leduc: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order: is this the hon. member's first speech?


An hon. Member:: It is.


Felton Fenwick Legere: No, Mr. Speaker. I might say, on that point of order, that it is not my first speech and if you wish I will cancel these notes and speak off the cuff.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Felton Fenwick Legere: As I was saying, the tides, the temperature of the water and the direction of the wind are sometimes the cause of fish wandering around for their food, and in order to capture these fish the fishermen must also roam. The fish being on the bottom lots of times-mostly all the time, I should say-the fishermen must necessarily go back to inventions which have come into being since the last war. I should like to point out in this regard that the fisherman now has at his disposal the fathometer and the fishscope. By means of these instruments he can estimate at what depth the fish are lying and set his trawl or lower his fishing line with a hook on it accordingly and catch those fish for his means of livelihood.
The coast of Nova Scotia is a rocky coast which is visited every summer by perennial fog which makes it very hazardous and dangerous for those who have to approach the coast line especially during the night fishing period. The long-liner gropingly tries, to get into port; the hand-liner creeps into port; the herring fisherman staggeringly creeps alongside his jetty thankful that some men of yore invented the compass. However, men of science, during the last war and thereafter, made tremendous strides in electronics and came out with a navigation instrument known as LORAN. I call this.

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen the fisherman's homing pigeon, for a fisherman can be guided by this instrument no matter how dark the night might be or how thick the fog, and reach his home port in safety.
I have pointed this out, Mr. Speaker, to call attention to the fact that these devices exist. However, I might also point out that without the necessary cash to buy them they cannot be of help to our fishermen, and that the great majority of our small commercial fishermen do not possess this necessary cash. It is easy for one to saunter down to a home port and watch as foreign craft touch the wharf. Immediately the fishermen jump aboard and explore every facility aboard. They longingly look at all the things which have been installed, whether they include the LORAN, a fishscope, a fathometer or a diesel engine. But that is as far as they get. In nine cases out of ten their longings cannot be satisfied because they have not sufficient money to enable them to buy these things. If they could afford to buy them they would certainly increase their fish output and add substantially to their means of livelihood.
Oftimes they will turn to their dealers for money with which to buy these commodities, or these essentials to greater yields in their fishing activities. The dealer receives the men with sympathy and assures them that they have the right idea, but reluctantly has to discourage them and tell them no, explaining that he cannot buy for them either a LORAN or a fathometer or what have you because he has already stretched his sympathy to the breaking point and if he went any further he would go bankrupt.
For this reason the fisherman dreads a storm which might destroy his equipment and prevent him from fishing. He is faced with only one alternative. He cannot provide the money himself for new equipment; his dealer is unable to assist him, and therefore he must turn to the government. I am positive that this government is-as it should be- vitally interested in seeing that fishermen are provided with every possible means of improving their economy and, hence, of bettering the economy of this country. I must say that I greatly favour this proposal to establish banking credit facilities so that those who go down to the sea for livelihood and who, oftentimes, come back with very meagre catches may be given the assistance necessary to better fish production, assistance which will in turn mean a more satisfactory economy for the whole of the country, thus placing * Canada among the greatest nations of the world.


Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, J left my bifocals at home and therefore my
[Mr. Legere.l
remarks will be very brief. I do not think they need to be too long in any event because of the ample amount of discussion we have had here today in support of one or both aspects of the intent behind the resolution now under discussion, namely extended credit facilities for farmers and fishermen, Coming as I do from the most important maritime province of Canada, we have a two-fold interest in it there. The farming interest has been expressed by my colleague the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) and we in the riding of Skeena have an interest predominantly in fishing but also in farming in the interior part of the province.
If I were to express the great benefit that a bank or agency of the nature outlined in the resolution would have I would only be repeating what has been said earlier in this discussion by other hon. members. It is not very often that we find such complete unanimity from all sides of the house, from all parties represented here and from all parts of the nation in support of a particular idea. We may disagree on details concerning the implementation of the plan but nonetheless to my recollection-and I have listened to practically everyone who has participated in this debate-each is agreed in principle that the government should proceed with the establishment of such facilities to assist farmers and fishermen.
I do not know why we do not discontinue talking and start voting, unless of course some of the individuals who may follow me feel it is necessary to completely beat this to death until 10 o'clock hoping not to put the government in the embarrassing position of voting in support of a resolution knowing full well that the government has no intention of doing anything about implementing it.


Mr. McGee:: Are you advocating closure?


Frank Howard: Am I advocating socialism?


Frank Charles McGee: No, I asked if you were advocating closure.


Frank Howard: Look who talks about closure! No, I am not advocating closure as we have come to know it through the introduction provided a few years ago by my hon. friends to my immediate left.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. May I remind the hon. member that he is straying somewhat from the subject matter.


Frank Howard: Getting back to the subject, Mr. Speaker, we are advocating that a formal expression should be given by this house to the resolution before it. We cannot do that if we are going to continue debating it until 10 o'clock. I feel that anything that may be

said will merely be a repetition of what was said by other hon. members earlier and I feel it is stretching the imagination of the house just a little too far to expect that anything new can be said on the question. Nothing would please hon. members in this house and the people affected by this resolution more than to have the resolution passed by a unanimous decision of the house. A formal vote would strengthen the hand of the government when it got around to doing something about this. It would show the house as being unanimously in support of the measure. No one disagrees and we are all in favour of giving this type of assistance to the primary producers. A formal vote would indicate to the people of the country that we are not afraid to stand up and vote for it and this should be done instead of continuing to speak as has been going on for such a long time today.
One could move a formal motion that the question be now put but I would not want to embarrass too many people by doing something like that and so I shall just appeal to the decency of hon. members, to their understanding of parliamentary progress and to their inner thoughts in asking that some formal unanimous expression of this house be given to this resolution by having Mr. Speaker put the question and by you Mr. Speaker, refusing to recognize any hon. member who rises so we will have an opportunity to vote on it and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) who will have to put the measure into effect will know he has the complete support of all hon. members in this house regardless of party affiliation.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Mr. Eric Stefanson (Selkirk):: As I rise to take part in this debate, Mr. Speaker, I should first of all like to congratulate the other hon. members who have preceded me in the discussion of this resolution. As I represent a constituency which is composed largely of primary producers, consisting of farmers and fishermen, and as the economy of my constituency as a whole is dependent upon the income of these people, I feel it my duty to say something on this resolution.
We have had on the statute books the Canadian Farm Loan Act which has been available to farmers who wish to borrow money through the farm loan board. I have had many complaints from my constituents about the inadequacy of this board and about the limitations imposed on borrowing under the terms of the act. This government did make more money available through this legislation last year and I believe borrowing was at an all time high in that period. However, farmers generally are not satisfied with the 66968-9-39
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen act and feel that they cannot borrow as much money as they require for necessary improvements.
The following words were contained in the speech from the throne:
You will also be invited to make a comprehensive review and revision of the legislation concerning farm credit, in order that credit may be more effective in assisting in the development and maintenance of an efficient and prosperous agriculture.
I believe this speaks for itself and indicates that the present government is going to have a good look at the financial needs of the farmer and introduce the necessary legislation to take care of those needs as far as agriculture is concerned.
In addition to the Canadian Farm Loan Act we have the Farm Improvement Loans Act which makes money available to farmers on short term loans for various purposes including the purchase of livestock and other things but this, too, is not adequate to meet present needs. We also have the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act. No doubt this has been beneficial to fishermen in certain areas but fishermen in the province of Manitoba have been unable to make much use of it and therefore it has not benefited the industry in that province.
I agree with the principle embodied in the resolution before us in these words:
-and to provide sufficient capital to enable farmers and fishermen to make capital improvements required for the efficient and profitable operations of their undertakings.
One reason why the operation of the Canadian farm loan board has become unsatisfactory and unrealistic is because the value of goods, land, machinery, livestock, etc., has greatly increased since the introduction of the Canadian Farm Loan Act. It takes more money to start farming today than it did 10 or 15 years ago. As the funds proposed are self-liquidating, I approve of this plan. Any government has to be careful when considering assistance for any group or particular segment of the economy. No doubt this type of assistance is not considered as a subsidy. This government-or any government for that matter-should be careful in granting subsidies as that type of system continually leads to more and more socialism. The primary producers of this country, in this case our farmers and fishermen, have been independent throughout the years and proud of their profession and have not been continually looking for government handouts.
In my constituency, which is known as the interlake area of Manitoba, large quantities of grain, livestock, hogs, sheep, poultry, turkeys and other things are produced. Most farmers carry on mixed farming and there is a very large production of livestock. There
610	HOUSE OF
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen are huge areas which are not suited for grain but are good pasture land producing wild hay. Many of these farmers have herds valued from $10,000 to $50,000 but the value of their land is considered low so the amount they can borrow is limited and generally inadequate to meet their needs. With the livestock industry in a healthy state and being an extremely good risk, I feel this should be taken into consideration and have a bearing on the amount available for borrowing.
Most of the farmers in my constituency can be classified as family farmers. In many cases their farms are worked by the whole family. Sons and daughters have often worked for their fathers and mothers without any set salaries and their work has gone into expanding the farms. In many instances, when the parents are ready to retire, the sons and daughters who perhaps want to carry on the family farm have not sufficient cash to pay for it and neither have the parents the necessary cash to buy a house in a small town for their retirement. If money were available for these types of cases it would solve two problems: it would keep more young people on the farms and the parents would retire at an earlier age, buy a house in a small town and be able to enjoy their retirement.
I now want to deal briefly with the fishermen. Within the boundaries of my constituency we have the two largest lakes in Manitoba, namely lake Winnipeg and lake Manitoba. I think many members fail to realize the importance of the fishing industry in the province of Manitoba. We hear a great deal about the fishing on the Atlantic coast, particularly the cod fishing industry. We also hear a great deal about the fishing on the west coast, particularly the salmon fishing industry. In Ontario and Manitoba we have the bulk of the fresh-water fishing in Canada. One reason one does not hear so much about this is that the respective provincial governments are in control of fishing in those provinces. I am sure it is not known to many that Manitoba has sometimes produced more fish than the province of Ontario. Manitoba also produces the best freshwater fish in the Dominion of Canada. Among the species caught are whitefish, pickerel, sauger, goldeye and many other species. Most of the fish is exported to the United States and there is no such thing as a surplus. Lake Manitoba has only one season, during the winter, while lake Winnipeg has three seasons. It has a summer fishing season, a fall fishing season and a winter fishing season. Most of the fishermen on lake Manitoba are engaged in farming as well as in fishing, while on lake Winnipeg we have what we call the full-time fisherman.


I fully agree that those primary producers need credit. Fishing fails completely on the lakes in Manitoba at certain times, the same as we have heard about the failure of the codfish on the Atlantic coast this year. What the reason is for this we do not know, but it does happen and after complete failures the primary producers are in need of assistance.
The problems facing the fishing industry in Manitoba are many and some concrete action will have to be taken to solve them. However, the government alone cannot solve all the problems facing this industry. They can, however, take certain steps to help the situation. More research is essential and licence fees are much too high. A fisherman on lake Winnipeg, fishing three seasons, pays a licence fee of $85. He pays $50 for the summer season, $15 for the fall season and $20 for the winter season. Besides this, there is a licence fee if he operates a whitefish station, packs his own fish, and perhaps buys from one to seven boats. If he does this he has to pay a licence fee of $100 and for each additional boat over seven he has to pay another $25. If there are skiffs fishing out of his station he has to pay an additional $30 for any number of skiffs up to 20, and a further $2.50 for each skiff over 20. He also pays the lands branch $100 for the rent of the property his station occupies. In most instances it is approximately one acre of land. Besides this, he pays a licence fee for his wood and the logs he uses in his wharf. All these things are a real burden to an industry which is in difficulty at the present time. There are many other problems with which I could deal but I want to get back to credit for fishermen.
At present, fish companies extend credit to many fishermen for their fishing operations. This includes, nets, twine and general supplies and extra cash to pay wages and licence fees. Naturally, when fish companies extend credit to many fishermen, some are successful and others are not. In order to stay in business the fish companies of necessity must make proper allowance for losses or for bad accounts. I feel confident that if the fishermen had some other source of credit and were therefore free to sell wherever they could get the best price they would be more successful. I am sure that all the companies would welcome the opportunity of getting out of this type of financing, but with no other credit available to fishermen they are unable to shake this burden. This system seems to prevail all over the country. Credit is being made available to farmers and I feel that the same type of credit should be made available to our fishermen. Whether this new

credit would be made available by broadening existing legislation or the setting up of an agricultural and fishermen's development bank on a basis similar to the industrial development bank is a matter for the government to decide.
I feel that the extending of credit, both short term and long term loans to those primary producers, the farmers and the fishermen, will be of great benefit to the economy of the country as a whole.
(Translation):


Mr. Gabriel Roberge (Megantic):: Mr. Speaker, I should like, first of all, to congratulate the hon. member who spoke before me, because I gathered that he limited his remarks as much as possible to the resolution before the house. However, if I may keep the debate within its proper limits, I think it would be useful to read over to you the substance of the resolution introduced by the hon. member for Drummond-Artha-baska (Mr. Boulanger), which suggests to the government to consider:
-the advisability of establishing an agriculture and fisheries development bank to consolidate and expand existing credit facilities for persons engaged In these primary industries-
I listened today not only to the remarks of the members from the opposition, but also to those of the government supporters, and indeed I had the impression that all of them were in agreement to say that the resolution was well taken. As a matter of fact, I heard no one say that he was opposed to the resolution. So, Mr. Speaker, without criticizing the decisions that you and Mr. Deputy Speaker have rendered when the hon. member for Joliette-L'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Pigeon) delivered his speech, we tried as much as possible to remain within the scope of the question under study.
If my memory serves me right, that resolution was put on the order paper last year by the hon. member for Drummond-Artha-baska, who represents the riding next to mine. Unfortunately, this resolution had not been dealt with and I congratulate him for having included it again on the order paper. I congratulate him also for having been the first member to present a resolution on the first private members' day.
Mr. Speaker, I do not propose to be very long, because I think that at this late hour, at 20 minutes to 10, it is time to vote on the question and I would not like to talk
66968-9-391
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen too much and prevent the members from voting on the important suggestion made by the hon. member for Drummond-Artha-baska.
It is easy for me to give my opinion since I already made it known to this house last year while the estimates of the Department of Agriculture were being considered, when I stated, as quoted on page 2945 of Hansard:
But we should also keep in mind that farming is, to a certain extent, about to lose its character of a family concern in order to become a real industry.
I think the government . . . should concentrate on this problem and realize that the farms of our country might cease to be an economic family unit in order actually to become an agricultural industry.
Mr. Speaker, obviously we, on this side of the house, are in favour of maintaining farms as family concerns, but we must not close our eyes and try to stop the change, nor should we forget that the family concern is really developing into an agricultural industry. We should, by adequate methods, safeguard this system based on family industrial concerns, and it is for that reason that we on this side of the house, have thought fit to suggest the establishment of this agriculture development bank whose advantages were outlined by my colleague for Drummond-Arthabaska.
Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of notes- it is not a written speech-I also have quotes to give to the house, but since it is getting late, I will refrain from reading them. All I want to say is that we, of the opposition, sincerely believe that the creation of an agriculture development bank would be one of the solutions needed to settle the farm problem, not only in the province of Quebec, but in the whole country.
So, I think that the hon. members should come to an immediate conclusion about the value of the resolution presented by the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska.
(Text):


Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to say a few words with reference to the motion as I represent a constituency largely populated by ranchers and farmers. I am not going to quote what has been mentioned in the speech from the throne. I was going to deal with the argument of the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) that the motion before us is redundant because in spirit the speech from the throne says exactly the same thing as the motion we are now debating.
In dealing with credit as far as the western farmer is concerned, it is difficult to isolate the different programs established for the farmers of western Canada under various

Aid to Farmers and Fishermen statutes but if in the few remarks I make in the time left at my disposal I refer to certain statutes it is because the credit provided thereunder pertains to a particular phase of agriculture. It is often thought, particularly in eastern Canada, that western Canada farms are very large, and I should like to take a few moments to quote from an address made by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) on October 28, 1957, in which he dealt with cash advances for western farmers. At that ;ime he said, as found at page 462 of Hansard:
That is specified acreage. This is a list giving the breakdown of permit holders in western Canada, being a total of 230,354 and of this total there are 31,299 who have from zero to 99 specified acres or acres under cultivation.
There are 63,272 who have between 100 and 199 acres and there are 51,762 who have between 200 and 299 acres under cultivation. . . In other words, contrary to the general belief existing in eastern Canada that western farmers are all big farmers, rich farmers and in some cases are reputed to go to California for the winter and that sort of thing, there are in fact very few farmers in this category and most of them are small farmers in this area. As these figures indicate, in fact two-thirds of them or a little less have farms with 300 acres or less cultivated land.
So that two-thirds of the farmers of western Canada have 300 acres or less. When dealing with farm credit the size of the farm is very important. In the last twenty years a revolution has taken place in the farming industry in western Canada as in other industries. The horses that used to be seen in the fields have now been replaced by the most modern type of equipment. This revolution has left a demand for credit. Representing a farming district, I believe there are four reasons why the farmers of western Canada need extended credit. In the first place, in order to conquer the wheat surpluses of western Canada it has been necessary for the farmers to diversify their crops and some of them have had to go into stock raising. For example, one of the farmers in my constituency went into the production of a new type of grass seed this year. The seed cost $1 a pound. In order for this farmer to get into the production of this new type of crop and in order for others to go into stock production so as to cut down the surpluses of wheat it is necessary for our farmers to get credit.
The second reason for extending credit is in order to conquer the cost-price squeeze about which we have heard so much in the house. Western farmers have had to obtain larger equipment and more land. If the farmer is to get that type of equipment and obtain more land so that he can cut his overall costs it is necessary for him to obtain credit. In addition, many of the early pioneers who came to Saskatchewan and Alberta are now retired and some have died. Young men
tMr. Woolliams.l
who wish to farm need credit to buy these farms. That is why in spirit I support the motion. That is why I was very happy to hear in the speech from the throne that the question of credit would be reviewed.
There is one other reason why credit is very important to the farmers of western Canada and it has to do with whether private capital will come into the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta. During the regime of the C.C.F. government in Saskatchewan certain legislation was placed on the provincial statute books such as the land contracts action act and other acts which have scared out private capital.


Hazen Robert Argue: Oh, nonsense.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: It is not nonsence. The hon. member for Assiniboia says it is nonsense but he knows it is true.


Hazen Robert Argue: You told us this three or four times last session.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: You must have been listening in your dreams to speeches I did not make because I only made one speech last year. If I may continue, private capital has been scared out of the province of Saskatchewan.


Hazen Robert Argue: Nonsense.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The people who provide the capital know that they have no real security because of that type of legislation. Under the judicature act of Alberta the same problem exists. That is why we need the type of legislation referred to in the motion, so that our farmers can get capital to improve their output of production and because it will also assist to keep young men on the farms.


An hon. Member:: Let us proceed with the vote.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I hear the voice of the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) again, but in discussing this question of credit I would say that our party needs to offer no apologies to the western farmer for what it has done. Here is our record in so far as these statutes having to deal with credit are concerned. Even in the thirties we introduced the wheat board legislation. Our party was the first to bring in floor prices. We introduced the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, because after the droughts in the thirties most farmers in Saskatchewan and Alberta were insolvent. As a result of that legislation millions of dollars of debt were written off, so that today the farmers in Saskatchewan and Alberta have clear titles to their farms.

We also brought in the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act which, in many cases, resulted in water being put on farms where there was no water. Today thousands of pounds of beef are being produced on these farms. When I hear the voice of my good friend from Assiniboia, I should like to remind him, too, that we supported the same co-operative movement. I should like to ask my good friend from Saskatchewan, who attended the same university that I attended, in so far as this march on Ottawa is concerned: who is leading this march? It is Charlie Givens. This is the same Charlie Givens who is vice-president of the Saskatchewan wheat pool. What is his policy? Charlie Givens was the leader of the C.C.F. group in the mock parliament of the University of Saskatchewan during 1938-39.
I would ask some of those members of the wheat pool to look back at the records of the thirties when the farmers of western Canada were insolvent, so were the co-operatives and so were the wheat pools. What government in western Canada backed the Saskatchewan wheat pool financially? It was none other than the Anderson Conservative government. They were the ones who backed the wheat pools at the banks in order to keep their co-operatives in shape to compete with the line elevator companies.
In so far as obtaining money to operate the farm is concerned, we have had such legislation introduced as that which provides cash advances. We know, and it has been said many times by western members in this house, that the farmer finds it very difficult to deliver his wheat. In fact, back in my constituency today there are some farmers who have a one or two bushel quota. Cash advances have helped to put money in these farmers' pockets, but even with cash advances there is a need for the extension of credit to the western farmer.
Our record in 1958 is a pretty good one. Let us look at Alberta. In Alberta in 1958 there were loans disbursed totalling $3,800,336, while in 1957 in Alberta there were only $1,547,000 advanced by the Canadian farm loan board. In Saskatchewan in 1958 this same agency advanced $4,600,000, and in 1957 during the same length of time there were $2,980,000 advanced. When you look at the record you find that this administration advanced double the amount of money through the Canadian farm loan board in Saskatchewan and Alberta, as was advanced the year before. I am very happy to see the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hark-
Aid to Farmers and Fishermen ness) is in his place tonight, and to know that, according to the speech from the throne, a further extension of credit will be granted to the western farmer, and particularly in Alberta and Saskatchewan.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I might now outline what I would recommend. I have discussed this with many of the farmers in my constituency. The farmers in Alberta, and particularly in Bow river, say that they need long term loans at low interest rates. The reason for this need is that they wish to expand their operations, have more land and buy machinery. They need long term loans similar to those granted under the National Housing Act. The second thing is that the farm loan board has been administered from one city in the province of Alberta. The farmers of Alberta with whom I have discussed this would like to see the farm loans administered at various offices throughout the province, just like the National Housing Act loans are administered.
The farmers would like also to see the red tape eliminated, and loans processed as quickly as are the National Housing Act loans. In this way the credit would get out to the farmer quickly, and there would not be so much red tape as they have had to go through by reason of the loans being processed through one particular city in Alberta.
I should be very happy to say a few words on behalf of the farmers in my constituency so far as credit is concerned, because without credit the farmer cannot defeat the cost squeeze from which he is suffering. This is one of the reasons that the farmers have assembled in Saskatchewan, looking forward to this march on Ottawa. I know that these farmers, if they ever come from western Canada, will receive a very courteous hearing from the ministers who sit on the front benches. This is one thing that differentiates the present cabinet ministers from the ministers in the former administration. As an example, I might tell you one little incident that occurred. One of the coal miners in Canmore said he went down to see Mr. C. D. Howe two or three years ago with reference to an extension of the unemployment insurance.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member is straying a bit from the resolution.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is true. This miner was told to return because they would not change the Unemployment Insurance Act just for one coal miner. The same situation

Business of the House
exists so far as meeting ministers is concerned, and so far as the delegates from western Canada are concerned.


Mr. C. F. Kennedy (Colchesier-Hanis):: Mr. Speaker, I see that the time is very limited. May I call it 10 o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: I think if the hon. member draws another breath, he may call it 10 o'clock.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: May I ask the house leader if the order of business for tomorrow is as indicated on Friday evening? If it is, will it be taken in the same sequence, with the supplementary estimates first?


Howard Charles Green: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.