Substantial support. I am glad the hon. member has raised that question because it reveals one of the difficulties in deciding the matter and the reason why I felt it necessary to have the whole picture before me in order to decide whether the vote was sufficiently representative. Suppose only 8,000 out of all the producers in Canada voted for the scheme and 1,000 voted against it; there might be a question whether enough producers voted in favour of it. I would think not.
Since we are on the marketing board and the west has occupied most of the evening, perhaps I may be given a few minutes to discuss the interests of the maritime provinces. I have in my hand the Canada Gazette, extra edition, Ottawa, Friday, January 18, copy of an order in council touching the establishment of the eastern marketing board for potatoes, including Ontario, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia. I find in this order in council under clause 3, subsection (b) :
The scheme has with virtual unanimity been endorsed by forty-eight meetings of producers and dealers held at central points throughout the producing areas of the four provinces.
I claim that the statement "the scheme has with virtual unanimity been endorsed" is a misstatement and should not appear in an order in council unless the minister has had an opportunity of satisfying himself as to its correctness. How many meetings were held in New Brunswick, when, and by whom?
As a matter of fact we are all out of order in discussing this question for the length of time we have; it does not come under publications. So far as the eastern Canada potato scheme is concerned; it comes under a different category. Each provincial government sent representatives to wait on the dominion marketing board with the sanction of the provincial governments behind them. One of the provisions made in the marketing act is that if representations are made by local boards from different provinces with the sanction of the provincial governments they may be considered as sufficiently representative, although in addition to that certain other representations were made.
I might say in connection with this potato marketing board that when it came into operation the price of potatoes I believe was twenty cents a barrel, and even one of the papers that was most critical of the scheme and of the whole act admitted in its marketing news on at least one occasion that the advance in price had been due to the setting up of the board. I believe the market price of potatoes was fifty cents instead of twenty.
It is fifty-five cents for an eighty pound bag at Montreal, and there is no price fixed at the place of shipment. Your board has fixed no price, therefore you cannot claim the credit. But that is not the point I wish to raise. I shall discuss this more fully under the proper item, but I am asking this question now to give the minister time to get the information so that he can answer it when we come to it again. I feel that the minister cannot answer offhand and I am not pressing for a reply at the moment. But I want to know the number of meetings held in New Brunswick and where they were
held, showing unanimity of potato growers in New Brunswick in regard to coming under this scheme.
I shall be glad to get that information for the hon. member. I believe the committee will agree that there has been a fair amount of time spent in the discussion of this subject, which was not really in order, but for which I am as much to blame as anyone else, if not more. I move that we rise and report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Before the committee rises I would ask the minister a question. There is $20,000 appropriated to Alberta, $20,000 to Saskatchewan and $10,000 to Manitoba. Has any sum at all been appropriated for Ontario? Or will there be?
-that the minister has spoken so much about a "scheme," a scheme that smells like rotten eggs. We do not need any scheme; we want a policy, a policy to assist the farmers in the sale of their products. I will not insist upon saying any more about it, because I shall have other opportunities. But I wish to praise the minister for one thing, for the publication of a bulletin setting out the many uses of honey, which was issued after I had mentioned the decrease in home consumption of honey. He directed his staff to write a lot about the different uses of honey, and I congratulate him upon that. I do not say that I congratulate him upon his whole policy, but I think this was a wise move on his part, and that he should publish such pamphlets about every kind of food product grown by the farmers-