Thursday, April 6, 1967

Keith Harrington: Well, considerable effort was raade by the producers but I am not too sure what has been done otherwise.

Honourable Daniel J. MacDonald: I have been contacted by other cream ship- pers and people of manufacturing milk about assistance to the Stabilization Board. There was a lot of disruption and things were not presented properly. For instance, they have to register and this resulted in confusion. Some people got two numbers; some were not registered. It is practically straightened out now. In fact. I only know of one that is not straightened out and we have been working on that one now for at least three months. It turned out he had two numbers; he doesn't know how he got them, but he had them. I didn’t realize this about the milk, Sir. It was

nger brought to my attention and possibly there was nothing that could be done a ut it.

Fluid milk producers received 75¢ per cwt. for 3.5% butterfat. But your ques-

tion was when it was adopted first they didn’t receive it for the first couple of months or something?

Keith Harrington: Yes, three months.

Honourable Daniel J. MacDonald: Three months. I wasn’t aware of this. For all milk fluid milk producers received 75¢ per cwt. for 3.5% butterfat for all milk in excess of 120% of the producer's delivery for which he received fluid milk prices.

Early in December the Hon. J. J. Greene announced the appointment of a new Dairy Commission. The Commission will be responsible for the stabilization of the price of manufactured milk and cream in order to provide efficient producers with a fair return for their labour and investment and to assure consumers of a continuous and adequate supply of high quality dairy products. The Commission is charged with the administration of the Federal Government support funds and will be responsible for determining a basis of payments for subsidies to producers. You are all aware that another policy has been announced and it is not yet entirely finalized. The Milk Producers and the Federation of Agriculture are meeting in Ottawa today with the Honourable J. J. Greene to try and do something about this quota system which we in this province did not receive with too much favour because we feel that it is not conducive to enlarging herds. I made representation myself to Honourable J. J. Greene to get this quota raised. The figure that I suggested was 75,000 po.unds It would be quite a help. It is amazing to find out that 80% of the shippers of manu- factured milk in thisp porvince, 80% of them come under the 50,000 pound limit. This is really amazing information when a fellow finds it out. As far as 100,000 pounds is concerned only 2% of our producers ship over 100,000 pounds of milk.

L. George Dewar: Are the ones under fifty thousand pounds excluded?

Honourable Daniel J. MacDonald: No, no, Sir, it is just the other way.

Walter Dingwell:8f1eaker, those statistics that you relate here at the moment, is that the average a1 over the Island?

Honourable Daniel J. MacDonald: No, Sir, not all over the Island.

Walter Dingwell: The average of one particular cream producer? Honourable Daniel J. MacDonald: No, actually, Sir. Walter Dingwell: I have different statistics from different creameries.

Honourable Daniel J. MacDonald: Do you have them from all? Probably from the whole Island there would be 75% instead of 80%. I think probably 80% does apply to this one particular creamery which I understand the honourable mem- ber' 1s quite familiar with. Probably a Director on that board, Sir? I know you were at one qtime. But this was a little amazing to me that 50,000 pounds did involve so many of our roducers; I was quite amazed at this figure. It is seventy-five any- way3 Iham te sure; I haven’t got the exact figure but it is around seventy five to g ty.

Keith Harrington: (Remark inaudible).

_1ss_