Mr. GROTE STIRLING (Yale):
Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to this amendment entirely. My main reason is that there is no such body as the Horticultural Council of Canada, and I suggest that it is not reasonable to insert a wrong description. There is a body whose name is the Canadian Horticultural Council. I am further opposed to the amendment because it cuts right across the main object of the section, which was to facilitate the creation of grades which are not included in the Fruit Act. To refer this matter to a body such as the Canadian Horticultural Council may result in wery considerable delay, as that council is composed of the representatives of the fruit and vegetable interests all over Canada and it is only at the annual meeting that matters such as this are considered. This very matter has been discussed at considerable length in the conventions of the fruit growers' associations in
different parts of the Dominion; it has also been discussed at the annual meeting of the Canadian Horticultural Council. Matters such as this are frequently discussed between the fruit interests of America and of Canada. The fruit growers are perfectly satisfied with the clause as originally drawn, and I do not think it would be in their interests that the Horticultural Council of Canada should be brought into consultation, even if the name was correct. But my main reason for opposing the amendment is that it would be inserting in the bill reference to a body which does not exist.
Topic: FRUIT ACT AMENDMENT BILL SENATE AMENDMENT