§ 73. Mr. MATHERSasked the Minister of Agriculture why the Milk Marketing Scheme was not revoked in accordance with the Agricultural Marketing Act, 1931, Section 3, when the report of the independent person was received, giving particulars of the voting by producers during the suspensory period.
§ Mr. W. S. MORRISONSection 3 of the Agricultural Marketing Act, 1931, provides inter alia, that if it is proved to the satisfaction of the Minister at any time before the expiration of the suspensory period that the number of producers voting on the poll was less than half of the total number of producers (excluding producers exempted, or entitled to exemption, from registration by or under the provisions of the scheme) he shall forthwith, by order, revoke the scheme. No person attempted to prove to my predecessor in office that the number of producers voting on the Milk Marketing Scheme was less than half the total number of producers, excluding those exempted from registration.
§ Mr. MATHERSHas the Minister got the full details of that voting; and, in view of the fact that there is a belief in certain quarters that the scheme should have been revoked under the conditions that he has indicated in his answer, will he take steps now to publish in full detail the number of producers entitled to vote and the voting for and against that scheme that took place at that election, 1918 in order to settle the controversy once and for all?
§ Mr. MORRISONI would mention, first, that at the beginning of the scheme no one knew how many producers of milk there were, and, in the second place, I would say to the hon. Member that I am aware that there is a certain conflict of evidence on this matter, and that I will look into it and communicate with him when I have thoroughly investigated it.