province of British Columbia was not directly represented on the committee which considered the bill. I suggest to the Prime Minister that on account of the importance of Vancouver as a grain port and the possibility of oriental trade passing through that port, British Columbia be given representation either on the board or on the advisory committee.
like to ask in connection with paragraph (e) of subsection 1. A great deal has been heard this afternoon about producers, but very little has been said about consumers, and I should like to make some observations concerning the consumers of British Columbia, and to ask the Prime Minister why that province should be included in the bill. I could see no great harm in its being left out. When one realizes that in the year 1930 the yield in Ontario was over 20,000.000 bushels while in British Columbia it was only a little over 1,000,000 bushels one is at a loss to understand why British Columbia should be included and Ontario left out. Then the point of view of the consumer has not been considered. British Columbia is a consuming province; we consume more than we produce. In ordinary years the poultry industry of our province uses between 8,000,000 and 10,000,000 bushels of wheat from the prairie provinces, but we produce only a little more than 1,000000 bushels. Upon looking over the bill I am wondering what will happen to the poultry producers of the Fraser Valley if a price above the world price is set. I venture to say that we would have an unjust condition if the province of British Columbia were
called upon to pay a set price higher than the world price, when we are shouldered with a freight rate twice as high as that enjoyed by Ontario and other provinces.
You tried to put that over last year, but it was no good. It shows you know very little about poultry business when you start talking about barley. Right now I am talking about something I know something about.
I believe an explanation is due British Columbia indicating why that province is included in the bill. If it is included because it is a wheat producing province, the answer is that we produce only 1,000,000 bushels, and when we compare that small output with an output of 20,000,000 bushels from another province it seems strange that that province should be left out while we are included. Only a few days ago we were complaining about being excluded from a bill, but to-day my complaint is that we are being included and other provinces are being left out. I should like an explanation from the Prime Minister.
British Columbia is included because the British Columbia wheat producers in the Peace River district desire to be included. Substantially speaking, they are producers of wheat across the line dividing Alberta and British Columbia. If the hon. gentleman is speaking for the province of British Columbia and states that these wheat producers desire to have British Columbia excluded from the bill, I am content.
It is all right for the Prime Minister to ask me if I am speaking for the province of British Columbia. Only a few days ago we heard that the attorney general was speaking for that province. I will admit that I cannot speak for British Columbia, but I still say I have not received an answer to my question, namely, why Ontario with a production of 20,000,000 bushels is left out and British Columbia with a much smaller production is included. I hope the bill is in no way designed to control our ports. I would draw the attention of the committee to the fact that in 1933 over 100,000,000 bushels of wheat issued from the Pacific ports as against only 83,000,000 for all other Canadian ports. The decrease in exports of Canadian grain through United States ports has been due to the splendid advantages which Vancouver and New Westminster offer in the shipping of grain.
Like the hon. gentleman I have received telegrams from Vancouver asking that they be given representation on the board, and indicating that they are greatly interested in the exportation of wheat. We have not yet reached that stage, the bill not having been passed, but the representations that have been made will be given every consideration. Ontario is not included in this bill; it is not a producer of wheat for export, but the Peace River valley in British Columbia is exporting wheat. We ascertained that when the five cents a bushel bonus was paid-
If it is thought that British Columbia should not be included in the bill I have no desire to press it unduly, but it was represented to us that the wheat producers in that area should not find themselves in a different position from that of neighbouring producers across the imaginary line that divides British Columbia and Alberta. Those familiar with wheat production in Ontario will not make the suggestion that that comes within the bill at all, or could.
The purpose will be to follow the general principles that governed in connection with the old wheat board in 1919. Distributed over the area where the production takes place, four should represent producers, and the balance might be business men or men engaged in shipping or other matters of that sort.