.

y Administration tried a series of
mergency measures to rectify the U.S.
alance-of-payments deficit, one of
hich was an attempt to increase the
urplus of exports over imports. While
ve are not here discussing the total
roplem involved in this, or even
Whether oF not the Johnson Adminis-
ration succeeded, or could succeed in
ty aim. The fact is that they pushed
Xs aside for their advantage in the
Market place. ;

we have a glut of wheat. We have
a crisis of overproduction in wheat.

e UK, China, and the Socialist
lands of Europe, in the recent past,
took 50 percent of our flour and wheat
gyports. Socialist European countries
took 29.6 percent, and China took 29.8
percent in the period 1962-63 to 1966-

67-
ji of the conclusions about where
we sell our wheat have not been

5
: Total,
U.S.A. Canada exporting
Perlod (millions of bushels) tries
4950-51 375.3 241 838
1956-57 539.5 264 1,024.7
1957-58 396.4 320 856.2
4966-67. 731 . 516 1,609.8
4967-68 750 345 #

BS. drawn by our governments, although

today they madly clutch at the hope
that both China and the U.S.S.R. will
puy lots of wheat, from us.

This raises some deep-going political
questions about the influence of for-
eign policy on agricultural markets.
Right now the United States and West
Germany are attempting to force a
¢ougher stance on Canada in NATO.

Against whom? Against Canada’s best

wheat customers!

There are other contradictions, too.
For instance, we ‘are faced with the
roblems of storing surplus wheat,

“while three-quarters of. the world is —

hungry.

Scientific American, November, 1968,
’ gays:

_ “The economic gulf that has divided
the poorer countries of the world from
the richer countries is rapidly widen-
ing .. - It is highly probable that for
at least the next 20 years most of the
people in the world will continue to
exist at the margin of subsistence ...
about 2.1 billion people, or 64 percent
of the world’s population, live in coun-
tries whose average income is less

than $300, and almost 1.9 billion of

these people live in countries whose
average income falls below $200...”

The same article uses several criteria

for measuring poverty in the world.
This, however, is fundamental. The
average per capita income in the Unit-
ed States, for a population of. just
under 200 million, is $2,893. For Can-
ada, with a population around 20 mil-
lion, it is $1,825. But for 1,018 million
people it is below $100.

Now the “experts” are raising new
questions. Are we growing too high a
quality wheat? This, of course, is not
the problem of the farmer, but the
shortcoming of government policy.
One article has it “Developing nations

short of foreign exchange (our empha--
_ sis) have preferred to import accept- -

able but less costly wheat grades.”

A Canadian Press report in the Re-
gina Leader-Post said: ©

“In two short years, the world has
found it can get, along without wheat
from the Canadian grain belt. The as-
sured markets are gone—perhaps for-
ever and Western Canada farmers
are facing a dilemma unmatched in
nearly 40 years... What do they do?
Diversify? Switch to new crops or var-
ieties? Sell at any price? ... Mr. Park-
er (W. J. Parker, president of the Al-
perta Wheat Pool) says. the world
could get along nicely without any
Canadian wheat. Mr. Runciman adds
that urgent statements about North
America having to feed mankind are
not valid . . . The dwarf varieties (Mex-

ican dwarf Pitric) hold promise of self- —

sufficiency for Pakistan and India...
closer to home the U.S.A. is on. an
export binge and cutting into tradition-
al Canadian markets .. . part of ‘the
teason for the push was the unfavour-
able: American balance-of-payments . . .

Canada’s. best prospects for sales are

in Communist China .
always paid up . -
Again we need to revive our attack
on the spending of nearly two billion
dollars yearly on armaments; on our
commitments to NATO and NORAD

.°. Peking has

and show that it is in this area where ©

we can find the capital to expand mar-
kets for agricultural products.

The outcomes of federal and provin-
cial elections indicate that a wide sec-
tion of the Canadian electorate is
confused on these questions, blaming
most of our tax problems on welfar-
ism, rather than on the heavy arma-
ments spending which benefits the
monopolies—and the give-aways, tax
concessions, low royalty rates given
the monopolies by the same govern-
ments.

That’s why it’s so important to show

e A moratorium on farm debt
so that no farmer loses his machin-
ery, land or his equity in them, as a
result of this year’s conditions.

e A special federal fund to, prov-
ide a minimum income of at least
$3,000 yearly to each farmer, pre-
serve herds and stocks, subsidize
interest rates so they don’t rise
above 5 percent during this crisis.

e Government action to provide
a system of state-owned drying
equipment.

'-e@ Immediate government action
to guarantee an adequate supply of
_ good seed grain.

e Steps to protect Canadian agri-
aes from U.S.A. dumping.
3 tni 4 Sey £53

Communist farm program.

_e@ Remove the minimum restric-
tions for qualifications for dairy and
egg subsidies. :

e@ A comprehensive Dominion-
provincial, all risk, crop insurance
scheme, which would assist in guar-
anteeing a minimum annual income.

e Federal-provincial actions to
bring monopoly profiteering under
control.

e A radically new program to
secure new markets for wheat, in
light of present-day reality. The
basis for trade expansion must be
a policy of buying from those who
buy from us, and the acceptance of
local currencies. Socialist countries
now purchase more than 50 percent
of our export wheat—let’s have new
policies of friendship with them.

f+ tArreege

“Th

We are faced with the
problems of storing surplus
wheat while three-quarters

of the world is hungry.

the alternatives opened up by policies .

based upon. peaceful co-existence and
‘mutual advantage.

-‘There’s another area to be looked
at: the class differences within agricul-

ture. There is poverty and social back-

wardness throughout the agricultural .

community.

A good many people have read gen-
eral statistics about the declining farm
population, ‘and have concluded that
the farmers have virtually disappeared,
and that there will be no such animal
around. In their opinion, the farmers
who are left have now )become: rich
and wealthy—and, by deduction, reac-
tionary. ~ }

A quick glance at the 1966 census
figures, which really needs studying in
its totality, reveals that these conclu-
sions are wrong. The problem of the
“small farmer” is still with us.

Just examine this table from the
1966 census reports. ‘

There are 430,522 census farms. |

Number Annual Value of Approx.
of farms agricultural products sold of all farms
10,282 Over $35,000 23
9,384 _ Between $25,000-34,999 2
31,149 Between $15,000-24,999 7
44,217 Between $10,000-14,999 10
38,753 Between $ 7,500- 9,999 9
58,103 Between $ 5,000- 7,499 14
37,923 Between $ 3,750- 4,999 9
47,024 Between $ 2,500- 3,749 11
60,947 Between $ 1,200- 2,499 14
55,271 Between $ 250- 1,199 13
36,692 Between$ 50- 249 9

The top two categories, that is,
those. farmers selling above the $25,000
a year, are limited to about 4 percent
of the farmers. Depending on the par-

‘ticular “expert” who does the figuring,

it is estimated that net income varies
between one-quarter and one-third of
gross annual sales.'In that case, only
21 percent of all farmers would have a
net income of $5,000 a year upwards.
Below that are all the rest.
Hedlin Menzies and Associates, in
Rural Poverty in Canada, show the dis-
parity between farm, rural non-farm,
and urban families by province in 1961.

: ‘ Farm * Rural
Province 1958 non-farm Urban
Manitoba 3,572 3,564 5,657.
Sask. 3,321 3,584 5,417
Alberta 4,281 4,198 5,894

~ 102,000;

This table indicates that rural non-
farm average was 69 percent, and the
rural farm average was 63 percent of
the average urban income.

Rural Poverty in Canada shows that
over half the total family income for
those farmers grossing between $1,200
and $2,499 annually, got 50 percent of
their incomes from non-farm sources, .
to give them a mean average’ annual
income of only $2,400.

According to this report, 44 percent
of all families residing in rural areas
of Canada were poor.’ In absolute
terms they formed the largest groups
in Quebec, with 125,000; Ontario, with

and Saskatchewan with
61,000.

\

"In two short years, the
world found it can get along
without the wheat from the

: Canadian grain belt."