Albert C. (Bert) CADIEU

CADIEU, Albert C. (Bert)

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)
Birth Date
June 28, 1903
Deceased Date
October 31, 1990
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bert_Cadieu
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=5477b234-7b2d-4a38-9cd9-31b2826497c8&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
contractor, farmer, rancher

Parliamentary Career

March 31, 1958 - April 19, 1962
PC
  Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)
June 18, 1962 - February 6, 1963
PC
  Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)
April 8, 1963 - September 8, 1965
PC
  Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)
November 8, 1965 - April 23, 1968
PC
  Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)
June 25, 1968 - September 1, 1972
PC
  Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)
July 8, 1974 - March 26, 1979
PC
  Meadow Lake (Saskatchewan)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 34 of 35)


March 27, 1962

Mr. A. C. Cadieu (Meadow Lake):

I would also like to commend the hon. member for Yukon for bringing this bill before the house. Anyone who has done considerable travelling in northern Canada can see the real need for the bill.

As a representative of a far northern riding and having had the opportunity recently of making an extended tour of the north, right up to the Arctic, I have seen the rapid growth that is taking place in that area. It would do a lot of hon. members good to see the development in progress in the north, and accompanying it the increase in population.

I also want to commend the hon. member for bringing the bill before the house in order to give the franchise to the people of Keewatin and Franklin districts. Returning to the present bill I, as one who represents a large population of Indian people, can fully realize what it has meant to those people to have a representative in the upper house. I know the great task which the hon. senator who represents that vast population has to do, and I can see great possibilities in the Eskimo population having a similar representative.

I know the hon. member for Kootenay West was talking about saving money, but when

one looks at the vastness of the north country and understands that these people want better representation than what they have at present, then his argument does not bear much weight. In conclusion I would like to go on record as supporting Bill C-28.

Topic:   BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT RESPECTING SENATE REPRESENTATION
Full View Permalink

January 29, 1962

Mr. Cadieu:

I am glad to have the opportunity of participating in this debate because I have had so many requests for acreage payments during travels through my constituency. I told my constituents I was sure the government would not let them down.

I know I shall not be permitted to list the many sound pieces of legislation pertaining to agriculture introduced by the government under the great leadership of our Prime Minister, the Right Hon. John G. Diefenbaker. He is very highly respected and I can assure you that my constituents appreciate the co-operation we have had from the former minister of agriculture, the Hon. D. S. Harkness, and from our present Minister of Agriculture who is held in the greatest esteem throughout the dominion.

As all the western members with the exception of one from the three prairie provinces made strong representations seeking these acreage payments I was quite confident in telling my constituents that I was sure they would not be let down, particularly in a year such as this. As these representations favoured the two-price system they agreed that this

Supply-Agriculture

was the fairest way it would be paid. When one looks at how the acreage payments are made, he can easily see how the present government is trying to protect the family farms. The fact is that out of a total of 223,994 permit holders 179,951 are under 500 acres per permit, leaving only 44,043 over that amount.

The farmers in my constituency were very severely struck by drought, except in a few small areas. This made things very difficult that year, and this measure will certainly be greatly appreciated. Many farmers will be receiving the full benefit of prairie farm assistance. There are a great number just about on the line, who went over the 12 bushels, and I am sure that they, as well as those farmers who were under this amount, will very much appreciate these acreage payments.

I had the pleasure of having our Minister of Agriculture visit my constituency. I am more than happy with the wonderful job he did when we were faced with one of the worst drought conditions we have ever experienced. We very much appreciate the quick action taken by the minister and his department in alleviating the difficulties which might have led to a real panic on the livestock market. He took a great interest in the movement of grain and feed. The action of the minister and his department levelled the whole thing off and we did not run into any panic. Everything went along quite smoothly. I can assure hon. members that the farmers in my constituency, and all western farmers, very much appreciate what the government has done on their behalf.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Full View Permalink

April 17, 1961

Mr. A. C. Cadieu (Meadow Lake):

May I

ask the Prime Minister whether he is able to report on the latest developments in regard to the situation created by the withholding of the royal assent by the lieutenant governor of Saskatchewan.

Topic:   SASKATCHEWAN
Subtopic:   RESERVATION OF LEGISLATION RESPECTING MINING CONTRACTS
Full View Permalink

August 9, 1960

Mr. Cadieu:

Mr. Chairman, as a farmer and one who represents a large farming community I feel it is my duty to take part in the debate on this very worth-while item. Many farmers in my constituency, as well as people in all walks of life, will be very happy at the announcement made by the Prime Minister yesterday. Acreage payments will be very well received and, I might add, are greatly needed at this time by a large number of farmers. I am most pleased that the Prime Minister and the cabinet have taken heed of the views of western members of parliament, the many farm organizations and individual farmers who have requested acreage payments.

Many farmers and businessmen have been in favour of the two-price system. However, they realize the difficulty in making payment under such a system on a bushel basis and the danger of increasing wheat production. Because of that fact they feel that the measure now proposed is the fairest way in which payment can be made. I would take issue with the members of the opposition who spoke when the announcement was made yesterday and referred to these acreage payments as relief. This is not relief but is something that is due to the western farmer because of the price squeeze situation in which he finds himself and what he has to pay for the commodities he requires to operate his farm.

The government has brought in many measures which will assist agriculture. The government made an acreage payment on the same basis in 1958 which I know was appreciated by a great many farmers and businessmen. I am quite sure that a similar payment would have been made in 1959 if it had not been for some organizations that wanted to embarrass the government and put forward the idea of deficiency payments

Supply-Agriculture

which would have cost some $325 million. They knew that the government could not accept this proposal inasmuch as it would have assisted the large grain producers to the greatest extent in that about 87 per cent of this vast sum would have gone into the pockets of about 27 per cent of the farmers.

I am aware that the proposal now before us will not be a cure-all for the problems of the western farmer but it will be a great help. I sincerely hope that the inquiry being made by the agriculture committee into the high cost of farm machinery will bear some fruit and that the item now before us will help the farmer to solve many of his problems. In conclusion, I should like to say that I fully support and endorse the acreage payment program.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Full View Permalink

March 31, 1960

Mr. Cadieu:

Mr. Chairman, I too should like to express my approval of this resolution providing for the completion of the present trans-Canada highway. I am also of the opinion that it does not provide sufficient money. In view of the fact that the present trans-Canada highway is already completed in the province of Saskatchewan and has been for almost three years, and in view of the fact that Manitoba and Alberta have almost completed their share, I would recommend highly that a second trans-Canada highway get under way. I was very pleased to hear the contribution to this debate made by the hon. member for Dauphin and was very interested in his remarks.

When one looks at the great potentialities this northern route would open up in the way of natural resources and connecting with roads to resources and connecting many federal and provincial parks in this vast area and some of the best farm land in Canada he immediately sees the value of a second trans-Canada highway, coming into Saskatchewan on No. 3 highway on the east, thence to Prince Albert, connecting roads to resources at that point and making use of the much-needed and new four-lane traffic bridge now nearing completion at that point, then continuing west to Lloydminster and west through the province of Alberta and British Columbia. One really has to see this great country to realize the need for this second trans-Canada highway. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, it will be second to none. I think, without any doubt, construction of this highway under a join federal-provincial program would give access to one of the most scenic and resourceful routes in Canada.

In this area we have an organization known as the northern trans-Canada route association which has been doing much research work on this proposed route. In their pamphlet I notice they indicate that the extension of such a highway construction program should be considered by the government of Canada at the 1960 session of parliament so that the provincial governments can make their plans and include this item in their 1961 budgets. They go on further to point out the points brought out by the Secretary of State for External Affairs, who stated in the House of Commons on Friday, June 5, 1959, as reported at page 4385 of Hansard:

Possibly some policy may have to be adopted which will allow one type of aid in one province and another type of aid in another province in order to serve the national interest.

This is very important, because there is such a difference in the vast terrain and we can build so many more miles cheaper, comparatively speaking, than can be built through parts of Ontario, British Columbia and the maritimes.

Consideration should be given to the starting of a second trans-Canada route in this area. I was also very interested in the remarks of the hon. member for Churchill who pointed out some of the great resources that such a route would open up. I notice that my colleague, the hon. member for Saskatoon, proposed a route through Saskatoon on the basis of freight rates. If Saskatoon had the freight rate problem of the north that city would warrant a lot more consideration. Also, if we in the north had a highway built to the standard of No. 5 highway which runs through Saskatoon we would refer to it as our second trans-Canada highway. The importance of the starting of a second trans-Canada highway cannot be over-emphasized, Mr. Chairman.

Topic:   AMENDMENTS TO EXTEND PERIOD OF PAYMENTS AND INCREASE MAXIMUM EXPENDITURES
Full View Permalink