June 22, 1951


Motion agreed to, bill considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.


RETURNED SOLDIERS INSURANCE ACT

PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO BENEFICIARY RESTRICTIONS, APPORTIONMENT OF INSURANCE, ETC.

LIB

Hugues Lapointe (Minister of Veterans Affairs)

Liberal

Hon. Hugues Lapointe (Minister of Veterans Affairs) moved

that the house go into committee to consider Bill No. 389, to amend the Returned Soldiers Insurance Act.

Topic:   RETURNED SOLDIERS INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO BENEFICIARY RESTRICTIONS, APPORTIONMENT OF INSURANCE, ETC.
Permalink

Motion agreed to, bill considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.



The house in committee of supply, Mr. Dion in the chair.


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


Marketing service- 34. Dairy products, $716,839.


PC

John Alpheus Charlton

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Charlton:

Could the minister give us some information as to the present production of butter and cheese as compared with last year?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. Gardiner:

During the last few weeks butter production has been up slightly week by week as compared with a year ago, but the production of butter for the period from the beginning of the year to the present time is down. The departmental officials estimate that if production continues as it has gone for the last few weeks it will be probably a little higher than the production a year ago.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
PC
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. Gardiner:

Cheese production has been running along somewhat lower than what it was a year ago, but the production was not high either last year or this.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink

Item agreed to. Marketing service- 37. Livestock and livestock products, $1,283,653.


PC

John Alpheus Charlton

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Charlton:

What is the chance of getting a contract with or selling some bacon to Great Britain this year?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. Gardiner:

We have an understanding

with Britain that if there is any bacon available at the price offered, it will be purchased for them. But at the present time there is no indication that there will be any bacon available. The price is about ten cents higher than the British price offered would permit of our paying.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
PC

John Alpheus Charlton

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Charlton:

The government subsidy

brings the amount up quite considerably. Has the British price not been raised since?

4544

Supply-Agriculture

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. Gardiner:

Not to our knowledge. No

offers have been made of any higher price; not to my knowledge. It is just possible that if we had any to sell and if we were to attempt to sell it to the British, we might be able to get a higher price than they offered some time ago. But we are consuming the pork as fast as it is being produced and put on the market.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
PC

John Alpheus Charlton

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Charlton:

How much pork has been

exported to the United States?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. Gardiner:

Very little. It is a negligible quantity. It is only an amount which goes across for certain purposes. We get just about as much back for other purposes. On balance, we might say that there is nothing at all passed over to the United States.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
SC

John Horne Blackmore

Social Credit

Mr. Blackmore:

Will the minister tell the

committee why it is that we are not producing any more pork than we are producing? Surely in a country like Canada we should be able to produce pork for export. What would be the reason why we are not producing as much as we were producing in 1944?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink

June 22, 1951