Manitoba Hansard — 11 March 1960 (Sitting 39, 26th Legislature, 2nd Session)

26-2-39

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly Of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable A. W. Harrison Volume IV No. 39 March 11, 1960 2nd Session, 26th Legislature Printed by R. s. Evans. Queen�s Printer for the Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg

DAILY INDEX Friday, March 11, 19 60, 2: 30P.M. Introduction of Bills: No. 120, re School Act (Mr. McLean)......................... 14 45 Second Readings: Bill 51, re Margarine (Mr. Seaborn) • . • • • • . • . • . . . • . . . . • • • . . • • . . . • 1448 Mr. Smellie . . • . • • • • . . . • • • . . • • . • • . . . . . . • . . • • . • • • . • • • . • . • . • • . • • • • . • . . • • • • • . 144 9 Mr. Tanchak . • • • • . • . • • • • . • . • . . . • . . . • . • . . . • . • . • . . • • • • . . • • . . . . . . . • • • • . . • • . • • 1452 Mr.

Johnson (Assiniboia) •.•• ; • . . • • . . . . . • • . . • . . . • . . . . • . . • . . . . . . • • • . • . • . . • . . 1454 Mr. Wagner . . . . • . • . . • • • • • . • • • . . . . . • • . . • . . • . • • • . . . • . . . . • • . • . • • • • . • • • . • . • • • 1457 Mr. Desjardins . • • • • . . • • . . • • • . . • . • . . . . • . • • . . . . . • • • • . . . • . . . . • . . • • • • . . . • • • • . 145 9 Mr. Groves . . • . . . . • • . • • • • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • • • . . . . • . . . . • • . • . . . . • . . • . . • . . • 1460 Mr. Stanes, Mr.

Scarth . • • . • . • • . • . . • • • . . • • . . . • • . • . . • . . . . . . • • . • . • • • . • • • . . • • 1462 Mr. Weir, :M;r. Johnson (Gimli)............................................. 146 3 Mr. Prefontaine • • . . • • • • • • . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 1464 Mr. Orlikow . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . • • . . . • . • . . . • . • . . . • . . . • . • . • • . . 1465 Mr. Corbett 14 66 Bill 82, re Dental Association (Mr. C-hristianson) . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 1467 Mr.

Paulley . • . • • . • • . • . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • • • • • • . • 1468 Bill 83 , re School Act (Mr. Schreyer): Mr. Lyon, Mr. Schreyer, Mr. Paulley ........ 146 9 Mr. Roblin, Mr. Speaker . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . 1470 DAILY INDEX Friday, March 11, 1960, 8:00P.M. Condolences: Re George Mil ne,.

Francis Ferg, Q.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . 1471 Committee of Supply: Public Works, Highways, Aids and Public Works . . . • . . . . • • . • . . 1473 Municipal Affairs, Administration . • . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • • • . . • . 14 96 Local Government Districts . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . • . . . • • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • . • . • • 1507 Municipal Assessments ..• :. • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • . • . • . • . . • . . . . . . . • . . • . • . . . . . . . . • 1512

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Friday, March 11th, 1960 Opening P:rayer by Mr. Speaker MRO. SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions Reading and Receiving Petitions Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committee Notices of Motion Introduction of Bills Committee of the Whole House HO:N. STEW ART E. M cLEAN (Minister of Education) (Dauphin): I move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Health and Public Welfare, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itselve into Committee of the Whole to consider the following proposed resolution standing on the Order Paper in my name.

Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: Would the Honourable Member for St.Matthews please take the Chair. MR. McLEAN: Mr. Chairman, His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor, having been infor- med of the subject matter of the proposed resolution, recommends it to the House. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Resolved ·that it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend The Public Schools Act by providing, among other matters, for special grants to be made from and out of the Consolidated Fund to certain school divisions with respect to certain high schools that have fewer than twelve classrooms. MR. McLEAN: Mr.

Chairman, we have a Bill coming forward with quite a large num ber of amendments to the Public Schools Act, and one of the sections has to do with the grants for the constructions of high schools in school divisions, and it is for that reason that this resolution is before the committee at this time. The detail of the resolution, I think would be better discussed when the Bill itself is before the House and committee. MR. E. PREF ONTAINE (Carillon): Mr. Chairman, will we have to discuss all the princip les involved in the Bill?

It seems to me that it would be more proper if we would know what this exactly means, because I think there is an understanding on the part of the Minister tQ tell us somehow, sometime, what action he will take with respect to the resolution that was brought forward by the Member for Turtle Mountain, or is it connected in any way with that Resolution? MR. McLEAN: Well that's rather a diff icult question to answer categorically, Mr. Chairman, but if you wish I can review the history of the thing.

As you will recall, the reso lution was before the House when we met in the summer of 1959, at which time I was asked to study the grant

schedule as applicable to high school construction in school divisions. I carried out that study and the

section to which I have made reference incorporates the conclusions to which I came as a result of making that study; and proposes certain changes, outlines the con ditions applicable in the particular context of the

section and of the regulations. Whether or not it meets too resolution of the Honourable the Member for Turtle Mountain., I'm not in a position tO make any comment, because that is obviously a matter of opinion whether it does or not, and the only association it has as far as I'm concerned is that it deals with the same subject. It carries out my undertaking to make a study and to report to this House what, in my opinion, .should be done with respect to those regulations. MR. RUSSELL PAULLEY (Leader of the CCF) (Radisson): Mr.

Chairman,· I believe the Minister said on the introduction of tnisresolution in the committee , that he was bringing in a Bill dealing with a number of changes in the School Act. Now then, my question to him woUld be, is this normal?

Whereas he's bringing in, unless there is some significance in the resolution ·. itself which may be related to the resolutions and a.I.!lendments which we have before "us on the ;. Order Pa,per, is it a usual thing to bring in a resolution pftbis �. on a Bill which is dealing ·with general application to the whole Schools Act, to bring in a resolution that is more or less specific of one of the items.

Now then, if it is, if the purpose of it is that it appears to the Minister that he is doing this to inform the comlilittee, and through the committee to the House, that the points raised in the motion of the Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain, in addition to the amendments, that if this is the .answer to that, that is fine; but it seems to me to be a lit- . tie peculiar to bring in a Bill dealing with general amendments and this being specific in a March 11th., 1960 Page 1445

(Mr. Paulley, cont'd.), ••• ,resolution. Are there no other points -- I don't. know whether the Minister would be in a position or would answer this question. Are there no other changes in the proposed Bill which may have a bearing on the expenditures out of the government Consoli dated Fund other than this particular one resolution? MR. McLEAN: Mr.

Chairman, the reason for this resolution today has nothing what ever to do with the resolution moved by the Member for Turtle Mountain or the amendments made to it, If I may le permitted to say so, I have felt that a great deal of that discussion has been, shall we say, unn ecessary, because I have never had an opportunity of making my re port to this House, which I shall do when we come to the second reading of this Bill. The reason that this resolution is on the Order Paper is that the Legislative Counsel said, and I'm guided entirely by his views, that because this

section in this Bill proposed, or had to do with the expenditure of money, that it was required to be introduced in this fashion. This is his view of the matter not mine, and this, as far as I can recall at the moment and I'm pretty cer tain it is, is the only

section of the Bill and of the various sections dealing with the Act, that has anything to do with the expenditure of funds. HON .STERLING R, LYON (Attorney-General)(Fort Garry): Mr, Chairman, this reso lution has been recommended by a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor. If the Honourable Leader of the CCF will recall yesterday, I introduced by way of resolution an amandment to the Liquor Control Act, but that's only one of a number of amendments, but the rules say that these all have to be introduced by way of message. MR. PAULLEY: Mr.

Chairman, may I assure the Honourable the Attorney-General that the Leader of the CCF Party is fully aware of that. The question that I did ask however was, were there any other changes in this Bill that--(interjection)--no, just a minute now--that re quired expenditure from Consolidated Funds other than this one, because if that is the case then this should not be specific insofar as the content of it is concerned. MR. D. L. CAMPBELL (Leader of the Opposition)(Lakeside): Mr. Chairman, I was not going to take

part in the debate about the question of the consent of His Honour the Lieuten ant-Governor or the necessity of this, which is evidently a money Bill, coming before the House.

But when the Honourable the Minister of Education says that he thinks that on the resolution of the Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain that there was a lot of unnecessary discussion, I beg to differ with him, because if my honourable friend had been going to bring in something dealing with the grant to schools or the expenditure of money in any way that was not outlined in the estimates that were before the House--before the committee when his estimates were un der discussion, then he could have told us at that time what was planned.

And had he done so, then the resolution to which he refers would have been unnecessary or, as has been pointed out on two or three occasions before, if when the resolution appeared on the Order Paper the Hon ourable the Minister or any Minister of the Crown had stood in his place and said that th.e gov ernment was bringing in legislation on that same matter, then the resolution would not have been proceeded with. B.ut neither of those things was done, Mr. Chairman, so I maintain that the discussion was not unnecessary; that it was completely in order. MR. McLEAN: Mr.

Chairman, this is perhaps not too important a matter except to just point out that the Honourable the Member for Dufferin said, when speaking to this resolution, that the Minister of Education had not had an opportunity of reporting as he had undertaken to do, and he asked this House to reject the motion. Now the House didn't see fit to do that and I have no quarrel with it. Perhaps my choice of words a few moments ago was not entirely apt, except to just point out that he was suggesting, a suggestion which wasn't adopted, that per haps I'd better make my report. Now I am ready to do so.

I do not accept the view, however, that because a resolution is necessarily introduced into this Legislature that a Minister of the Crown must immediately stand up and disclose or say what he proposes to do in the way of the introduction of legislation. Surely that must rest in his hands, to be brought in as, he considers to be proper and at the right time. MR. CAMPBELL: May I inform the Minister, Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to that statement.

My only point is that if the Honourable the Minister does not stand up and make such a statement, that he cannot under those circumstances criticize the fact tha t the resolution is brought in and is debated. As far as. the remarks of the Honourable Member for Duff erin are concerned, estimable gentleman though he is, and with an opinion that is valued by the Page 1446 March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd.) .• House of course, but he 'can't take the place of one of the Ministers of the Crown. They're the only one's who can make the statement regardillg the legislations to be brought in. Well, they and perhaps the Honourable Member for St. Vitd, when he moved the •. .••.• MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall the resolution be adopted? The committee rise and report. Call in the Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Committee of the Whole House has adopted a certain resolution, direct ed me to report the same, and ask leave to sit again. MR. W. G. MARTIN (St. Matthews): Mr.

Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Hon- ourable Member for Dufferin, that the report of the committee be received. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. Mr •. McLean introduced Bill No. 120,

an Act to amend The Public Schools Act (3 ). MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. HON. MAURICE E. RIDLEY (Minister of Municipal Affairs)(Pembina): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day I would like to draw your attention on your left in the gallery of the high school children of La Riviere. They are accompanied this afternoon by their school principal, Mr. Banderstoel, and quite a number of the citizens who have been kind enough to provide them transportation to come in to the opening. I am sure everyone in this House is well aware where the Town of La Riviere is.

That is the great ski resort of Manitoba which has given recreation to quite a number in the United States and the whole Province of Manitoba. I'm sure that we welcome them here this afternoon. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. MR. W. H. HAMILTON .(Dufferin): I'd like to draw the attention of the members of the House to a group of children that are here in the gallery above me. They're from:Winkler. There's 25 of them; Grades I to VIII, in charge of Mrs. H. Dick. We welcome them here and' hope they enjoy their afternoon and their visit to this beautiful building. MR. DAVID ORLIKOW (St. John's): Mr.

Speaker, before the Orders of the Day I'd like to direct a question to the Honourable the Attorney-General. This morning's Tribune carries a story which is headed: "Police Methods Rapped by Judge. A county court judge sharply cri ticized police methods used to obtain a confession of guilt", etc. I wonder if the Attorney General has had a report on this matter and if he has anything to comment to the House. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the Honourable Member from St. John's for givi��g me notice of this question. I have had the opportunity to receive an oral report from the Crown Attorney.

I have taken steps to secure the transcript of evidence of the voir dire during which this discussion took place concernillg the admissibility of a statement.' I am advised oral ly that His Honour the Judge in making his remarks also pointed out that there had been no threats or no abuse or anythillg of that sort of the witness whatsoever, but that he found that the statement was inadmissible for other reasons. But certainly we are looki��g into it. I would like to leave the impression with the honourable member though that this is a statement that _ has been found to be inadmissible.

Not an unusual situation in criminal trials, but, nonetheless, in view of the comments that have been made by His Honour, we will certainly look at the tran script. MR. A. J. REID (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day I'd like to di rect a question to the Minister of Education. The other day I questioned him on the financial setup of River East division No. 9, and I believe he was going to send a couple of inspectors out to investigate. I wonder if he's got anything to report on the matter. MR. McLEAN: Mr.

Speaker, I want to read to the House a prepared statement on this matter and would ask leave to do so just as quickly as I can have it prepared--! hope early next week. However, I would like to say this, that there is in my opinion no substance to the com plaint which has been made by the City of East Kildonan. The fact of the matter is that the secretary of the school division, through an error, did withhold a certain sum of money for a period of three weeks. He has acknowledged his error. He understands now th� procedure to be followed and has given us his undertaking to see that It doesn't happen again.

O'n the premise that everyone is entitled to make a mistake once in a while, I'm really not inclined to be too critical. The amount of time involved was three weeks. But the fact of the matter is further, that the school district of East Kildonan had received $100, 000 from the school division in March 11th, 1960 Page 1447

(Mr. McLean, cont'd.) •• advance of the time that they are entitled to have it, so that not only _are they already paid up in full but they have $100, 000 in advanc_e. So I really think there's not too much concern. I'm going to have a prepared statement which I will read to the House next week. MR. S. PETERS (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day I'd like to di rect a question to the Minister of Labour, and I'm sorry that I didn't give him notice. He can take this as notice, and this is in connection with the death of a workman out at the Bell Found ry.

And my question is, is the department investigating? And were there any violations of re gulations--safety regulations or such matters? HON. J. B. CARROLL (Minister of Labour)(The Pas): Well, Mr. Speaker, the depart ment has a full report on this particular accident. I'm not familiar with all the details except that this particular workman apparently undertook to do work while the equipment was in opera tion and, of course, we're told that certainly the equipment should have been shut off when that kind of cleaning-out process was taking place.

It's one of these things that the workman had probably done on previous occasions and had possibly grown a little careless. But the advice is that in working on equipment where there is this kind of hazard, that it should be shut off completely , and the workman who does the work should actually insure himself that it can't be turned on while he's performing this particular hazardous task. If the member would like a full report on it, I'd be very pleased to provide him with that information at a later date. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. Orders for Return. The Honourable Member for Brokenhead. MR. E. R.

SCHREYER (Brokenhead): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Elmwood, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: 1, what was the average price paid in 1958 for MCF to Trans Canada Pipelines by, (

a) Winnipeg and Central Gas; (

b) Inter City Gas at Portage; (

c) Great Northern (Brandon); 2, (

A) what was the total volume of gas in MCF purchased in 1958 from Trans Canada Pipelines by (

a) Winnip'2g and Central; (

b) Inter City Gas at Portage; (

c) Great Northern_ of Brandon; (

B) what was the to tal cost of this gas purchased? 3, Is there any affiliated interest existing as regards Winnipeg and Central and Trans Canada Pipelines? 4, Was it necessary for the Municipal and Public Utility Board to give approval, as required under

Section 82, Clause i of the Public Utility Board Act, to any contract between a utility company and any other company in the year 1959? If so, what were the contracting parties involved? Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: Second reading of Bill No. 51. The Honourable Member for Wellington. Mr� Seaborn presented Bill No. 51,

an Act to amend The Margarine Act, for second reading. Mr. Speaker presented the motion. MR. R. SEABORN (Wellington): Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to present this Bill to repeal

Section 5 of the Margarine Act which prohibits the manufacture of coloured margarine. What this Bill of mine lacks in novelty, it makes up for in importance. For its purpose is to -restore to the citizens of" Manitoba a freedom they have been denied since 1949. I make no secret of the fact that I would like to have seen our government, which has shown such courage and strong leadership in matters of education, social welfare, and agricul ture, take the initiative and get the credit for introducing this Bill as a government measure.

I under_stand, however, from some of my own colleagues who come from rural areas, that exces sive pressure to oppose this Bill have been put on them by a few voters whose individual strength is greater by virtue of the unavoidable inequality in representation between rural and urban areas. Undoubtedly such pressures have also been applied to some of the members of this House who are in opposition, hence a private Bill-,.-surely the last--and a free vote.

You will recall that at the last session I introduced a similar bill and that that bill failed to carry because it was not put to this House but instead, on July 21st, 1959, this Legislature by resolution authorized the government "to give consideration to the advisability of establish ing an independent Board of Inquiry into the economic and social consequences of the colouring of margarine similar to butter as it affects the consumers of both butter and margarine in Mani toba, with instructions to report to this House at its next regular sitting".

All but 12 members of this House voted in favour of that resolution and that because they thought we ought to have ,, Page 1448 March 11th, 1960

· (Mr. Seaborn, cont'd.) •• voted on the very Bill. On October 14th, pursuant to the resolution, an Order-in-Council was passed establish ing a commission and naming WUUam J. Waines, Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science of the University of Manitoba, as Commissioner. Professor Waines held public hearings and heard representations from 11 organizations and two individuals, and in addition, received communi cations from 13 organizations or individuals. His report to this House, authorized by this Leg islature, was placed upon your desks.

For this reason I do not propose to deal with the report in any considerable detail, but there is one thing I feel it my duty to say, that every member of this House who voted in favour of the resolution for a Board of Inquiry last session, shelved his responsibility of voting for or against the Bill by saying, "I want someone to get me more information than I have before I vote". We now have the information and the recommendation of one who is better informed, by reason of the inquiry which he conducted; and better qualified than any of us. We asked for information and advice and we have it.

Dean Waines has found that the farmers. in Manitoba engaged in producing butter or cream for butter, 1 1/ 2% of the to tal economy of the province but admittedly a very important 1 1/ 2%, will not be hurt by the re moval of the ban; and that the consumers of this province are suffering an injustice by its con tinuance. The recommendation of Dean Waines is simple and unequivocal, and so is my Bill . . MR. R. G. SMELLIE (Btrtle-Russell): Mr. Speaker, Charles P. Curtis said at one time, that there are only two ways in which a man could be completely unprejudiced and impar tl.al ..

One was to be completely ignorant and the other is to be completely indiff erent. I don't suggest to you, Sir, that I am completely unprejudiced or impartial, and I would suggest that if we take Mr. Curtis' statement at its face value, that no honourable member of this House would like to be considered to be completely unprejudiced or impartial, and I'm quite sure that Dean W aines would not either. He did suggest, Sir, that the agricultural industry was a declining one and that the dairy industry, as a part of the agricultural industry, was a rather insignificant part of our economy.

And there, Sir, I would like to take issue with Dean Waines. According to the 1956 census, we had in Manitoba 34,8 91 farms where they had dairy cattle producing milk. Of those, Sir, .25, 379, or well over 50% of our farms in Manitoba, had three to 17 cows. These people, Sir, are the main producers of cream in Manitoba. And in 19 58, the income to the farmers of the Province of Manitoba from cream cheques amounted to some $1 3,622, 000. The income from dairy products in Canada, in 19 58, exceeded the income from wheat.

What is more, Sir, the income from dairy products· provides for the farmer a steady income throughout all of the months of the year and this, Sir, in our present agricultural economy, is one of the most im portant aspects that we must face. That steady cash income to the farmer is something he can not get from the raising of wheat. The grain grower is by necessity limited to deliveries at the convenience of the Canadian Wheat Board; but his deliveries of dairy products are steady.

The market is there at all times, and it is one of the few incomes the farmer has that is steady throughout all months of the year, and it provides a great stabilizer for the economy, particu larly of our rural areas. And this is important, Sir, not just to the farmer. This is impor tant to every· one of us who has to live and deal in the rural parts of this province, because we all know that ;without the custom of the farmer in the areas such as the one which I represent, the rest of us have little if any business.

And, Sir, I would 1 ike to give you one or two minor examples of my own experience as to how this industry affects people in my area. During the late 19 30's I had the opportunity to work in the office of a butter manufacturer, a butter manufacturer who, at that time, produced approximately ten to 12% of the butter in the. Province of Manitoba. I was a school boy at that time and the job that they gave me was to sort cream tickets.

There were cream tickets com- ·' tug into that office from five different creameries, and as yo1,1� sorted those tickets every day, wu became familiar with the names that appeared on those tickets. They were the same�eople . regularly�.tW.oand three times a week;. And alSoin that office, ·these people came to cash their cre.a:m tickets, mostly from the creamery closest to the office. When these people cam e in I had the opportunity to talk to many of them, and although I was quite young, I was quite in terestedin that business and I did talk to many of them.

And there were many, many people who came'to that office at that time, Sir, that told me that·without their income from cream March 11th, 1960 Page 1449

(Mr. Smellie, cont'd.) .. cheques they could not survive. It provided their whole livelihood. With the income from those cream cheques they fed their families; and they provided the cloth ing for their whole families.

At about that same time I had many opportunities to go with the cream trucks throughout the area which I now have the honour to represent, and I have pulled many a cream can up from th,l'l well where it was kept to keep the cream cool; and I have talked to many of those people and I am sure,, Sir, that if Dean Waines knew those people as I know them, he would know that this was not tnsignificant to my people. To a great number of the people in th� constituency which I represent, this is their bread and butter literally.

Of more recent times, Sir, I had occasion to visit many; many of the farm homes in Birtle-Russell and the story is no diff erent today than it was in the late 1930's. It is still the same situation and I would like to tell you of one home that I visited during the 1958 election campaign.

We had been travelling all afternoon visiting farm homes, and there was no place in this particular area where I could purchase a meal, and as supper time approached the guide who was with me suggested that we should call at a particular farm for supper because he knew these young people and he particularly wanted me to meet them. When we arrived at the house he asked the farm wife if she would mind giving us supper, and she said, ''well we haven't much to offer but you're certainly welcome to share what we have". We went into their home which was a very modest one.

The land which they were farming was not particularly good, and these people were newlyweds, and what they offered us for supper was boiled potatoes and boiled eggs and tea and home preserved fruit and homemade bread. I have eaten more sumptuous meals but I wish to assure you, Sir, that I have never enjoyed better fellowship anywhere.

I made enquiries of these young people as to how they were managing on this particular farm; how they hoped to become established; and they told me that they had used every penny they had to make a down payment for this particular farm and to stock it with the livestock which they had, and that they intended to live from the products of their livestock. In other words, from the calves that they raised and from the cream that they could sell to the creamery; and that the produce of the farm. itself, in the way· of grain, would be used to make the additional payments on the farm.

They were optimistic about the future. They were making a very humble beginning but they had faith in the future and they knew that they could establish themselves with hard work and if they were thrifty. But without cream, they couldn't survive. On page 11 of the Waines Report, Dean Waines indicates that margarine will not benefit particularly from the colouring of that product. He also indicates that butter will not be hurt particularly if margarine is col9ured. But here again, Sir, I cannot agree with Dean Waines.

There is only one reason why anyone wants margarine to be coloured and that is so it will look like butter. And why do they want it to look like butter? Well there are two reasons for that. The consumer wants it to look like butter because he's used to butter. Butter has developed a trade; butter has developed a consumer acceptance over many, many years. And one of the . things that is associated with butter is its pale yellow colour; and the consumer of margarine simply wants to convince himself that he's eating butter. It goes farther than that.

The law does riot prevent the manufacturer of margarine from making his margarine taste like butter; and they are addirig additives to margarine to make it taste like butter. Nobody has prevented them from doing that. · Dean W'aines goes on, on page 13 of his report, to state that the colouring of margarine had no effect in British Columbia on butter production in that province. I would suggest to you, Sir, that the Province of British Columbia is an importer of butter. They cannot produce enough butter for their own needs now.

They couldn 1t produce enough before the colouring of margarine and they certainly cannot even at the present time, but the Manitoba producer is an entirely diff erent situation. Here in Manitoba with butter, just as with eggs, we produce surpluses over and above our own immediate consumption needs. The production of butter is important to the agricultural economy of this province. In British Columbia it is not impor• tant to anything Uke the same extent that it is in Manitoba. Dean Waines goes on to say that once consumption patterns change, they seldom revert to their original state.

Hence, a change once brought about might well persist. He recognizes the fact that the consumption of marga rine has been increasing throughout most of the provinces of this Dominion, and that the con sumption of butter has been decreasing along with it. I suggest to you, Sir, that it may be of no importance to the producer of cream in British Columbia, but it is of great importance to Page 1450 March 11th, 1960

{Mr. Smellie, cont'd.) •• the producer of cream in a province like Manitoba where we are ex porters of butter. Approximately 38% of our total production of butter in Manitoba is for ex port to other provinces. In the opinion of Dean Waines there will be no significant effect by the allowing of colour ing of margarine by itself, and there, Sir, I cannot agree with him. The colourini of marga rine is requested by the margarine interests, particularly the Edible Oils Institute of Canada, to make their product more attractive to the consumer. And why do they want to make 1.t more attractive?

In order to sell more of that same product. You cannot tell me that the Edible Oils Institute of Canada have at heart the particular interests of the consumer. They have their own interests at heart. The dairy industry are worrying about the dairy industry; and the dairy industry includes the farmers of the Province of Manitoba. We have in this particular question, Sir, to weigh in the balance on the one side, the convenience of the consumer; and on the other side, the survival of an industry that is vitally important to many, many of the people of the Province of Manitoba.

Margarine has the legal right to competition with butter, but, Sir, I would suggest to you that it does not have the moral right to assume the goodwill built up for butter by taking on the colour of butter which is natur al to butter throughout many months of the year. And this is one subject upon which I would like to express a few words because there has been much misunderstanding about the colour of butter. In countries of this world where cattle can graze out-of-doors on green feed all through the year butter will remain a pale yellow colour naturally, without the addition of any colour substitute.

In this country, particularly in Manitoba, during the summer months. of the year when the cattle are grazing on green grass, and which is the major production time of the year when by far the greatest percentage of our butter is produced, the butter which is produced is naturally a yellow colour. There is no colour added to it. And because of the desire for uni formity of colour throughout the whole of the production season, butter colour has been added to some extent to butter, in particularly the winter months when the cattle are kept indoors and when they are on dry feed.

There's some other interesting facts that I would like to bring out at this time, Sir, and that is this, that during the summer months when butter is produced in its own natural colour, it may be interesting to this House to know that the more the butter ts worked, in otherwords, the longer it is worked in the churn, the lighter will be the colour of that butter.

And during some months of the year when the colour of cream is really rich, it's necessary to work the butter a little bit longer in order to preserve for that butter the pale yellow colour which has always been distinctive of quality butter in this country. And there is one other thing that I would like to point out to this House, Sir, and that is this, that Manitoba butter producers are proud of their history, and very justly so, because the producers .of butter in Manitoba have been producing the best butter in this country for many, many years.

Something like 44% of the prizes for butter in national competition have gone to Manitoba in one year. And that is something, Sir, that I think we should be very, very proud of and we should do nothing to detract from it. Anything whtch is done to increase the sale of margarine in this province is bound to detract from the butter industry. And there is one other thing that I would like to point out to you and that is this, in the dairy industry butter is known as the balance wheel. Tied to the production of butter is the production of raw milk and all of the other factors in the dairy industry.

If the production of butter decreases, the production of raw milk will also.decrease. And the consumer should know, in advance, that at the present time we are producing in Manitoba approximately what we are consuming in the way of milk. We have no great surplus as far as milk is concerned in Manitoba. If we reduce the consumption of butter or the production of butter, we may face a shortage of raw milk in this province, which I am certain that none of us would like to see. Mr.

Speaker, I am asking this House to weigh in the balance the convenience of the con Burner who wishes to use margarine, and the survival of the dairy industry. And I am asking ·you, Sir, to vote against any colour for margarine in this province. But further than that, Sir, i want to make o�e statement.

I want to se;rve notice, Sir, on this House, that li: you cannot · see this thing my way; that if you agree to give second reading to this Bill; then, Sir, I serve . ·notice on this House now that I will introduce into Law Amendments Committee an amendment to this Bill which will preserve a distinction between the colour allowed for quality butter and the colour allowed for margarine. Thank you, Sir. March 11th, 1960 Page 1451

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. J. P. TANCHAK(Emerson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to concur to what the Honourable Mem ber for Ham iota has said, and after he has so--(in�erjection)�-ofB irtle-Russell; I'm sorry--and after he has so thoroughly explained the reasons why we should not accept this Bill, there's very little for me left to say. The Honourable Member for Wellington, who introduced this Bill, I differ completely with him. He did mention something about leadership which I did not intend to bring up at this time, but since he did mention that, I think I should say a few words on this.

We've heard quite a bit on leadership in this House. It has been mentioned off and on almost every day. I myself congratulated the Honourable the First Minister on the leadership that he has shown on several occasions, especially the leadership he has shown in the Metro Bill. Although I did not wholly agree with him, but there was leadership in that. The First Minister was not afraid to take the steps necessary.

But I'm afraid that today I have to say that the Premier has disappointed the people of Manitoba, not only the urban as well as the rural, because they expected the Premier to show leadership in the question of margarine, and I say that the First Minister has shown an outstanding lack of leadership in this question. He has shirked his re sponsibility in this. In fact he took the easy way out by allowing one of his backbenchers to in troduce the Margarine Bill. We all remember that at the last session this--(interjection)-- Pardon? · HON. DUFF ROBLIN (Premier)(Wolseley): You ought to withdraw the word "allow".

MR. TANCHAK: Well, I'm sorry. I withdraw the word "allow". MR. ROBLIN: Say what you like about me, but withdraw the word "allow". MR. TANCHAK: I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I'll explain the matter further, Mr. Speaker, and you'll see what I mean by the word "allow". MR. CAMPBELL: On a point of order, my honourable friend has no right to suggest that the word "allow" be withdrawn. It's parliamentary. MR. ROBLIN: It's parliamentary, but I deny its accuracy. MR. CAMPBELL: No matter whether you deny or not, my honourable friend is entitled to his opinion. MR.

ROBLIN: And I'm entitled to say it's inaccurate. MR. CAMPBELL: You can say what you like except you should wait until the right time to say it. My honourable friend should obey the rules of the House f.f he wants to try and make them. MR. ROBLIN: The time to object is when the word is spoken, as my honourable friend · knows only too well. MR. CAMPBELL: My honourable friend has no right to object just because something is spoken that he doesn't agree with. MR. ROBLIN: No, but he can correct inaccuracies when they're stated in the House. MR.

CAMPBELL: It's not up to my honourable friend to correct inaccuracies until the occasion arises for him to speak when he's in order. MR. ROBLIN: If you want the last word, I'll give it to you. MR. CAMPBELL: Sure, I was right. MR. TANCHAK: In the first place, I didn't use the word "allow". MR. ROBLIN: It sounded like it though. MR. TANCHAK: I used the word "allowing"--by allowing the backbencher to introduce this Bill.

And although I hadn't explained why I used that word, you know that at the last ses sion this margarine question was brought up, and for one reason or another a resolution was brought in by one of the Conservatives asking that the government consider a Royal Commission-- MR. ROBLIN: No. MR. TANCHAK: Or an investigation into this margarine. The majority of the mem bers of this House agreed to this. Later, I presume, the government appointed a Commission, a one-man commission to study this question. Therefore, I say that it was the duty of the gov ernment t o act on the findings of this commission to this House.

The First .Minister should have shown leadership in this. It doesn't necessarily mean that the governme nt must accept the findings of the commission, f.f I'm right and I believe I am, but I think it was the duty of the government either to accept or reject the findings of this commission. And, therefore, when I say that the government or the First Minister did allow a backbencher to introduce this Page 1452. March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Tanchak, cont'd.) •• motion, by that--(interjection)--well, it's a matter of opinion, and in my opinion, I'm right. MR. ROBLIN: You can take my word for it if I say it's inaccurate. MR. TANCHAK: The First Minister could have used his . • • • . • and say "Let me take the leadership", and this way he wouldn't have allowed the member to bring in the resolution. Naturally, the member probably could have done it on his own if the Minister refused to do any thing at all about it. The commission appointed was a one-man commission. I do not know the gentleman.

I've heard· plenty of him, and I'm not going to criticize him. I believe that he's a professor at the University of Manitoba and doing a fair job. But I do not think that the government was fair either to the people of Manitoba, or even to Mr. Waines, by allowing a one-man commission to decide such an important question. I think this was too much of a responsibility for one man to shoulder. I completely disagree with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Margarine and I'm not going to go into detail. I had intended to do something similar to what the previous member had spoken.

It seems to me that, according to this report, it serves a four-fold purpose, or accord ing to what the commission findings are. In the first place, if.margarine was coloured yellow, the same colour as butter, it would help everyone and hurt none. In the first place, it would make the housewife very happy because she will do away with the work of this messy mixing, so it will probably make her happy. It will also make the dairy farmer happy, according to the report, you can read in it, because it is not going to influence the production of butter.

At the same time, it will make the margarine manufacturers very, very happy because they antici pate a huge increase in the sales of their product. And fourthly, I presume that it will make the government happy, giving it a way out of this question. I do not agree with Mr. Waines when he says that it's not going to hu:rtthe !fairy farmer. We know that in 1942 the per capita consumption of butter was about 30 pounds annually.

In 1948, when margarine was introduced, not coloured, in Canada, and that was due to necessities created by pre-war conditions, or post-war conditions I mean, the consumption of butter de creased by 44 million pounds; and last year the consumption of butter was about 19 pounds per capita as compared to 30 pounds per capital in 1948. So I think you can attribute this decrease in the consumption to the introduction of margarine in Manitoba. And I say that if margarine was coloured the same colour as butter, butter colour, the consumption would drop consider ably.

It has been mentioned by the honourable member speaking before me that the commission states that it will not affect the sales of butter considerably. You notice the word "considerably". So I presume that Mr. Waines does himself agree that to a certain extent, it will hurt, because he could have said "it will not hurt the butter production at all", or use some other words, but he uses the word "considerably". He does admit that it might.

Now I say that in these trying times that the farmer is going through, that if anyone has any least bit of doubt that this may hurt the farmer to the minutest, very tiniest bit-- I'll use the simple words "tiniest bit"--it is our duty not, not to vote for this Bill and not add to the farmersr troubles. By retaining the colour ban on margarine you are not going to hurt the oil growers of Manitoba any, because we know that at the present time, and I think it has been mentioned during the discussion on the agricultural estimates, that we are only producing about 15% of our requirements in vegetable oils.

Therefore, most of our oils are being imported, and .J would say that until the time comes when we produce vegetable oil in such quantities that we are not able to market it, I would say we could consider this question at that time.

But not at < <this time when the farmers' plight is $0 serious and when the vegetable oil producers have a :ready market for their product. · I had a few notes made here but the honourable member mentioned them and I don't . :want to repeat them, but I will simply say that the colouring -of margarine yellow would reduce -�, ':the incomlf,.af -our farmers, and ·the ·results .would be felt not 'Only by the farmers alone but by \practically all the people of Manitoba and probably of Canada; ·It will be felt by the governments; tt will be felt by merchants; by bankers; by truckers; farm machinery agents; in every city in every town in the Province of Manitoba; and I strongly urge the members of this House to con sider this and let us, for this once, show the farmer that we're willing to go along with him 'and help him.

I thank you. March 11th, 1960 Page 1453

MR. GEORGE W. JOHNSON (AsSiniboia): Mr. Speaker, as I rise to speak on this sub ject I am not unmindful of the fact that this is the 11th year, as I understand it, that this issue has been brought before this Legislature, and if I was a gambling man, and playing a certain gambling game, and "11" came up, I'd say I was the winner. First, Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the honourable member from Birtle-Russell that I fully agree with his remarks, his rather emotional remarks, and I can also say to some extent· that I agree with the remarks of the honourable member from Emerson.

I do not agree with their thinking insofar as this Bill is concerned.

True enough it has come in this House for 11 years--you may say kind of slid in--and by the action of the members they let it slide out again, and they heaved a sigh of relief and said, "well that question is away from us for another year", And I know perhaps that many of the words I speak will have been spoken in this House many times during the 11 years, but since this is the first opportunity that I have had of, as it were, publicly or in the legislature, of voicing my opinion, I necessarily will perhaps go over some ground that has been gone over many times before. Let me assure you, Mr.

Speaker, that insofar as our agricultural economy is concerned, that I stand foursquare behind keeping that economy at a high level, and certainly I am sure that the vast majority of the urban dwellers would say the same thing and indeed they have, and indeed they do today, because no one reads of any criticism coming from the urban dwellers against the butter subsidy that is being paid and will continue to be paid. No question about that. Now, Sir, to go back to the years before margarine was allowed to even be manufactur ed in the Dominion of Canada, what do we find?

That when this question was finally taken to the Supreme Court of Canada, that court ruled the law invalid, and indeed a year later, as it proceeded to the Privy Council, they in turn concurred with the ruling of that court; so we then had the manufacture of margarine. And indeed, why shouldn't we have? IS there anything wrong in the manufacture of an

article that is nutritional, as I'll mention a little bit later; that is practically manufactured of agricultural products.? Certainly not. It would be a restraint of trade, and it was up until that time. Now to protect the dairy industry, what do we find? We find that the provinces said "Okay, we'll allow you to manufacture margarine but you just can't colour it". That was when this question should have been settled, Mr. Speaker. I submit to you that that was the time that this question should have been settled once and for all, then and there.

But, no, it comes up every year to the embarrassment of rural members. Why? Be cause politics have been allowed to creep in to some extent. Again we find the pitting of the urban dwellers against the rural dwellers. Such a case should never be--should never be. Now I submit, Mr. Speaker, that in the discrimination against the colouring of margarine we are prohibiting, again I say, discriminating against the basic freedom of every consumer to pur chase, either by desire or necessity of price, the

article of her choice in the most pleasing and satisfactory manner that that

article can be produced and put on the shelves of the grocer. Now--subsidies. As a matter of fact, I read in the paper last night where I think this past year it has gone up again of 85 million pounds of a surplus, based on 649 per pound sub sidy. That's fine. There's nobody arguing against that. No doubt that subsidy will be carried on. It's profitable; it must be profitable because no one increases production under loss. - (interjection)--That's okay. Have a good laugh, brother. Now I'll--(tnterjection)--oh, thanks a lot.

Now to proceed a little further inregards to this surplus, in the wisdom of the Federal Government as tothe--not the present, the· past one and also the present--they do not consider it >vise to allow those people who pay the 649 per pound subsidy the advantage of now and again having a little bit more butter than they would actually buy at a lower price. No one complains about that. No one complains about that, to maintain that high price than to take a loss. Now the people that are opposed to this say that, "oh, if you colour margarine, it would lead to fraud and deception". Well, Mr.

Speaker, I'm not going to dwell on that because that is in my opinion just a ridiculous statement and a very weak argument. They also say that it would be of economic benefit to only two manufacturers in Winnipeg. Well listen, Mr. Sp3ak er, it doesn't make any diff erence if it's right, if it only benefits one manufacturer. Are we out to discriminate against anyone manufacturing a wholesome product? What kind of a democ racy would that be? They say colouring of margarine would increase the sales of this product. And I agree. I agree--certainly it would. There's no argument against that.

While I myself do not use it--and my friends across the way there having a good smile to themselves--but I'll Page 1454 March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Johnson (Assiniboia), cont'd) ..•.• come to him a little bit later and tell him what I think- this argument about increasing the sale of the product, this is a frank admission of guilt in an endeavour to stifle trade and curtail the right of purchase . Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to refer just back a few minutes previous in my speech to the fact of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. One wonders what would happen today if the colouring of margarine was carried to this body. I wonder what their decision would be. In i:ny opinion there is no doubt what their decision would be. Now, Mr.

Speaker, in February, 1953, the Free Press, the Winnipeg Free Press, by Gallup poll -- this is Februay 27 , 1953 -across the prairie province s, and this is in 153, mark you, indic ated 67% of the people in the prairie provinces expressed preference for coloured margarine. And that wasn't only taken in the city; that would be taken in other parts as well. Now we hear of the effect of coloured margarine on the dairy industry, and some opinions have been expressed this afternoon that I'm rather sorry to hear, and that is the remarks opposed to the thinking of Commissioner Dean Waines' setup on this.

However, that was Dean Waines' opinion. I'm not going to add any words of admiration, but I must say this, that here we have a man more responsible in his decision than if there were two or three or four, faced with a problem that has been before this Legislature and the people of this province fo 11 years. No one can deny his ability in this matter to judge, and I think all credit should go to Dean Waines, for I am sure in rendering his decision on this that he faced the freedom and democra tic right of the consuming public, I'm quite sure . Now Mr. Speaker, we mention those people who criticize this move .

We also have now, and I'd like to quote from a brief here and I'm going to quote Dr . D. L. Gibson, head of the University of Saskatchewan Dairy Department, who prophesied in January, 1949 that the advancement of dairying would not be affected by the introduction of margarine . "Milk and butter are on the edge of a new era" -- indeed it was - "and there need not be the slightest fear that margarine will become a strong competitor to the Canadian Dairy Industry." Dr .

Gibson estimated the per capita consumption of margarine in the vicinity of 5 or 6 pounds, a figure that was amazi ngly accurate although there had to be an inevitable adjustment of butter when margarine was first introduced. The butter sales since 1949 show an annual increase and the 1958 consumption was greater than the 1948 production of butter, the year before margarine was introduced. I'd like to quote further, "In the United States the per capita consumption of butter has remained comparatively steady and is about the same today as it was in 1952 and 1953 .

The per capita consumption of margarine has risen from 7.9 in 152 to 9.0 in 195 8. According to the Manitoba Department of Agriculture there is very little, if any, butter surplus in the United states at the pre sent time . The presence of coloured margarine has apparently had no material effect on the butter market." Further, "The presence of discriminatory legislation against margarine violates one of our basic freedoms, the right of free choice in the market place .

Consumers should have freedom to choose their products they wish to buy, and further, they have the right to expect that the products will be in the most attractive form that is possible and at the most reasonable price . It is di:rficult to ascertain what benefit, if any, the dairy industry has derived from the restrictive legislation against margarine. Such measures have not increased the sale of butter not interfered unduly with the consumption of margarine. The dairy industry would undoubtedly benefit from the removal of this re striction on colour.

One 'r esult would be that this industry would stand to recapture the goodwill of consumers who would appreciate the opportunity to have a free choice of a comm odity in the form they would prefer them • " I want to skip over a little here .

I wanf to read you what I consider is a very condemn ing piece of literature, and this is from The Voice of The Farmer, September 1st, 1959, and this is what it says: "We feel that this is the time that every organization of dairy farmers, farm unions, and Chambers of Commerce , should go all out impre ssing upon the governments, both provincial and federal, the need for removing butter imitations from the market, never mind the colouring." Well, Mr . Speaker, honourable members, you can figure. that one out for yourself. MR. PETER WAGNER (Fisher): Mr.

Speaker, would the honourable member permit a ·question on this item that he just read? MR. JOHNSON (Assiniboia): I' d just as soon you'd wait until I've finished, Sir, so I March 11th, 1960 Page 1455

(Mr. Johnson (Assiniboia) cont'd) •••• don't get off my line, and I'll be quite willing to answer any question that I possibly can. I have another tack I'll be going on in a minute, but I ju st have this much to say. Margarine is the only food where colour is banned. To my knowledge, no other food or product of any kind is limited in the use of a specific colour. Margarine as a nutritious food has been enqprsed by medical authorities in Canada and the United States.

The Canadian Medical Association-- the Canadian Council on Nutrition, the Ontario Inter departmental Nutrition Council, the American Medical Association on Food and Nutrition, and others, have endorsed it and it is included in the Canada Health Rules . It is uniformly nutritious summer and winter. There can only be one reason for the ban on coloured margarine and it is the same reason that prevented us from having margarine for upwards of 62 years from 1886 to 1948 . There is cogent evidence that the restriction of coloured margarine is not contained in any of our health acts.

It is not the institutions of democracy, Mr. Speaker, which confer freedom upon us, but essential justice which can, if we will it, be secured by means of democratic institutions . Now, Mr. Speaker, enough for that. Now I want to come to the Bill that calls for the removal of the colour ban. The Bill does not call for anything, only the removal of the ban. But the reason for the controversy in this item for years has been the tie-up of the colour of margarine with the dairy industry. Now I maintain and I suggest to you, Sir, that we're only asked to remove an iniquity from our economic structure on this item.

We all have to consider what it may do to any other industry.

I say to you, Sir, that if, and perhaps the biggest "if" that was ever spoken, because we have had no facts as to what happens with the colouring of margarine-- we do not know, we've had theory, but I maintain, Sir, that we are here and I ask all the honourable gentlemen in this Chamber, the only thing they're asked to do in this Bill is to vote on right or wrong -- if, and I say that "if" again, the colouring of margarine should happen to be harmful in any way at all to the dairy industry, then that's another question this Legislature will have to answer when it comes up, when we have the facts before us -- riot now.

We're only asked right now, and at this time, to rule on our democratic part of our economy, whether we are going to continue to deny to the consumer the right to purchase an

article of her desire and in the way she would like to purchase it .. That's all we're asking here . And I say to the honour able members, when you cast your vote on this, you think back. I am quite sure as far as we're all concerned, that insofar as the dairy industry is concerned, no one wants to do them any harm, nor would they. But the harm -- we cannot discriminate. If there is a harm, then this legislature will have to correct it or be called upon that. But what about the consumer? Do they not fit into this picture at all?

Now I know the honourable member from Birtle and Russell mentioned, I think one place where he'd gone to eat and all they had in there was certain things, and I believe him. I can tell you a few years ago when I ea meout here, that's about all I had too. But those things shouldn't enter into a right or a wrong. That's got nothing to do with it. The question is, Mr. Speaker , is it right ·to discriminate against the basic freedom of the people to buy an

article the way they would like it.? Should we base - oh, it's going to help two or three manufacturers- that's got nothing to do with it. This is a right or wrong and I feel, Mr. Speaker, before taking my seat, that on this occasion that the members of this Legislature should, more seriously than they ever have in the past, give a lot of thought to this because this thing cannot go on and on and on every year in this Legislature . Surely we're big enough to remove an iniquity, and that's what we're. asked to do . MR. J. M. FROESE (Rhineland): Mr.

Speaker, I do not wish to speak on the Bill itself at this time . .... However, I would like to place a question to the First Minister if I am permitted. That's in connection with the· Bill. MR . ROBLIN: Mr. Speaker, the only person to whom the honourable member may address a question is the last speaker . · MR. SMELLIE : Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Honourable Member for Assiniboia would permit a question. I would just like to know what he would consider to be a ·somewhat emotional speech. MR. JOHNSON (Assiniboia): The one the Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell made . MR .

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland has the floor. Page 1456 March 11th, 1960

MR. FROESE: Am I permitted the question? MR. SPEAKER: Oh, it was the question you wanted to ask was it? Are you ready for the question? MR. WAGNER: Mr. Speaker, now I have a pleasure in this House even to talking against my own colleague, and I believe on the other side of the House and to my right, there won't be no coalition. It seems to me that we are going to ''coalate"from one side of .the House to the other. But first, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to say as far as our CCF members are concerned, that we believe in our group that the principle of this bill cannot be decided on the party basis, so we have therefore not attempted to reach an agreement on the party basis. The members of our group who will speak, and every member who votes, will actually use his own personal opinion and within his personal power. However, Mr.

Speaker, I hope that we from the rural area can convince the city members to see our way and to preserve the industry of that type that has given so far, and shall give, the most helpful and healthfullife in the future. But I believe no matter what I say, every member in this House has his mind made up so there is no use arguing, debating too long or present facts and figures, but just to get yourself on the record whether ••• MR. T. P. IDLLHOUSE , Q.C. (Selkirk): Why don't we all sit down? MR.

WAGNER: As far as the Honourable Member for Selkirk gave a good suggestion, I would sit down if he would cast a vote my way. Mr.

Speaker, this margarine bill has been tossed into this House many a time -- in and out, and then in again -- over and aver again; .but I hope f!.S a beginner, and particularly whe re the area of Fisher is concerned -- a green horn as I am - I would be able to succeed today in this House to throw that bill so far that .it will never come back again. · · I <lo not intend, as I s_aid earlier, to present statistics and figures and what not, but only one thing I want to say, if the ban will be lifted and colour will be allowed yellow, and there•s others in my opinion the same way, that half of Manitoba farmers will suffer and will suffer heavily.

And I'm going to take just an example from my own constituency, and I believe the Honourable Member for Gimli and the Honourable Member for st. George will agree, that in the Inter lake area 95% of the livelihood comes from the cream cheque. This product is not pnly concerned with butter, the dairy, it's concerned with ve_al calves, with steers, with cows .and with everything that goes with it. Even as far as the fertilizer is concerned. Now what will happen if it is allowed to be coloured yellow?

That deceit will come into picture -- some body is going to be deceived, and as the honourable member for Ass iniboia quoted from The Voice of the Farmer, I shall quote also. From ••• of ••• the beginning December 1st, 1959, Voice of the Farmer, and the heading is this: "No soap, says strong farm brief. Yellow-hued margarine would bring disaster to dairies, deceit to users •11 And here is what they called deceit. "Butterlegging, or the passing of yellow margarine for butter at butter prices is · facilitated with yellow-coloured margarine •.

According to the .experience in the Uni ted States iluring the fiscal year ending June 1957, of 3, 280 public eating'places inspected, illegal serv ings of margarine totalled 455, or 14% in violation of the law. And an effective inspection program too prevent such fraud would require huge sums of money. n Then we are going to hire · somebody to keep control and we're going to pay, and pay heavUy . Now the revenue I don't need to quote. To my surprise, and I appreciate very much the member for Birtle-Russell, he quoted the exact figures that I was going to quote.

And I have a ·l ot of friends m the �ity of Winnipeg. They are all workers and they are not fussy to use margarine. A$ a matter of fact, they don't like it, and 1'11 -go a little bit further. I have far-. away re1J!.tioh and when she felt sick she went to a doctor, !Wd t;he doctor advised her to lay o:ff the margarine if she doesn't want to get cancer. 'Now, Mr •.

Spea.Irer, not only do I have to ; -�c-onvince the other city members but I also have to convince m;�dlity colleagues, my own leader, ::"!Wd it give,1!lle a great pleasure to stand _here and defend rn:y.own rights •• in spite _of this ha l 'hii.1 hit Have: your fui:t-- ibelieve 1 Mr .• Speaker; that thepecipie in the gallery have more fun .·::than we haVe below. ·Therefore,.: Mr •.

Speaker, this is some proof to .show how important the · :tiil:iry, butter in particular, is to the Manitoba farmer; an(! also to the people as a whole, and ; yet we base our argument that colouring margarine yellow will not hurt the industry. Regard less how large the dairy industry is, at the moment, in my. own opinion, if the foundation is ·ri diculed, if it's punctured, the whole industry will come down. And as you members will ·M arch 11th, 1960 Page 1457

(Mr . Wagner, cont'd) .. ... . recall, I always like to refer myself to a cartoon which cuts down half of my speech or even more, and here -is what I'm trying to point out. The foundation - how big is the cat -- dairy industry -- how big as it is on this cartoon -- how small are the mice -- but they have the bell in their hand -- they want to hang that bell and that bell is led by our honourable member for Wellington. Our First Minister, according to the picture, ' is pushing him . And no doubt, and no doubt, in my mind there is no doubt at all, the city members are pushing the First Minister. MR. ROBLIN: Mr.

Speaker, I just want to make one poin t that my colleague reminded me of. I don't know anyone who could push the Honourable Member for Wellington . MR. WAGNER: Well pos sibly he's a bigger man, but somehow he's on the front with the bell. Therefore, Mr . Speaker, as I suggested, the foundation of any building, if it's rotten or it's broken, the building shall come down. This is my point -- no matter how big the industry is, if the foundation will be ridiculed; if it's going to be taken underneath from it, it is going to fall down.

I just asked the city members whether they wished to see the industry come down; whether they would like to see all the farmers that are engaged in the industry to come down to the city and ask for employment; ask for welfare; possibly push them out of their own jobs. Before I sit down, Mr. Speaker, I want to read a resolution from District 5, which was presented to me on behalf of the Manitoba Farmers' Union, and this area is represented by the District 5 Farmers' Union in three constituencies, that is, Gill)li, St. George and Fisher.

And in that District 5 there are 44 locals, and I am sorry that they didn't inform me how many members of 44 locals, but I have a pretty close guess . Resolution in reference of coloured margarine, February 21st, 1960, District 5, which livelihood of many small farmers in District 5 between Lake Winnipeg and Manitoba Lake depended largely on the weekly source of income from cream cheques; and

whereas we of the Manitoba Farmers' Union are still against the use of yellow colouring in margarine because we feel that they are trying to sell margarine using the tribute of butter as sales means; therefore

be it resolved that we protest the lifting of the ban on the yellow colouring of margarine; therefore be it further resolved that all MLAs vote against coloured margarine and if the MLAs vote for coloured margarine, that they put this in the Act that they should be compelled to eat the margarine." Signed - District 5, Secretary, Mrs . Anne Jessel . And here I have with me different types of resolutions and letters and so on, but I'm not going to go in detail · At this moment nobody referred -- some of the honourable members referred to what happens in United States with margarine.

I also want to refer to a brief, a brief presented by a farm organization, and every member received it I'm sure . But I just wonder if the 50 members went to the trouble to read it. "S ince the repeal of the federal restriction on yellow i:iliii'garine, July 1950, 13 states have lifted the ban on the margarine and sale of yellowcolour . At the present time only the main dairy states of Minnesota and Wisconsin prohibit the sale of coloured margarine.

The per capita consumption of margarine in the United States has increased during this period from six pounds in 1950 to nine pounds in 1958 "• and it has the table showing. "On the other hand, butter consumption in that country has declined from 10 .6 pounds in 1950 to 8.4 pounds in 1958 . The pre- war per capita figure , 1939, for butter and margarine in that country were 17 .2 and 2.3 respectively." You just can notice the difference -- 17 .2 to 2.3 respectively.

It is important to note that average consumption of butter ill Minnesota, where colouring is not allowed, is now about 21 pounds per capita compared with the national average of 8.4. A survey conducted by the University of Minnesota in 1952 on the competition between butter and margarine revealed that of the 1, 179 families from which information was obtained, 36% reported that they would buy more margarine if it were coloured; and 53% reported they would pay more for coloured margarine. Source - State Bulletin 417, June 1953, Agricultural Experim ental Station, University of Minnesota. Now one more quotation.

"T he Manitoba Farmers' Union made a telepbone survey in Greater Winnipeg in June and July of this year and housewives were asked questions with · reference to the· colouring of margarine. 753 calls were made and 531 reports filled out. Forty- five percent of the housewives contacted said they would use more margarine if it were coloured. " This is the answer in itself. If it would be coloured the city women would use more margarine. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I just wonder if the· colour of the butter would have been white, Page 1458 March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Wagner, cont'd) .•.•. or I'm going to go a step further, black, wouldn't the thrifty wife today or the manufacturer today not have asked for the same colour as butter ? I believe they would ask for the same thing. And now the city wife does not stop and think if the margarine will be coloured - have yellow colo ur -- if the price of margarine wouldn't go up. And I am sure that the price will go up as the colour will come in. The Honourable Member for Wellingt on, when he was speaking, he said that the people were entitled to freedom; that an injustice is being done.

The way he cited it, it seemed to me that the city housewife is being sha ckled, is in chains behind the iron wall because it is not allowed to be colou red yello w. I believe, Mr.

Speaker, if any housewife -- the city housewife would go out and visit her fa rmer friends and notice how the farm er's housewife has to work with the dairy, with the livestock, carry on with other chores around the fa rmhouse, then the city wife would compare its job in the city, how hard it is, as the Member for Emerson stated, -------off, with this colou ring of marga rine. she would analyze her own decision, what the fa rm woman has to go through to get this cream cheque into her.hands to subsidize her livelihood, and the city housewife would vote against the colour ing of margarine herself if she would be there out on the farm and analyze it for herself.

The Honourable Member from Assiniboia states that butter is subsidized, and I agree with him that he agrees that he has no argument with it. But the industry -- the dairy industry -- the butter does not need to be subsidized. The fa rmer does not wish its subsidization. If the farmer was given a fa ir share of the national income, he does not need no subsidization. The Honourable Member also from Assiniboia quoted an

article from Voice of the Farmer which I wanted to ask a question but he wouldn't allow me. That's fine. I don't hold anything against it. But was it a letter written by an individual member into The Voice of the Farmer for that article, or the statemeii.t which he read was put in by a farm organization official ? I just wonder whether it was just a private member wrote it in or not. MR. SEABORN: Mr. Speak er, maybe I can help the Honourable Member for Fisher here. This quotation from the farmers' paper was a requote from the Carillon News, if that helps him ariy; MR. WAGNER: Well , Mr.

Chairman, the way I understood the member for Assiniboia used it, it came directly from The Voice of the Farmer - the farmers' paper from the Farmers' Organization. I' m ·not responsible for what happens in Carillon News. MR. FROESE: Mr. Speake r, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Broken head, that the debate be adjourned. MR. SPEAKER: Didn't the honourable member ask a question and then he spoke? HON. GURNEY EVANS (Minister of Industry & Commerce) (Fort Rouge): On a point. of order, my understanding, Mr.

Speaker, was that the Honourable Member for Rhineland at that point sought to ask a question and he was informed that it was not in order at that point. I took it to mean that he was seeking to ask a question and had not spoken on that occasion. I would raise a further point, Mr. Speaker, that you might wish to consider, that in view of the fact that a large number of the honourable gentle men may desire to speak on this Bill, that whoever sought to adjourn the debate might now be willing to hear other speakers before he adjourns. MR. FROESE: It will be all right with me that the others speak. MR. L.

DESJARDINS (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker , my speech will be very very short. I agree with the Honourable the last member that spoke that the camps are pretty well divided now and there's not much use in speaking on this or trying to convert the others, and I also agree that it seems to be, from what I hear in different rooms other than this one, it seem s to be members of the city against the rural members. But there is one wrong, Mr. Speaker, that I feel should be corrected. I certainly feel that all the members of the government are morally bound to vote in favour of this Bill .

I say this becaus e this question has been in front of the people of Manitoba for going on ten years, and all kinds of litera ture for and against it has been circulated . And last year when a member of the government, in fact the same one who is sponsoring this Bill this time, tried to have the same Bill sponsored, the members of the government, all of them except the honourable member, voted instead to have a Royal Commission study this further -- (Interjection) -- well, a C<:Jinmission. I voted against it for the information of the Honourable the Attorney-General becaus e I don't think it was fair.

I March 11th. 1950 Page 1459

(Mr. Desjardins, cont' d) •.... don't think it's fair to embarrass a man and that is exactly the position that Professor Waines has been put in. And I think that the government should at least apologize to the honourable member because I'm sure that not one -- not one of the members of the government have changed their mind on this . It was just hoping that he bring in a recomm endation that would favour them and it would be an excuse to vote for it. Now many times we're challenged by the members across from us, why don't we vote this way and why don't we vote that way.

And I think thi s is a point, . that if they were sincere, and every single one of them except the Member for Wellington voted in favour of this ,. well they should at least go for it. MR. LYON: Your government cleared it up ten years ago. MR. DESJARDINS: Well I' m not responsible for the se things that happened ten years ago. I don't remember that they asked for a commiss ion. I know that last year I was ready and the me mber s of my Party -- the Liberal Party were certainly ready to vote for it - (Int erjection) -- What' s that? I can't understand that . I wish they would ask one question at a ti me . MR.

SPEAKER: ..... ......... a question . The Honourable Member for St. Vital . MR. FRED GROVES (St . Vital) : Mr. Speaker, I will take the advice of the Honourable Member from Fisher and try and not in my rem arks repeat sta tistics that we have listened to on this debate , as in the number of years. that it has been before the House . A review of the past references that have been made in thi s House on previous occasions on this debate reveals a great traged y . It would appear that the case has not been judged on what is right but what is politically expedient .

In the past, I'm sure, the tremendous publicity that the Manitoba Legislature has given to margarine surely has increased its sale rather than impale it. A great deal of public conversation follows the debates on margarine in this House and what we are doing, in effect, is running a regular annual advertising campaign for the producers of margarine . The ban on the colouring of margarine should be decided on its merit and not on politics or the protection of one particular industry . Sooner or late r, perhaps thi s afternoon , thi s ban on the sale of coloured margarine is going to be lift ed.

There never has been a valid reason for insisting that housewives must do this messy job at home in the kitchen when it can be done mor e efficiently and mor e economically and in a more sanitary manner by the manufactur er . The consumption of margarine is increasing very rapidly. Why is this when the con sumers of th is country were raised on butter and probably would rather have butt er on their table than margarine 'l The obvious answer is price, not only the lower price of ma rgarine but the higher price of but ter.

Edible oils, whether animal or vegetab le, are not naturally white; vegetable oils are som ewhat yellowish in colour and anima l fats, particularly when they are eating grass instead of hay, are more yellow during the summer mont hs. Canadians expect and demand yellow coloured table fat and since Federal Government regulat ions allow products made from animal fat to have artificial colouring added to keep them bright yellow in colour, it would seem -- it would seem logical that ma rgarine might also be coloured yellow, in order to suit this consumer preference.

The Federal Food and Drug Regulations protect the consumer against any contamination or misrepre sentati on in this regard. We are asking for no change in the Margarine Act that affects standards , nor do we wish any of the rest of the Act changed insofar as it applies to serving ma rgarine in resta urants or trying to pass margarine off as but ter . It would appear then that the restriction on the sale of coloured ma rgarine is there to protect the sale of another food product. A large ma jority of the people in Manitoba want coloured margarine .

Some years ago they voted by a 5 to 1 majo rity in favour of banning the restriction against colour . I have here the statist ics but as I said earlier, I'm not going to bore the House by reading a lot of figures. At the time of this Referendum, my constituency voted overwhelmingly for discontinu ance of the ban on colouring. During the past election campaign, I visited over 4, 000 homes in my constitue ncy and with the housewife in those homes, the ma tter of coloured margarine is still a very live issue.

The real issue in my opinion, is not the farm er versus the consum er, but the dairy industry versus the consl.IIDer. Any damage to the dairy industry was, in my opinion, done when ma rgarine was first allowed to be sold, and I do not think that any furthe r damage will be done if it is now allowed to be coloured. Are the dairy and creamery inte rests in this province sufficiently strong to out-weigh Page 1460 March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Groves, cont'd) ...•. the moral rights of low income groups to buy a wholesome, inex pensive food product coloured the way they want it? Many people now feel that the dairy industry can stand on its own feet but it is reluctant to do so when the Fede�al Government is buying the ir surplus production . I can appreciate the concern, if justified, of the producers of butter and can appreciate too, that this is a matt er that creates a division between country and city and this is not a good thing.

Surveys, however, in the country, have shown that even in the dairy areas of this province, the use of margarine is quite widespread. The dairy industry in Manitoba is a big business, and it does have a lot of problems to solve. This, I am sure, they are big enough to do, probably with government help. But the solution to the ir problem is not the denying to the consumers of this province the right to buy coloured margar ine.

It would appear, too, that many of the previous speakers in othe r legislature s, dealing with thi s subject, and even the fa rmers themselves may have forgotten the fact that edible oils from which margarine is made is also an agricultural product. Growth of edible oil crops is a cash crop and many farmers in the southwe stern portion of this province have taken advantage of this situation and in fact , are now growing so much edible oil that they support a large processing plant in Alto na.

Margarine is an agricultural product; it is a product which _i s now primarily and will soon be enti rely made from Manitob a-grown vegetable oils, and it is ridiculous to place restrictions on the sale of one agricultural product in favour of anothe r. The margarine industry also has a great influence on the Canadian economy through jobs, jobs which it creates in the manufacturing plants .

The margarine industry should be regarded as a source of reliable family income . _ Dealing with the subject of jobs, this has been stressed many times in briefs that have been presented to members of municipal councils, particularly in the Greater Winnipeg area dealing with the subject·of margarine.

In a recent pamphlet issued by the National Dairy Council of Canada, called "Fat Facts on Canada' s Dairy Industry, "w e read th is: "D airy processors, manufactu rers and distributors are spending more than $5 million each year to advertise -and promote the sale of dairy products and expand the market for milk production of Canada'·s farmers ." And I would like to ask, what are the dairy industry of Canada spending on the advertising of butte r? To date I have not seen any evidence of any of this $5 million being spent to promote the sale of butt er.

As a matter of fact, if we judge by th is ad, and I refer to this one, which is how the dairy industry is spending on adverti sing, $5 million-- and I'm sure that you've all seen this -- it' s ridiculous for an industry tha t' s supposed to be promoting a product to be spending/ $5 million on advertising of this ty pe . And if we can judge by this ad which I cut out of an issue of The Tribune of last summer, that this is the way they' re spending their money, surely they can't be trea ting the threat of margarine seriously.

Surely they should be promoting by a vigoro•lS advertising campaign, the -sale of th eir own product . One cannot turn on one's TV set without being constan tly reminded about the merits of margarine as a spread, and yet we see no such advertising on behalf of butt er. All this ad is trying to do is to ju-stify the existence and the importance of the dairy industry and perhaps tha t's a very necessary thing . But surely, they would be further ahead with this type of money -- with the type of morrey that this ad costs. to be spending it -on promoting the sale of their �wn product, which is butt er . .

Who in this Legislature has ever seen a TV commercial on butt er ? Who has ever seen a picture colour ad in a magazine, asking us to -se1l butte r? ·N obody; because there is no such ·a dvertising for butt er. Certainly there should. There certainly should. Well, apparently, margarine advertising seems to be selling margarine, so surely butter advertising -- well, ·p ri-ce sells it too. In 1953, 310 million pounds of butter were sold and for the same period 145, ooo, 598 .:o pounds of-margarine were sold.

Andl would suggest that if the producers of butt er, the . :. dairies anCt creamerif;ls want to :stay in the: rutullng;· the y'd b�tter have a look at their own .. ; lndustry;" 'they had better take some lessons in :advertisin!t ani;l,selling techniques from their : competito ts and not depend on depriving the producers of another product, which they want to :.sell. · · ' · In summing up, I would like to sum up rny case as foii:ows: 46 out of 48 states, in the ·• .United Sta te s,. permit colouring; two provinces and the North West Territorie s in Canada . permit colouring.

It was important enough to the people of Newfoundland to insist that coloured 'March 11th, . 1960 Page 1461

(Mr. Groves, cont'd) •.... margarine be a condition of their joining Confederation. Practically all Europeru: countries, including those in which the dairy industry is a major and important contributor,. permit colouring. Margarine is an agricultural product, and as such should not be restricted. Margarine already carries a 10% sales tax, which butter does not. It cannot be denied that farmers, even dairy farmers, buy margarine themselves . Margarine is a wholesome food recommended by Canada's food rules. Margarine is purchased primarily by families with low incomes .

The growing of edible oils is something that this Legislature should encourage if we are assured that ten times the amount grown would find a ready market. Two million of our fellow Canadians are free to buy coloured margarine now so why should Manitoba consumers be penalized? There are, at the present time, millions of pounds of coloured margarine being manufactured right here in the City of Winnipeg, for consumption in British Columbia . When the consumers of Manitoba find this out and find out that they can't have it because of stupid legislation, they aren't going to be too happy.

We all believe in the democratic principle of freedom of choice, and it is in ou.r interests to see that the ban on yellow margarine is removed. And in closing I would like to appeal to the Members of the. Hou.se to send this Bill on to Commi ttee where it may be considered in more detail. MR. SPEAKER: MR. D. M. STANES (St. James) : I'd be very pleased, Mr. Speaker, but I would like to reply to the remarks of the Honourable Member of St. Boniface who said that he thought that the report was a waste of time . Personally, Mr.

Speaker, I have never felt in favour of this colour ban at any time, but I was prepared to reconsider my opinion and perhaps change it completely, if I felt that there was going to be considerable economic damage in the province. The report came out that there would not be , therefore it has been most useful to myself. Now, whether other people on the other side of the fence would use the same way, that is another matter. Mr. Speaker, there is very little that I can add to the debate.

I have what I think is a good argument, but I'm sure it's very old in this House and probably been given on many occ asions so I won't give any of it. But I am reminded, Mr. Speaker, of the remarks often given by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, when he states, I think quite rightly, that it does matter where you sit . It does remind nie, in this particular instance, it does matter where you live . MR. W. B. SCARTH, Q. C. (River Heights): Mr.

Speaker, I think that the Honourable the Member for the area between the lakes has made a very shrewd remark and that is to the extent or to the intent that it is doubtful if anybody on the floor of this House has the persuasive powers to change anybody very much in his opinion.

I do agree, Sir, with respect with the honourable member for As siniboia for the views, I do agree with his suggestion that there is a discrimination and a sharp discrimination against one Canadian industry in this bill and I disagree with the Hm ourable the Leader of the Opposition when he was talking over TV the other evening, despite the fair company that he had, he made one remark with which I do not agree and as, Sir, you will recollect, when the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture was on estimates, a great deal was said about tariffs, import duties, and then the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition suggested on TV and elsewhere, I believe, that the farmer was dis criminated against on account of tariff duties .

If there were no tariff duties in this country, Mr . Speaker, I'm afraid the farmers would have a very very difficult time. There would be no government revenue to speak of, to support their butter; there would not be su.fficient industry in Canada to support 17 1/2 million people and again I'm afraid the dairy farmers would suffer most acutely without those tariff duties over which we, of course, in this House, have no control. So let us forget that one situation, but remember this, if we will, the tariff duties are for two purposes -- (

a) they are to regulate the dumping of goods in our country, and (

b) they 3-+e to put our federal government in a position to bargain with other countries who have tariff duties and without them Sir, we, or no other country of our type could survive . This particular bill, is, I think, as far as it goes, an ideal one. In other words, it cuts out a dis crimination, but it doesn't go far enough. And, Sir, my suggestion is that agriculture should bear in mind that it cannot live by taking in its own washing. Agriculture is just as dependent upon industry in Canada as industry is dependent upon agriculture, and the moment that we start discriminating Page 1462 March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Scarth, cont'd) •••. against the agricultural industry and other industries such as the margarine industry, or whatever it is, then we are going to be in for real trouble, and I suggest, Sir, that we cut out discrimination in Canadian industries. Tarifi duties, yes, they must be imposed to compete with other nations, but within our own little Can ada let us not discriminate one industry against the other. Now Sir, I'd like to refer to the 1949 act which we are amending.

Section 4 -- bear in mind that we are asked to repeal

section 5 of the act in colour - but

section 4 says that every owner, operator, manager of a public house eating place where margarine is served, shall cause the words "margarine served here"to be prominently printed on every bill of fare . Subsection 2 says that every owner, operator, manager of a public eating house where margarine is served but in which a printed or written menu or bill of fare is not used, shall display or cause to be displayed in a conspicuous place in the dining room or other eating place thereof a placard containing the words "m argarine served here"in capital letters not less than 1 1/2 inches high. And

Section 12 provides a fine of $500 or imprisonment, for not more than six months or both, for an infraction of the act . Now margarine, Sir, as far as I know, doesn't contain nitro-glycerine or potassium cyanide. It's a very healthy thing and why within a bill-- and if we're not discriminating against a Manitoba product then I don't know what it is -- why it should stigmatize that

article in a restaurant or eating place, is more than I know. And all I ask Sir, and I happen to be associated with a creamery in Manitoba, all I ask Sir, is justice and that industry is not discriminated against. That we get fair play for everybody including the. consumer. MR. WALTER WEffi (Minnedosa) : Mr. Speaker, I might say that I have no intention of wasting my breath or your time or the time of the members in trying to change anybody's mind, and I also might say that I will have a lot less to say altogether than the Honourable Member for Fisher had to say in closing.

I rise purely and simply to make my position clear. I intend to support this bill at second reading. .I guess possibly I'm one of the unknown quantities that people have been wondering what's going to happen but I feel quite frankly, that there's room for a compromise. I intend to try and seek that compromise in committee- if it isn't successful, I reserve the right to oppose the bill on third reading. Thank you, Mr . Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. GEORGE JOHNSON (Minister of Health and Public Welfare) (Gimli): Mr.

Speaker, I would just like to join into this debate because I can speak as the member for Gimli and because I tbink I, too, should join in this party schizophrenia that' s been going on this afternoon. But I certainly hope all the colour stays in the members anfi out of the margarine, and having survived Mr.

Speaker, during the depres sion years in the Interlake on the cream cheque, and having practiced and survived on the cream cheque as a physician, I can assure .you I have some very positive feelings in regard to this matter and I wish to just, in the few minutes I have, to concur most wholeheartedly in the so-called emotional jag which my friend from Birtle-Russell endorsed in this afternoon -- what he said was very true. I also wish I could conscientiously endorse the dangers of margarine as enuncia ted by the member from Fisher, but I'm afraid that he's out in left field there.

However, the only thought that comes to my mind is, certainly in the Interlake area the economy of that district, as the member from Fisher has so rightfully stated - has depended to a large degree on butter, being outside the Winnipeg milk shed and being largely in mixed farming and smaller farms and to supplement the fishermen on the lake, the cream cheque has stood the test of time as being one of the main sources of revenue to the people. The Arborg Creamery, as you might have noticed in the press the other night, Mr.

Speaker, for the second year in a row, has .won the butter-making championship, and Rivei-ton and Arborg are noted for their very fine butter . We always hear the story that we need the small farmer, the man with the diversified income -- he's more stable. During the. depression� he survived when the others were in trouble.

I remember the depression years -- I'm not that old, but as a boy on a farm every summer in the Inter lake area, milking cows and going to the creamery twice a week in the car, this was the only source of revenue on that farm to buy the staple items, and the coffee and lump sugar was abo�t all 01;1e bought in those days, in addition to what was ·raised on the farm. And I saw this when sheep were selling for $1 ;5 0 a carcass. This is March 11th, 1960 Page 1463

(Mr . Jo hnson, cont'd.) .•.. what stood the test of time for these people . I don't think I, as the member from Gimli, despite what some of my townspeople may think, the housewives, as to coloring of margarine - I feel I owe it to my constituents to express my feelings very positively in this regard.

But I can't help but feel it's bound--it isn't discrimination, it's just that if we talk about wanting to keep the small fa rmers on the fa rm, we want to assist him -w e're always talking this way - and then all of a sudden we break out in a real rash of, as I call, schizophrenia, and talk about monopolies and why he isn't advertising his butter, and so on. So I join with all . those who, as I said earlier, hope that all the calor remains with the view of the honourable members. MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Carillon. MR. PRE FONTAINE: Mr.

Speaker, I wanted to get on my feet in order to be sure that I would have forty minutes to speak and it's about the right time now. Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to be the member who introduced this matter on the floor of this House in 1949 . I would like to read the res olution that I moved on the 15th of February, 1949 . ''Move that this House request the government to immediately introduce legislation to regulate the sale of margarine in this province and in particular to provide that it shall not be so colored as to have the appear ance of butter" .

That was the start of the discussions that have been held in this House prac tically every year since. I haven't changed my opinion, Mr. Speaker, since that time, and I believe that this debate is an important debate because the fate of many farmers of Manitoba depend pos sibly on the idea of one person, maybe the judgment of Mr . Speaker, himself, and I feel it is important if, after all this talk, one man might be induced to vote with us who do not like this legislation. It might decide the fate of many many farmers of this province so I say that the debate is important.

I hope that the honourable member for St. James will listen to me .because I'm appe aling to him--apparently his mind is not definitely made up -- and maybe there is a possibility that he would vote against the bill. Mr . Speaker, a question as to whether mar garine will, if it is colored, replace butter, to me is proven by the words themselves of the person who was appointed by the government to make this enquiry. And I would like to quote just one sentence .

"Th e factory coloring of margarine will relieve the housewife of the incon venience imposed upon her if she wishes to serve in an attractive form a good food'' ..• 'in an attractive form' ••. to me this is a denial of the conclusion of the report in itself. He admits that it is more attractive if it is colored . If it is more attractive, it will be sold in larger quantities and it will displace more butter. This is the best argument against the whole recom mendation cf the commission that can be put forward.

His own words - and it's why the edible oil foods industry would like to have margarine colored, so that it would be more attractive. I would like to congratulate the member for Birtle-"R ussell for his good address on this matter . A very good one. I will not repeat the arguments, but I feel that it is one of the best addresses on the matter that has been presented to this House . I would like to quote from the February 25th issue of The Tribune, words from our own Dairy Commissioner in the Province of Mani toba, Mr. C. H.P.

Killick "The inroads made by margarine and its effects on overall consump tion of spreads were outlined briefly by the Dairy Commissioner." That' s from The Tribune the words of the Commissioner are those: "Let us make no mistake about margarine as an Important competitor to butter ." To me, that' s the crux .of the whole situation. If we allow margarine to be coloured we will certainly do harm to the dairy farmers and the farmers of this province. And let us not forget that there are only two provinces in Ca nada where the colouring is allowed, Newfoundland and B.

C., that• s where they do not produce enough butter. Newfoundland hardly any at all and B. C. very little . What about the other provinces; what about Ontario; what about Ablerta and Saskatchewan? We're in good company in trying to save a little bit of the market in this country of ours for the dairy farmers . And I believe it would be a sad day if this House would vote today, or riext week in favour of allowing margarine to be coloured. Mr . Speaker, it was for no idle reason that the Parliament of Canada, between 1886 and 1948 maintained a complete ban against the manufacture and sale of ma rgarine.

After all our parliament is not composed of people who are acting in this manner just for the fun of it, no, they were trying to protect a vital industry. I'm a free trader as you know. Mention has been made that we should not, those of us who are free traders, oppose this Bill. And the good paper, The Carillon News has been brought forward by the Honourable Member for c Page 1464 March ll, 1960

(Mr. Prefontaine, cont'd.) •••• Wellington. I would like to quote from the Carlllon News just a few sentences; it is a good paper, it has a very good name, and I would like to quote . The title is ''The Margarine Probe". "It is the studied opinion of this newspaper that southeastern Manitoba should go all out in protesting the introduction of colored margarine in Manitoba .

Every businessman, every labourer and every farmer in this p art of the province has a stake in the dairy industry and it is their privilege to state their position." And it goes on, and the paper answers the question that has been asked, what about the free enterprise you've been promoting all those years ? The answer that free enterprise is only relative. We accept the fact that a manufacturing concern works behind a comp aratively saf':! tariff wall in order that they may pay wages based on the high Canadian standard of living, and yet compete with Japanese goods .

When ordinary duties do not suffice, we add dumping duties. These are self-imposed restrictions that we want because the Canadian way of life is deer to us . If we had the choice between unrestricted importation of cheap foreign goods and the resultant chaos and the status quo, most of us would prefer to keep things the way they are. And then he applies this to the dairy industry in this situation . Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member for Assiniboia, said a little while ago that we should allow the coloring of margarine and that later on if it harms the dairy industry well then we should do something about it .

Mr. Speaker, to my way of looking at it, an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure and we know, experience proves, that the coloring of margarine increases its sale and does damage to the dairy industry . MR. ORLIKOW: Mr. Speaker, I agree with speakers who began their speeches by say ing that not many votes, if any, will pe changed by the speeches that have been made or will be made in this House on this subject. I represent an urban constituency; I represent a constit uency which is made up in the main of low income people and I intend to vote for this Bill, Mr. Speaker.

I intend. to vote for this Bill because the people whom I represent, find this an impor tant issue . But I think a good deal of nonsense has been spoken by some of the people who are also going to vote for this Bill. I think it is nonsense to suggest that this Bill will not hurt the dairy industry; I think it is nonsense to suggest that the dairy industry could increase the sale of butter and I suppose, decrease the sale of margarine by advertising. Surely there is only one reason why people buy margarine and a very simple reason .

They don't buy margarine because margarine is better, because it tastes better, because it looks better . They buy mar garine for the simple reason that margarine is cheaper and if you have a large family, if you use three or four or five pounds of butter or margarine a week, if you can save a couple of dollars a week and if you are on a limited income of 40 or $45 a week, this is important . This is why you buy margarine L11 preference to butter and for, no other reason . And for the Honour able Member for St.

Vital to sugge st that the problems of the dairy industry would be solved even partially by the dairy industry spending more money on advertising, I think is ridiculous . All it would do would be to increase the price of butter and so complicate the problem of the dairy industry and the farmer even more . Mr. Speaker, I listened to the Honourable Member for St . Vital and if he wants to ask me questions later, he can do so . I gave him the courtesy of listening quietly and I would ask for the same courtesy from him • Now, Mr.

Speaker, it has been suggested by, the mover of this motion, by the Honourable Member for Assiniboia that this will not affect the farmer. I think that is nonsense� The farmer is already in difficulty and this will make his difficulty even greater. The Honour able Member for River Heights made a plea for, I thought, a very contradictory plea, on the one hand he op posed the restriction on the margarine industry, on the other hand he upheld the restrictions which we have in the tariff structure .· Now, how ridiculous can you get?

The far mer is asked to operate -- in this resolution and in everything else which we hear from the · other side of the House--the farmer is asked to operate in a free enterprising economy at the same time as the farmer is shackled by tariffs. The farmer and other people pay billions of dollars every year because they can't buy foreign manufactured goods at the price they could be sold in this country; they are forced to buy manufactured goods produced in this country and to pay the tariffs and the subsidies which are inherent in this instance. I'm not opposed to tariffs and to subsidies necessa rily.

They may be ·necessa ry in certain or in all cases but to suggest that the farmer by hiiiB elf carry the burden of the tariff structure and the quota March 11, 19 60 Page 1465

(Mr . Orlikow , cont'd.) ••••• structure and that the farmer then be happy about the free enter prise system when it onl y applies to him, I think is not being realistic at all. Now, I do not believe for a moment, Mr. Chairman, that this Bill can be stopped. It maybe stopped in this Legislature , but I do not believe for a moment that this Bill can be stopped because the people of this province and the people of this country want the opportunity to use a cheaper spread than butter.

And once you open the gates to margarine, whether coloured or uncoloured I think you did the major damage to the dairy industry and to the farmer. And that cannot and will not be undone. I want to suggest, Mr .

Speaker, that it is consistent with my way of thinking that the farmer, just as every other person in this country of ours is entitle d to a decent standard of livi ng, we subsidize the manufacturers of Canada through tariffs, we subsidize them through other subventions, we guarantee to the workers in the city, a decent standard of living through such regul ations as the Minimum Wage Laws and the Fair Wage Act and I support that. And I think that the farmer is entitled to the same measure of support. I don't think that the passage or non-passage of this will change this very much.

It will make it somewhat more difficult, but I don't think too much more difficult . I want to suggest Mr .

Chairman, that we would be much more practical if we would suggest to the Federal Government that since the Federal Government has already passed price support legis lation , and since the Federal Government has already set the support price for butter at I think something in the neighbourhood of 68 cents a pound, that the Federal Government should take the next logical step of disposing of the surplus butter which we have in this country, which is purely a surplus because of the price problem , of disposing of the surplus of butter in this country by selling it at whatever price is required to dispose of it, right here in this country.

I think it is ridiculous for the people of Canada to support the price of butter as they are doing and I think it's right that we support the price of butter at a price which will give the farmer something near what it costs him to pro duce the butter and then to turn around and to sell the surplus butter or the so-cal led surplus butter, to Czechoslovakia at something like 38 cents a pound.

It seems to me that if this is the price required to get rid of the surplus butter that the place to dispose of that surplus but ter is right here in Canada, to the people of Canada, who have already subsidized the produc tion of this once and I think this is the place to dispose of it. Mr. Speaker, I'm going to vote for this Bill , I make no apology for my vote bacause this is an issue which I think is of importance to the people whom I represent. But I think, Mr .

Speaker, that the members who are voting for this Bill but who are also suggesting that this will not hurt the :fi:HiiefEi 6f this province and of this country, that is not important, that they are l:JefHg l�ss fiJihl h8nest when they S3!Y these things, Mr. Speaker. Mii;; A; H. CORBETT (Swan River): Mr .

Speaker, there has been a considerable illii 8iilit of emotionalism in all the speeches connected with this matter and that is quite natural, I presume, because it's a matter that is kind of dividing polit ical camps and upsetting family relations, but as far as the matter of -- for once I was led to agree with the Honour able Member for St.

John's; he built up a splendid case against the lifting of this ban and then after he proved his case entirely , he turned around and said, "Now I proved that the ban should not be lif ted" and then said, "I will vote for the lifting of the ban." Then the Honourable Mem ber for Fisher , he's in this too, and he said -- and once I agreed with hlni. too , he said that, "no matter how much we've talked here, it wouldn't influence any one of us" and that is right.

But there are certain arguments that have been brought up here with a kind of, in my opinion, would kind of lead to encouraging sectionalism in our province here. In other words, the urban against the rural but we don't want that to occur. I represent an urban constituency which is strongly in the dairy business and as such I am definitely opposed to the lifting of the ban on colouring. I think the technical end of the argument in favour of retaining the ban on colouring of margarine was explained very thoroughly by the Honourable Member for Birtle Russell.

And I don't feel that I'm quite in a position to add much to that, but there is consider able stress laid by the proponents of coloured margarine on the terrible hardships suffered by the poor urban dwel lers in having to colour this margarine after they buy it. Well, that may be so. It is quite a messy job, I believe. But t consider now that with the tremendous amount of modern conveniences in the modern homes in the city as well as in the country, that a little elbow grease e�:pended on mixing a blob of colouring matter into the margarine is not such a terrible hardship.

I was born on a dairy farm and at the age of six years old they set me down Page 1466 · March 11th, 1960

(Mr. Corbett, cont'd.) •••• on a stool alongside a cow, and there were certain appendages at tached to this cow and they said, "if you squeeze and pull on them you will get some milk and then you put that in a pail. " Well fortunately for my tender years this cow only had three of these appendages, some accident had deprived her of the other, so I became quite proficient in milking this three-teated cow as we called her in our vulgar way.

But I must tell these gentle ment that have become very "rhapsodaisical" or whatever the word is -- I haven't got the right word but that's all right, you know what I mean -- that if this colouring of margarine is going to have a tremendous effect on our industry, and our commerce and our industrial development, well I think that's a lot of "tommy rot" but it is going to have quite an affect on our well esta blished dairy industry.

I have no objections to the makers of margarine which I believe is normally coloured white --nearly white -- I have no objections to them colouring .the margarine but why should they insist on wanting to colour it exactly the same as our No.l grade daicy butter unless it is for one certain reason and, that is , to improve the sales of the thing -- of margarine. And that is after all the subject at hand is as whether it's going to hurt the dairy industry and it definitely, in my opinion , will affect the dairy industry adversely and not favour ably.

Soji could ramble on and give you a lot more experiences about the time when I used to get up at 4 o' clock in the morning in the summ ertime. I was the youngest boy in the family and to�eep our butter cool enough so it would not be soft when we got in there -- we left at 4 o'clock in the morning and drove in to Winnipeg about 10 or 11 miles and sat out in front of the old store on William Avenue there till 7 o'clock until the storekeeper came so we got our butter in good shape without softening.

But I could tell you that that bit of butter cheques was the main means of us living and me reaching the small stature that I have reached at the present was the fact those old dairy cows and what they meant to us. But that would be getting emotional, as most of these. men and I'm not emotional by any means. And I hate to admit that I tJVer agreed with anything that the CCF Party ever said to us here but today there was two of them -- the Honourable Member for Fisher and the Honourable Member for St.

John's brought in very good convincing arguments in favour of the retention of the ban on the colouring of margarine. And I'm sure, up in my country I have two very live creameries up there and that are -- dispensing quite a large amount of money every week around that country and I'm sure that their welfare will not be helped, but it will be rather hindered if this ban on coloured margarine is removed. Than.. �{. you. MR. SPEAKER: Any further questions ? Order! Order! MR . OBIE BAIZLEY (Osborne): I move, seconded by the MR .

ROBLIN: ••••• my Honourable friend the Member for Rhineland, Sir, could take the adjournm ent, if my honourable friend from Osborne wouldn't mind. MR . FROESE: Mr. Speaker, if there are no further speakers I move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Brokenhead that the debate be adjourned. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR . J. A. CHRISTIANSON (Portage la Prairie) presented Bill No.8 2,

an Act to amend The Dental Association Act for second reading. MR. CHRISTIANSON: Mr. Speaker, the purpose and principle of this Bill is the full implementation of the Paynter Report. You will recall that in 1956 the Minister of Education of the day, the Late Mr. W. C. Miller , asked Dr. K, J. Paynter, DDS, Ph. D, of the Toronto School of Dentistry to conduct a survey covering the costs and other factors in connection with the establishment of a Dental College in the Province of Manitoba.

The report was an exhaus tive enquiry into the dental health of the province with recommendations suggesting how the problem could be corrected. Dr. Paynter found that there was an acute shortage of dentists in Manitoba and, because of the fact that at the time 56% of the dentists were over 50, and 29% were over 60, this situation could only get worse. The immediate recommendation was the establishment of a dental college . This has already been done and it now has 40 students en rolled; 22 taking the second year of a five-year course. Dr.

Paynter also recommended the training of more ancillary personnel for the dentists use. More people could be served by each dentist if the number of hands or assistants the dentist had available could be increased. This amendment makes provision for the training of these people , to perform such functions as cleaning and polishing teeth; taking X-rays; taking impressions for artificial dentures; prepar ing artificial dentures and such other tasks as can be safely delegated to properly trained March 11th, 1960 Page 1467

(Mr. Christianson, cont'd,) ••••• persons under the supervision of a qualified dentist. The long term effect of this, Mr. Speaker, would be a lowering of all dental costs. The Bill also provides for the setting up of a non-profit dental clinic by the Dental Association to give service to those in need or indeed to anyone who wishes to avail themselves of this ser vice.

Section 3 provides for the use of a prescription from a dentist in the making of 4entures in the same manner as the druggist must have a prescription, from a MD. The las t(section provides for the use of an injunction to restrain those who are guilty of repeated offences under the Act, To sum up, Mr. Speaker , this amendment is essentially the final step in the implemen tation of the Paynter Report. The long term effect will be to increase the quality and quantity of dental services available and to decrease the cost of all dental care to all the people of Manitoba. MR . PAUI,.LEY: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to say a word or two in connection with this Bill. I appreciate very much the outline that the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie read to us in connection with this Bill. I have some arguments with him insofar as this applica tion to the Paynter Report because I'm sure, Sir, that the recommendations in the Paynter Report were not as explicit as the honourable member has pointed out. I might say that I'm not going to oppose this particular Bill going to second reading, We have already agreed that a Bill , namely, one dealing with dental technicians has been passed for second reading.

We also have another Bill which is under consideration at the present time and the reason I'm not going to oppose this Bill being given second reading is because I think in all fairness to all concerned, that all three Bi lls should be processed in the Committee on Law Amendments so that we can consider all aspects of this whole question. What the honourable member did not tell us in his remarks was that there are parts of this particular bill that are very restrictive in nature and parts which will give to a group the right to dictate to others.

We of the labour groups, I know, have on many occasions advocated policies akin to a closed shop, But I do not think as yet, as I can recall it, on any occasion have we attempted through one organization to dictate a closed shop to another group that is affiliated . And the purpose, as outline d, in this Bill as my honourable friend, the Member for Portage la Prairie, I think would do that. As you recall, Mr. Speaker, at the last session of the Legislature there were before us at that time a number of Bills dealing with the question of dentists and denturists and dental technicians.

It was suggested at that time that in order that the members of the House would have a full opportunity, if they so desired to consider all of the aspects of the Paynter Report; that the report of Dr. Paynter would be made available . I'm very happy to know that that has been done. But I do suggest, in all deference to the remarks of my honourable friend, the Member for Portage la Prairie, that if one reads and analyses the Paynter Report it is not as concrete and as concise as indicated by my honour able friend.

I appreciate very much the fact that the Dental Association with whom I have no real argument and I know that they're doing a worthwhile work, I appreciate very much the fact that the Dental Association intends to make provision for giving to people in need, certain facilities in respect to the dental profession. But I say, Sir, that we had that contention before us -- that offer before us when we were dealing with the Bills at the last session of the Legis la ture. I recall at that particular time -- a suggestion was made when we were considering the possibility of withdrawal of these bills , that that

section in the Bill at that time, as it is now contained, be left in and proces

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	26-2-39
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	26th 2nd hansardpdf 39.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	8ee8e09891dc48c44a25416527770c22c4beaec5

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).