May 8, 1939

LIB

Walter Edward Foster (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member can do so only if he has the unanimous consent of the house.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Agreed.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

Walter Edward Foster (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Do I understand the

hon. member has unanimous consent?

Some lion. MEMBERS: Agreed.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William John Ward

Liberal

Mr. WARD:

Thanks. The first table is

a statement of the value of manufactures:

Gross value of manufactures in certain Ontario cities and towns

Locality 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931Toronto .. $44,963,922 $58,415,498 $154,306,948 $371,090,034 $426,583,692Hamilton .. 14,044,521 17,122,346 55,125,946 109,803,883 125,164,616Kitchener .. 1.825,722 3,307,513 9,266,188 27,688,420 34,991,982Woodstock .. 3,089,695 2,508,247 3,200,216 7,910,256 8.147.999Windsor .. 953,030 1,260,947 3,771,706 16,113,891 13,686,998St. Catharines. .. .. 2,444,680 2,070,543 6.024.217 11,647,843 13,387,502Chatham .. 2,116,161 2,714,977 5,023,560 20,618,655 8,645,517Guelph .. 2,973,927 3,689,183 7,392,336 9,592,823 11.654,289Brantford .. 4,280,999 5,564,695 15,866.229 28.104,005 19,422,441Dundas .. 664,709 1,017,150 1,308,388 2,371,295 1,752,648Galt .. 2,621,310 2,225,343 5,252,600 12,108,176 9.645,225Ingersoll .. 1,242,206 2,515,469 3,113,495 2,967,829 2,364,360London .. 8,225,557 8,122,185 16,273,999 34,988,354 39,126,557Peterborough.. .. .. 2,594,996 3,789,164 10,633.119 28,214,981 23,530,247Sarnia .. 976,508 2,645,797 4,018,901 20.916,723 24,870,447Stratford .. 1,491,462 1,935,176 5,133,840 8,325,589 9,053,059Waterloo .. 969,835 1,052,177 2.812,595 4,953,159 4,546,771Welland .. 233,738 152,087 1,375,374 14,571,857 11,269,533

XMr. Ward.]

Prairie Farm Assistance

The next table gives the populations:

Populations of cities and towns, decennial censuses 1871-1931

Populations

City or town-Province 1871 1881 1891 1901 1911 1921 1931Toronto, Ont .. 59,000 96,196 181,215 209,892 381,833 521,893 631.207Hamilton, Ont .. 26,880 30.661 4S.959 52.634 81.969 114.151 155.547London, Ont .. 18.000 27.867 31.977 37,976 46,300 60.959 71,148Windsor, Ont . . 4.253 6.561 10.322 12,153 17.829 38,591 63.108Kitchener, Ont .. 2,743 4,054 7.425 9,747 15.196 21,763 30,793Brantford, Ont . . 8.107 9,616 12,753 16.619 23.132 29,440 30.107St. Catharines. Ont . . 7,864 9,631 9.170 9,946 12,484 19,881 24.753Peterborough, Ont .. 4.611 6,812 9.717 12.886 18,360 20,994 22,327Guelph, Ont . . 6,878 9,890 10,537 11,496 15,175 18,128 21,075Sarnia, Ont .. 2,929 3,874 6.692 8,176 9,947 14.877 18.191Stratford, Ont . . 4.313 8,239 9,500 9,959 12,946 16,094 17.742Chatham, Ont .. 5.873 7,873 9.052 9.068 10.770 13,256 14,569Galt. Ont .. 3.827 5,187 7,535 7.866 10,299 13,216 14.006Woodstock. Ont .. 3,982 5.373 8.612 8,833 9.320 9,935 11,395Welland, Ont .. 1,110 1,870 2.035 1,863 5,318 8,654 10,709Orillia, Ont .. 1,322 2,910 4.752 4.907 6.828 7,631 8,183Waterloo, Ont .. 1.594 2,066 2.941 3,537 4.359 5,883 8,095Smiths Falls, Ont .. 1,150 2,087 3,864 5,155 6,370 6,790 7,108

We now come to the income tax. I do not want to delay the taking of the vote to-night. Toronto, a city with perhaps 700.000 people, in the year 1938-39 paid in income tax $48,884,000. Winnipeg, with a population of about 240,000, say one-third the size of Toronto, paid income tax amounting to only $3,993,000. Why? Because all our wealth comes down here to eastern Canada. The west has been the milch cow that has built the industry of eastern Canada and has brought about the vulgar display of wealth that we find in the cities of eastern Canada. It is vulgar to those of us who come from the parts where the average income of our farmers is perhaps not more than $400 a year. In Oshawa about a year ago a strike was called by people who were getting an average wage of $1,400. I refer to the General Motors' strike. Yet we ask our farmers to continue growing wheat or feeding hogs and raising cattle on a basis of an annual income of $400. I like farming; I think it is the finest vocation in the world, but the disparity is not right; it is too great.

I said at the outset that I wanted to thank the Minister of Agriculture on behalf of my constituents for the effort he has put forth to ameliorate our condition. But I was terribly disappointed when he modified the acreage bonus bill. I do not think that was necessary. I do not think it was necessary in order to get it through this house. No evidence has been given to me that the house would not support the acreage bonus as submitted at the outset. I do not think there is any evidence to support the rumour that the house would not have supported an 80-cent initial price for wheat. The Minister of Agriculture told us that for the last thirty years the price of wheat had averaged 95 cents a bushel.

I have not heard so much superficial theoretical nonsense talked in this house on any subject this session-unless it was the two days' speech of the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Massey)-as I have heard on this question. Why on earth should we have to go to Professor Hope and a dozen other sources of doubtful information to prove the condition of agriculture in western Canada or the cost of growing wheat? All we have to do is to look up some of the records of the mortgage debt of western Canada to prove the condition the farmers of that section of the country are in. If the average price of wheat for the past thirty years has been 95 cents, and the present situation is the condition in which it has left us, then I say 70 cents is only half enough. If these figures prove anything, the price should be at least $1.50. According to the brief submitted to the Winnipeg conference last fall, the mortgage debt on lands and chattels in Manitoba is estimated at $92,730,000; which, with 19,500 farms reporting mortgage debts, means an average of $4,702 per mortgaged farm, or 65 per cent of the total farm land value of Manitoba.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

What is it in Ontario?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William John Ward

Liberal

Mr. WARD:

For the moment I am dealing with western Canada. According to the Saskatchewan brief, the burden of agricultural indebtedness in that province as at the end of 1937 was $482,000,000, which amounts to $15 an acre of the crop land of that province. I hope the house appreciates these figures, which indicate a debt of $15 an acre on the cultivated land of Saskatchewan. That is an average of $7,000 per mortgaged farm, and 82 per cent of the farms of Saskatchewan

Prairie Farm Assistance

are under mortgage. The Saskatchewan brief goes on to point out that not more than five per cent of the farms of that province are free of debt.

So. Mr. Speaker, if with 95 cent wheat for the last thirty years that condition has been brought about in Saskatchewan, I want to say to the government and in particular to the Minister of Agriculture that in this legislation we are far short of meeting the question of the solvency of western Canada. I farm one of the finest pieces of nature's soil, as I think perhaps the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crerar) will agree. Perhaps there is very little land in the world equal to that of the Dauphin valley, where I farm three-quarters of a section of that rich, alluvial soil. I would say that over a period of twenty years my average yield has been not less than thirty-six to thirty-seven bushels to the acre. The other day the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe) was boasting about his yields of wheat. I have frequently cut fifty bushels to the acre and yields have gone as high as sixty-five bushels in my district. I have kept accurate records of the exact cost of growing wheat on my farm, and there has not been one year since the war when I have grown wheat for less than 83 cents a bushel. At times the cost has gone over SI. If with yields like that I cannot grow wheat for less than 90 or 95 cents, how in the name of common sense can the average farmer throughout the length and breadth of western Canada grow wheat for 70 cents? It "can't be did;" that's all. I do not think I would be fair to my constituents if I accepted this measure as being satisfactory to us. It will not bring about the hoped for solvency in my part of the country.

In conclusion, I want to say to the government and to all parties in this house that I fully appreciate that this administration has gone further along the road of lowering tariffs than any other government since confederation. I think I can make that statement without fear of contradiction. I believe the trade agreements between Canada, Great Britain and the IJnited States constituted the greatest step towards freeing our trade ever made during any one session of a Canadian parliament. For that I am grateful. I believe it is going to do a great deal towards improving our economy and that of western Canada in particular. We see how our external trade has increased since the first of this year, no doubt largely as a result of the trade agreement, so we should be grateful to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King)

lMr. Ward.]

and those associated with him in the negotiation of it. But if we are going to continue to play Santa Claus to the manufacturers of Canada to the extent of tariffs ranging from 7i per cent to 30 per cent, as we are still doing I say to the Minister of Agriculture that no government can escape the bonus-ing of agriculture. For fifty years the farmers of this country have been sitting on their rights, while the manufacturers were in the saddle. Why, there were no farmers in this house until 1911, when the first independent farmer candidate to enter the House of Commons came from the constituency which I have the honour to represent. Until about that time the manufacturers were the government of this country. It is only within the last few years that the farmers have made their voice heard in this house. To raise the economic and social level of agriculture to the level enjoyed by 75 or 80 per cent of the people in our cities and large towns we would need $2 wheat. It could not be done with less.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

What about Michael Clark and a few of the other farmers who were here? Was not Michael Clark a farmer?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William John Ward

Liberal

Mr. WARD:

He did not come here as a farmer.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

What about Senator Douglas?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

Does it follow that if a man is not a farmer he is a manufacturer?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William John Ward

Liberal

Mr. WARD:

I realize that it is not within the power of a member of parliament to offer amendments to these bills. I should like to do so, and I would if I could, because I am not at all satisfied. I know these measures are not sufficient to ensure the solvency of the people whom I represent. If the acreage bonus had been left as it was, beginning at fifteen bushels to the acre with two bushels reserved for seed, it would have applied to a fair portion of the constituency which I represent. I want to remind the minister of what I said previously, that while I do represent a very rich portion of Manitoba, which produces large crops, where we harvest forty bushels to the acre, we farm land worth 840, $50 and $60 an acre, on which we pay from $1 to $1.25 an acre in taxes. This land costs much more to farm than the lighter land costs. The minister was quite correct the other day when he said you could farm light land, so long as it was not pure sand, much more economically than you could farm heavy land, but I am not at all satisfied with this measure. I do not know what I am going to do about it.

Prairie Farm Assistance

I do not want to vote against the government, because it has done a great many things that ought to commend and, I am sure, do commend themselves to every hon. member, I care not what his politics may be. I do not want to have to vote against such a government, but this is a very, very important matter to my constituents. If they have to sell their wheat for 53 or 54 cents a bushel, or perhaps as low as 46 or 47 cents a bushel, they are not going to meet the cost of production. I can produce wheat as cheaply as any farmer in Manitoba, and I know I would have to have at least an additional 15 cents in order to make it pay. The other day a man said to me in a critical way, "Why do you keep on growing wheat?" As a matter of fact I do not. At one time my annual harvest was five or six thousand bushels of wheat. That is not the case any more. I used to seed 175 and 180 acres; now I seed 30 to 50 acres. If I had continued to put a large acreage in wheat from 1930 on,

I would not own my farm to-day; I would have lost it. But we switched to other things; we used our heads a bit, and we have managed to remain solvent.

I wonder if I could not appeal to the minister; I wonder if he would not even now consider raising the acreage bonus to where it was previously. I believe if he does, I can go back and sell the idea or plan to my constituents. I will do the best I can. But with the acreage bonus where it is and the price where it is, I find myself just where I cannot very well support the government.

Miss AGNES C. MACPHAIL (Grey-Bruce): I want to speak very briefly. I do not consume very much time of the house, and I am sure if every hon. member spoke as briefly we would have no difficulty in finishing, and would not have all this worry about prorogation in time for the visit of their majesties.

I wish to say only two or three things. First, I listened with great interest to the speech of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), and while listening to speeches delivered afterwards, I concluded that some of his facts were -well, how can we say this?-carefully chosen. He made such a good case of it and his argument was so strong that I would have been prepared to go much farther than 70 cents. It seemed to me that, after building up a case as ably as he did, 70 cents was an anticlimax, or a terrible effort for only ten cents a bushel. But I suppose western Canada will be glad they are getting the extra ten cents, although some people in the west may

think it is just the difference between drowning in twenty feet of water and drowning in ten feet. They are over their heads in either case.

It seems to me that it is always the Ontario members who bring me to my feet in these questions. The hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Furniss) said that in his opinion the eastern farmer had borne as heavy a burden in regard to tariff as did the western farmer. All hon. members know I am not in favour of a high tariff, but any person who is familiar with any of the facts must know that what the hon. member says is not true The figures given by the hon. member for Dauphin (Mr. Ward) established the fact that that statement is not true, that prices of products of Ontario farmers are always at a higher level-I am talking about the whole field of production-than prices in western Canada.

At the conference held at Montreal an excellent brief was presented by Premier Bracken of Manitoba. He built up a long and elaborate case, much longer than could be used here, to show that between 1901 and 1931 the amount of land farmed in the five eastern provinces decreased by 8 per cent and the population in eastern Canada increased by 150 per cent, whereas in western Canada in the same years the amount of land farmed increased by 1,000 per cent. There are one or two paragraphs which could be read, if I had time. If we had time to go through this section of the brief, it would be clear that the rapid building up of eastern urban Canada in those years was as a result of the expansion of farming in western Canada. And it is also true that western Canada's expansion was built on an export market. Therefore the west has suffered very much by having always to buy in a protected market and to sell its great surplus of wheat, amounting to possibly two-thirds of the total production, on the markets of the world. The prairie provinces would have been very much farther ahead had they been a country by themselves and not tied to the industrial east.

I think the farmer in eastern Canada has suffered on account of the tariff, but to nothing like the same extent. On account of the great distances, western farmers pay high freight rates, they sell on world markets and buy in protected markets. They have received less for what they have sold, and have paid more for what they have had to buy. Those facts are perfectly clear, so that I say the western farmer need not apologize for himself. Due to him the industrial east has developed very rapidly. Only a little while

Prairie Farm Assistance

ago I was saying to the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Euler) that even Kitchener and Waterloo have grown, not so much on account of the tariff as on account of western Canada which has bought the industrial products they have produced.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

One could hardly blame eastern Canada for the long distances; they did not make the distances.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
UFOL

Agnes Campbell Macphail

United Farmers of Ontario-Labour

Miss MACPHAIL:

No, but they punished the west for those distances.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

Oh, no, it has punished itself.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
UFOL

Agnes Campbell Macphail

United Farmers of Ontario-Labour

Miss MACPHAIL:

If western Canada had dominated the policy of Canada as eastern Canada did, that difference in distance would have been taken into consideration to a much greater extent than it has been.

I turn to that part of the brief presented by Premier Bracken, in which he dealt with loss of farm income in western Canada. He said that in the seven years following 1930 the total farm income of the prairie provinces declined by twenty-five hundred million dollars, compared with the seven years prior to that time. That is a great deal of money, I should think-twenty-five hundred million dollars! If the manufacturers in eastern Canada had lost that much money, something w'ould have been done about it long before this. We can imagine the howls there would have been-well, one does not even like to contemplate them.

_ In fact, agriculture in all parts of Canada is not paid anything like the proportion of national income it should be paid. In this same brief Premier Bracken said that when we realize that nearly one-third of the people of Canada, w'ho are actually engaged in farming, receive only one-sixth of the national income, it is not a situation we can look on with any degree of happiness. I am not using his exact words, but that is the essence of what he has said.

The other night I agreed entirely with what the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) said. I think we ought to have a two-price wheat policy. The one-third that is consumed in Canada should sell at a price comparable with the general price level, and the loss on the two-thirds sold abroad absorbed to some extent by the Canadian government. I feel quite sure we are going to have a two-price agricultural policy, one price for domestic consumption and one for world consumption.

The hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Fumiss) said that the farmers of Ontario or of any other part of Canada could not say that so much of their product was for the

world market and so much for the home market. Of course they can. When they get dominion marketing legislation, and when they are not only the producers but the processors and marketers they can and will do it.

I can imagine many Ontario farmers will take the view that the west has everything and the east gets nothing. But that is an uninformed view. However, an uninformed view is one that prevails at election times and it might be well for me, if I were playing politics, to take the position taken by some eastern farmers, that the west is getting much more than it deserves. I do not believe that. I think the west, has suffered to an extent which is affecting not only the west but the whole Canadian economy.

I do not pretend to know much about the wheat question, other than it is a matter affecting the whole of Canada. If we cannot get back the markets that we had, we are facing a terrible time in Canada; there is no doubt about that. Those are problems which cannot be laid upon the shoulders of westerners only; we shall have to bear them together. I want to say again what I said the other afternoon in connection with another bill, that the greatest calamity which can happen eastern Canada is to have 30,000,000 acres now devoted to the export, if not of wheat, at least of all grains, turned into the production of products which eastern Canada specializes in now. If that happens, there will be a collapse in all agricultural prices. That is the way in which eastern farmers should be thinking at the moment. At least we should be able to understand and sympathize with that portion of agriculture which has borne the brunt of our loss in export markets.

It seems a sad thing to me that we should go on saying that we have a great surplus of wheat, possibly a carry-over of 100.000.000 bushels in Canada and an estimated world carry-over of 1,150,000,000 bushels, and yet in a civilized country like Canada and in a fairly civilized world there are great numbers of people who are not getting enough to eat. I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Massey) in his very much discussed criticism that there are people in Canada who are not well fed, and that these people are dying in numbers none of us knows. I think he was more right in his statement than was the Minister of Labour (Mr. Rogers) When he quoted an official in British Columbia as saying that the poorer and more destitute we are, the healthier we will be. That is a curious attitude.

Prairie Farm Assistance

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

Ross Wilfred Gray (Chief Government Whip; Whip of the Liberal Party)

Liberal

Mr. GRAY:

Not in the numbers the hon. member gave.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
UFOL

Agnes Campbell Macphail

United Farmers of Ontario-Labour

Miss MACPHAIL:

The numbers are

unknown, but I know one can hardly pick up a paper without reading that someone has been picked out of a river or from the side of the road or from some other place, and no one knows who he is. What did all these people die of, and who are they? I am sure there are many of them. We have too much wheat, yet people are not getting enough to eat. Women generally have more to do with food than men, and we appreciate its value.

I am sure that most of us were brought up by careful mothers *who saw that we ate the leavings.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
?

An hon. MEMBER:

The crusts.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
UFOL

Agnes Campbell Macphail

United Farmers of Ontario-Labour

Miss MACPHAIL:

The crusts. It has always seemed to me it is a reproach upon this parliament that we should have this tremendous amount of wheat when there are people on and off relief who undoubtedly are not eating sufficient food.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

It is not wheat that they want.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE
Sub-subtopic:   PERCENTAGE DEDUCTION FROM GRAINS MARKETED IN SPRING WHEAT AREA-PROVISION FOR ACREAGE PAYMENT
Permalink

May 8, 1939