Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the house of a change which will be made by the Canadian wheat board in the basis of the specified acreage upon which general delivery quotas are based. From time to time producers, farm organizations and others interested in land utilization in the prairie provinces have expressed the view that some encouragement should be given to individual producers to increase their acreages of soil improving forage crops. They believe that such a development in suitable areas within the prairie provinces would be constructive from the standpoint of the agricultural industry. It has been further indicated that a measure of encouragement would be accomplished if acreages seeded to such soil improving crops were included in the specified acreages upon which the board's general delivery quotas are based.

The wheat board has given careful consideration to this matter and thinks there is merit in including soil improving forage crops in its specified acreage, and this change will be effective for the 1957-58 crop year.

I might add that at the present time specified

acreage consists of acreage which producers seeded to wheat other than Durums, oats, barley, rye, and land in summer fallow. I believe that this change approved by the wheat board is a constructive one and in the long-range interests of western agriculture.

Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce arising out of the statement that specified acreage for quota purposes will include forage crops. Is this policy being conducted to encourage a shift of acreage from grain to forage crops? Has any consideration been given to adopting a Canadian soil bank program?

Mr. Howe (Pori Arthur):

Mr. Speaker, the change in the basis for quotas was made at the request of farm organizations. The purpose was not to penalize those farmers who believe that soil building crops are the proper adjunct to their farming methods. There is no consideration being given at the moment to setting up a soil bank program such as the one recently adopted in the United States. [Later:]

Mr. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):

May

I ask a question which could be answered either by the Minister of Transport or by the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I raise it as a question supplementary to those already asked on this matter. Has any action been taken to bring together the conference on the distribution of box cars and the transportation of grain which was recommended by the agriculture committee last year?

Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

Mr. Speaker, the recommendation was not clear that any particular person was to call the conference. I have not called it, and I have not been called to it. So I assume it has not taken place.

Mr. Dinsdale:

Does the government not take any responsibility for seeing that the recommendations of parliamentary committees are carried out?

Mr. Dinsdale:

In view of the silence from the treasury benches in regard to my previous

Inquiries of the Ministry question I should like to ask the Prime Minister if he would explain just what the purpose and functions of the agricultural committee are, and what action may be expected when that committee makes recommendations.

Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):

May I

suggest to the Prime Minister that the matter is now being left in a very equivocal and unsatisfactory position? What I would like to know, and I gather my colleague does also, is what happens after the report comes in. Is that the end of it all?

Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):

There are times when a report recommends the introduction of legislation, and that kind of recommendation is considered. If the government feels that it should take the responsibility of recommending the type of legislation reported upon, it does so. Various kinds of reports are made. There were two reports today asking that committees be authorized to sit while the house was sitting, and the house gave approval to that recommendation. All I want to infer is this: the fact that a committee suggests that consideration be given to matters involving expenditure of public funds means, interpreted in constitutional practice, that it recommends that consideration should be given by the government to the advisability of taking responsibility for recommending that kind of expenditure to parliament. Consideration is given, and if the government comes to the conclusion that it should take the responsibility of recommending that expenditure, the recommendation is made. Hon. members will know that the committee, no more than this house, cannot initiate decisions with respect to the expenditure of public funds.

Mr. Argue:

Can the Prime Minister say whether he has considered the recommendation made by this committee last year?