February 20, 1935

LIB
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member could not do that; the resolution already appears on the order paper in his name. However it is not for me to suggest how it should be done.

Topic:   BACK-TO-THE-LAND MOVEMENT
Permalink
CON

George Halsey Perley (Minister Without Portfolio)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Sir GEORGE PERLEY:

Who seconded the motion?

Topic:   BACK-TO-THE-LAND MOVEMENT
Permalink
LIB
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

I have the name of Mr. Reid.

Topic:   BACK-TO-THE-LAND MOVEMENT
Permalink
CON

Robert James Manion (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MANION:

May I suggest the resolution be withdrawn on the understanding that it will be referred to the committee on agriculture?

Topic:   BACK-TO-THE-LAND MOVEMENT
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

Is the hon. member

content?

ISir George Perley.]

Topic:   BACK-TO-THE-LAND MOVEMENT
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette

Liberal

Mr. BRADETTE:

Yes, on the understanding that it will go to the committee on agriculture.

Motion (Mr. Bradette) withdrawn.

Topic:   BACK-TO-THE-LAND MOVEMENT
Permalink

SOCKEYE SALMON

PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION

IND

Alan Webster Neill

Independent

Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Alberni) moved:

That, in the opinion of this house, the section of the special fishery regulations for the province of British Columbia which prohibits the export of sockeye salmon in a fresh condition, is against public policy and should be rescinded.

He said: Mr. Speaker, this is the first time that this motion has been called, although I have always been ready to go on with it. As this is the last time it can be called this session I would suggest that the minister might have the courtesy to allow the motion to go to the committee on marine and fisheries.

I have just time to put the situation in a few sentences. The regulation to which I object prevents the fishermen from sending fresh sockeye salmon for sale to Seattle or on the American side when the price is higher there; but when the price is lower on the Canadian side it does not prevent the canners from bringing fish in from the American side. It is a very onesided policy. The canners, when the price is low on the American side, freely bring fish in, but when the price is lower in British Columbia than it is on the American side our fishermen have not the privilege of shipping out their fish. That is a gross discrimination against the right of a man to sell his product in the best market.

Many years ago, when this rule was first made, three main arguments were advanced in its favour, all of which have been removed by changed conditions since. The principal one was this: It was argued that because the Americans were allowed to use traps and seines and we in British Columbia below the mouth of the Fraser river were allowed to use gill nets only, it was necessary to have this embargo because theirs was a cheaper method of catching the fish. But both of these conditions have ceased to exist; for last year the United States passed a law prohibiting traps in the state of Washington and adjacent waters, and two years ago in this country we allowed the operation of seines in our section of these waters. So that argument has been totally done away with, and there is nothing left now but the condition that it is a onesided thing. Hitherto the price has always been higher on the

Mining Industry-Mr. Campbell

American side, but during the last few years the contrary occasionally took place and the canners did not hesitate to bring in fish to the extent of hundreds of thousands of fish, 208,800 fish coming in in 1934, and that cut the price down to our local fishermen; but when the reverse is the case and there is a chance for our fishermen to get a higher price in Seattle, this embargo prevents it. The more or less plausible reasons that were advanced in favour of this embargo at the time it was proposed have been done away with.

As it is almost six o'clock I cannot proceed further with my argument, and I would therefore ask the minister to allow the resolution to go to the fisheries committee where it can be thoroughly threshed out.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Reid

Liberal

Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):

I join with the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) in suggesting that this question be sent for consideration to the fisheries committee. It is a very important question and time will not permit us now to develop the argument we would like to develop. I hope the minister will therefore accept the suggestion that this be sent to the fisheries committee.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
CON

Grote Stirling (Minister of Fisheries; Minister of National Defence)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. GROTE STIRLING (Acting Minister of Fisheries):

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Comox-AIberni (Mr. Neill) introduces a resolution which suggests that this house should direct that a certain course be taken with regard to a regulation. That regulation was first instituted in 1894, but it was very considerably modified in 1932 for reasons which then existed. These regulations are due to come up for their annual revision in from two to three weeks' time, and at present suggested amendments are being received from the industry. I question the wisdom of asking the House of Commons after only seven minutes' discussion to give any direction to the Department of Fisheries with regard to what it should or should not do. I have, however, no particular reason for objecting to the suggestion that the matter should be referred to the committee on marine and fisheries. It can be discussed there and the committee can report as it sees fit.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
IND

Alan Webster Neill

Independent

Mr. NEILL:

I will amend my motion to refer the matter to the committee on marine and fisheries.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

I do not understand that the mover can amend his own motion.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
LIB

William Duff

Liberal

Mr. DUFF:

The minister can move an amendment.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member cannot amend his own motion.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
CON

Harry James Barber

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. H. J. BARBER (Fraser Valley):

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat in favour of the resolution that has been moved by the hon. member for Comox-Albemi (Mr. Neill). I think the matter is one that perhaps should be discussed by the committee on marine and fisheries, and I would therefore move that the matter be referred to that committee.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink
?

Mr. FR ASER@Cariboo

I beg to second that motion, Mr. Speaker.

Topic:   SOCKEYE SALMON
Subtopic:   PROPOSED RESCISSION OP REGULATION PROHIBITING EXPORT IN FRESH CONDITION
Permalink

Amendment agreed to. Motion as amended agreed to.


February 20, 1935