1937-02-08

Mr. J. F. JOHNSTON (Lake Centre):: moved that the first, report of the special committee on farm implement prices, presented to the house on Friday, February 5, 1937, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Fisheries) :: With the unanimous consent of the house I beg to move:
That the question of the advisability of the government issuing trap fishing licences in British Columbia waters be referred to the standing committee on fisheries for study and report.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition):: I rise to direct the atten-
Privilege-Mr. Bennett

lion of the right hon. the Prime Minister {Mr. Mackenzie King), not as leader of the government but as leader of the House of Commons, to what I conceive to be a breach of one of the privileges of the house in connection with an answer made to a question asked on February 3 last by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley). The hon. member asked certain questions in connection with an agreement connected with wheat, and the answer was this:
1,	2, 3. The subject to which this question relates, namely, the marketing of Canadian grains abroad, is now being investigated by the royal grain inquiry commission, which has not yet reported to the government.
I suggest to the Prime Minister that an answer such as this is not quite in accordance with the rights of parliament, because the question was as to an agreement about which there was some knowledge, and had nothing whatever to do with this royal commission, which may or may not see the agreement. As the commissioner is now engaged in dealing with textile matters, one cannot think that parliament should be put in this position. I would have mentioned it before, but I conceived it to be a matter to be dealt with only by the leader of the house. If any ordinary minister were to undertake to answer questions in this way and the right hon. gentleman were affected he would have something to say much more caustic than the observations which I now make.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I feel sure that in the
[DOT]reply there was no intention to be disrespectful to any member. I understand the question was submitted last year to the commission and is under investigation at the present time. The reply was a statement of fact. However, I shall be glad to discuss with my colleagues the point which my right hon. friend has raised.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	Are the shippers of packages of Canadian fruits and vegetables to the United States required to mark each package with the name of the grower and the country of origin?
2: Is this required of similar shipments into this country from the United States?
3.	If not, will the government put a similar regulation into effect?


Mr. GARDINER:: Stand.


Mr. LENNARD:: I should like to suggest to the Minister of Agriculture that the last two paragraphs of this question could be readily answered. I should like to ask him if he could not give me an immediate answer at least to those parts.


James Garfield Gardiner: This is a question which will be answered by the Secretary of State (Mr. Rinfret). I am not in a position to give the answer: it comes from two different departments.


THREE RIVERS-STE. ANGELE DE LAVAL BRIDGE
Mr. DUBOIS:: 1.	Has the government taken action with regard to the resolution adopted by the House of Commons on March 9, 1936, with reference to the construction of a bridge over the St. Lawrence, between Three Rivers and Ste. Angele de Laval?
2.	If not, why?
3.	If so, what has been done?


Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	No.
2.	Definite consideration has not yet been given to the proposal.
3.	Answered by No. 2.


MORDEN, N.S., WHARF REPAIRS
Mr. BROOKS:: 1.	Did the Public Works Department have certain repairs made to the Morden wharf, Kings county, Nova Scotia, in the year 1936?
2.	If so. what was the amount of money authorized?
3.	To whom, and what amounts were paid for
the following:	(a) wages; (b) material; (e)
supplies?
4.	Was a special account set up for the purchase of lumber?
5.	If so, in whose name?


Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	Yes.
2.	$16,600.
3.	(a)
C. B. Dorey, Foreman	 $546.43
Irving Graves	 319.50
Stanley Maplebeck	 322.50
Clarence Graves	 230.40
Walter Graves	 236.10
Loring Graves	 236.60
Paul Graves	 227.70
Sable Baltzer	 195.00
Chute Baltzer	 237.90
Wallace Dempsey	 231.30
Charles Dempsey	 225.00
Murray Dempsey	 196.80
Fred Finlay	 231.90
Kenneth Grey	 171.30
Joseph McNally	 270.30
Clyde Dorey	 240.90
Walter Lane	 220.50

Questions
George Duggan	 146.40
Elmer Parks	 127.80
Frank Cassidy	 126.00
Watson Graves	 226.50
Warren Wagner	 85.50
Robert Graves	 225.00
Haden Barkhouse	 59.95
Max Baltzer	 28.50
Raymond Miner	 23.70
James McGarvey	 258.15
Robert Stephens	 41.70
Wesley Graves	 426.25
Amos Moriarty	 347.25
Mason Dorey	 430.10
Aubrey Dempsey	 43.80
Lemert Dempsey	 19.80
Joseph Dempsey	 231.55
Maurice Hussey	 149.85
Kenneth Weagle	 25.80
Thomas Sturk	 111.60
James McNally	 126.30
Joseph Moriarty	 185.10
Lorenzo Dempsey	 133.80
Earl Condon	 120.00
George Hussey	 150.25
Joseph Redgate	 83.10
Clyde Lutz	 146.40
Joseph Maplebeck	 166.80
Denis Boudreau	 54.90
James Boudreau	 72.60
Vernon Dempsey	 30.30
Arthur England	 34.80
William Redgate	 18.30
Olaf Jordon	 32.10
Albert Hannifan	 46.20
Milford Wagner	 42.30

(b) and (c)
S. S. Elfridge, sheathing, lumber, logs, etc	 $1,999.80
R. L. Patterson, timber and
hardware	 1,967.71
L. K. Patterson, bolts and
sundry hardware	 1,752.66
A. K. Kirkpatrick, sundry
hardware	 18.03
Clarence Groves,	lumber.. ..	5.60
H. Woodbury, ballast poles, timber	 1,875.62

4.	No.
5.	Answered by No. 4.


OLD AGE PENSIONS-NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. BROOKS:: 1. What is the number receiving old age pensions in the province of New Brunswick under the following headings:	(a) pension of
$20; (b) over $15 and less than $20; (c) over $10 and including $15; (d) over $5 and including $10; (e) $5 and under.


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	The number of persons receiving old age pensions in the province of New Brunswick as at December 31st, 1936, was 9,617. The number under each of the abovemention-ed headings was as follows:
(a)	614.
(b)	1,122.
(c)	5,888.
(d)	1,689.
(e)	304.
Pensions transferred from other provinces are included in the figures shown above.


RURAL MANITOBA DROUGHT RELIEF
Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	What rural municipalities in Manitoba have been admitted to the federal relief area on account of drought?
2.	On whose recommendation were these municipalities included?
3.	Which of the rural municipalities included were recommended by the province of Manitoba?
4.	Has the provincial government of Manitoba made requests for the inclusion of the rural municipalities of Stanley and Rhineland in the federal relief area?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	The following rural municipalities have
been admitted under the Feed and Fodder Agreement and the Federal Direct Relief Agreement:	Albert, Edward, Arthur, Brenda,
Cameron, south half, Winchester, Morton, Turtle Mountain, Roblin, Pipestone, Louise, Pembina, Riverside, Glenwood, Sifton, Whitewater.
2.	On the recommendation of the provincial authorities.
3.	All.
4.	The first map submitted by the Manitoba government showed the drought area in Manitoba to include a section of Manitoba in which Stanley and Rhineland were included. An agreement was reached with respect to an area in the southwest comer of Manitoba for which the dominion government would be asked to assume responsibility. It was agreed to admit nine municipalities immediately and to consider bringing in the others later. The understanding reached has been adhered to and no further request has been received from the Manitoba government for the admission of the municipalities of Stanley and Rhineland.
Questions


EXPORTS TO UNITED STATES UNDER RECIPROCAL AGREEMENT
Mr. BLANCHETTE:: 1.	AVhat number of cattle have been exported to the United States to date in accordance with the terms of the reciprocal agreement, and how does this compare with 1935?
2.	How much cheese has been exported to the United States to date in accordance with the terms of the said agreement, and how does the amount compare with exports during the year 1935?
3.	What is the amount of hard wood and soft wood exported to the United States in 1936 as compared with 1935?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	Exports of dairy cattle to United States in 1936 amounted to 8,194 head, and1 in 1935 to 6,266 head1. Exports of cattle, n.o.p. to United States in 1936 amounted to 224,306 head, and in 1935 to 108,557 head.
2.	Exports of cheese to United States in 1936 amounted to 114,564 cwt., and in 1935 to 4,749 cwt.
3.	Exports to United States of flooring of hardwood in 1936 were 582 M feet, valued at $28,860, and in 1935, 537 M feet, valued at $25,868. Exports of planks and boards, softwood, to United States in 1936 were 484,804 M feet, valued at $11,284,090, and in 1935, 329,431 M feet, valued at $7,555,764. Exports of planks and boards, hardwood, to United States in 1936 were 40,882 M feet, valued at $1,457,093, and in 1935, 19,179 M feet, valued at $658,523. Exports of timber, square, softwood, to United States in 1936 were 4,579 M feet, valued at $71,210, and in 1935, 1,964 M feet, valued at $38,892. Exports of timber, square, hardwood, to United States in 1936 were 19 M feet, valued at $742, and in 1935, 3 M feet, valued at $244.


BANK OF CANADA-SILVER PURCHASE
Mr. ELLIOTT (Kindersley):: 1.	How many ounces of silver did the Bank of Canada purchase for the government of the United States in 1936?
2.	What price per ounce was paid the Bank of Canada?
3.	What did the silver cost the Bank of Canada?
4.	What proportion of a silver dollar is silver and what is the value?
5.	What proportion of other metals and their value?


Mr. DUNNING:: 1.	Th? Bank of Canada did not purchase any silver for the government of the United States for the year 1936. The bank, under an agreement with the United States treasury, has undertaken to act as intermediary between the silver producers of Canada and the United States treasury in connection with such sales of newly-mined silver as may be arranged.

2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.
4.	Eighty per cent, the value being 27 cents when silver is worth 45 cents the ounce fine.
5.	Twenty per cent copper, the value being approximately l:jiooths of one cent when copper is worth 15 cents the pound.


ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY
Mr. ELLIOTT (Kindersley):: What negotiations are being considered between the United States and Canada with regard to deepening the St. Lawrence waterways for transportation purposes?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The St. Lawrence waterway project has recently been the subject of informal discussion, but no conclusions have yet been reached.


AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS-EXPORTS AND IMPORTS
Mr. SENN:: 1.	What was the total value of agricultural implements imported into Canada from the United States of America during each of the calendar years 1929 to 1936, inclusive, not including farm tractors?
2.	What was the total value of such material' exported from Canada to the United States of America during each of the said years?
3.	What was the total value of farm tractors Imported into Canada from the United States of America during each of the said years?
4.	What was the total value of farm tractors exported from Canada to the United States of America during each of the above mentioned years ?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	The value of agricultural implements imported into Canada from the United States of America during the calendar years 1929 to 1936, not including traction engines and parts, was as follows:-
Calendar years
1929		$14,634,694
1930		 10,804,404
1931		 2,354,814
1932		 1,284,377
1933		 1,291,061
1934		 1,538,883
1935		 1,745,221
1936		 2,391,025
2. The value of agricultural implements exported to the United States of America during the calendar years 1929 to 1936 was as follows: Calendar years
1929		$ 5,126,864
1930		 2,669,934
1931		 926,379
1932		 328,771
1933		 245,421
1934		 500,429
1935		 2,009,457
1936		 1,995,868

Questions
3. The value of traction engines and parts for farm purposes imported into Canada from the United States of America during the calendar years 1929 to 1936, was as follows:- Calendar years
1929		$16,694,847
1930		 9,839,477
1931		 1,326,123
1932		 678.880
1933		 751,477
1934		 1,311,501
1935		 3,300,422
1936		 6.420,237
4. The value of tractors and parts exported from Canada to the United States of America during the calendar years 1929 to 1936 was as follows:-
Calendar years	
1929		
1930		.. 17,917
1931		.. 8,863
1932		.. 6,149
1933		.. 2,901
1934		.. 7,424
1935		
1936		.. 7,958
CANADIAN FARM LOAN BOARD-	-EMPLOYEES


Mr. MALLETTE:: What is the total number of employees of all categories at the head office and in each of the provincial offices of the Canadian Farm Loan Board, not including the field inspectors employed on a fee basis?


Mr. DUNNING:: Head office 38, British
Columbia 7, Alberta 25, Saskatchewan 39, Manitoba 21, Ontario 19, Quebec 58, New Brunswick 5, Nova Scotia 5, Prince Edward Island 3.


NUMBER OF RELIEF RECIPIENTS AND UNEMPLOYED
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	What is actually the total number: (a) of heads of families; (b) of their dependents; (e) of individual eases of unemployed, all receiving relief at the present time?
2.	How many of the three above mentioned classes are employable?
3.	What is the total number of unemployed: (a) heads of families, and (b) unmarried boys and girls over twenty, not receiving relief at the present time?
4.	What is the number of: (a) employable, and (b) unemployable unemployed in each province at the present time, and -what was the average of each of both those classes of unemployed during the calendar years 1935 and 1936?


Mr. ROGERS:: All available information
was included in the report of the National Employment Commission with respect to the registration of recipients of direct relief which was tabled in the house on the 5th day of
February. As other data is abstracted from the registration returns it will be made available.


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD-QUEBEC CITY PUBLIC COAL DOCK
Mr. LACROIX (Quebec-Montmorency):: 1.	Is the National Harbours Board taking steps to provide the harbour of the city of Quebec with a public coal dock?
2.	If so, when will this facility be in operation?


Mr. HOWE:: Matter under consideration.


FARMERS' CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT-NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. CLARK (York-Sunbury):: 1.	What amount was paid for expenses of the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act in the province of New Brunswick for the year ending December 31, 1936?
2.	How many eases were before the New Brunswick board of review, and on how many was judgment given?
3.	How many cases were actually settled, i.e. payments made according to the judgment of the New Brunswick board of review?
4.	In how many cases did the board of review alter its first finding?


Mr. DUNNING:: 1.	$25,423.46.
2.	360 cases before the New Brunswick board of review and judgment given in 289 cases.
3.	No information.
4.	2.
.	IMPORTS OF ELECTRICAL GOODS


Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	Are customs officers required to note the origin or make of electrical goods, radio tubes and supplies, and electrical fittings for radios, both in the case of importers of these goods, and tourists returning to Canada from the United States with such goods in their baggage?
2.	Is such information contained in a report that is sent to a divisional headquarters, or department headquarters or elsewhere, and if so to what officer?
3.	To whom, outside of the customs service, would any of the information in question No. 1 be available?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	The country of origin is required to be stated on the invoice of all importations of goods being merchandise for sale, and, in the case of goods brought in by returning Canadians under the exemption provided in tariff item 703b for personal or household use, the country from which the importer arrives is accepted as the country of origin for customs statistical purposes.
2.	Copies of invoices and of declarations of returning Canadians are forwarded to the
Questions

Customs Division, Department of National Revenue, Ottawa.
3.	To the importer or his duly authorized agent.


BANK OF CANADA-LEAVE OF ABSENCE TO EMPLOYEE BROOKS
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Is there an individual named Brooks employed by the Bank of Canada, and, if so, what are his duties and his salary?
2.	How long has he been so employed?
3.	Upon whose recommendation was he appointed?
4.	Was he granted leave of absence, with salary, in 1936, and, if so, for how long, and why?
5.	Did the said Brooks accompany a member of this house on his recent trip around the world ?
6.	If so, in what capacity?
7.	Has the said Brooks resumed his duties at the Bank of Canada, and, if so, on what
date?
8.	Who replaced the said Brooks at the Bank of Canada during his absence, and what salary was paid to such individual?


Charles Avery Dunning: There is no information on record with the government of Canada with respect to the questions asked, but inquiries of this nature, and others relating to the Rank of Canada., raise a point which with respect to the Canadian National Railways was determined a number of years ago somewhat in this way: that questions as to matters of internal management were not usually answered in the house unless in the judgment of the management they could be answered without affecting the day to day management of the business. But in the case of the Canadian National Railways a standing committee has been set dp during each of the past many years in which members were given the opportunity of meeting the officers of the railway and asking questions relating to the business of the road. The government is giving consideration to the advisability of referring the annual report of the Rank of Canada to, say, the committee on banking and commerce, in order that members of the house may have the same general opportunity with respect to the affairs of the Dank of Canada as they have to-day with respect to the affairs of the Canadian National Railways. This matter is now under consideration, *and I give the information in view of various questions which appear from time to time on the order paper with respect to the affairs of the bank.


Mr. POULIOT:: It would be a good reason to abolish the Bank of Canada.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I feel it
incumbent on me to make at least one

observation with respect to the question. I went away in August last. I might have taken one of the messengers, as the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) did when he was leader of the opposition, to serve me in any capacity that might be required. Instead I concluded I would not do so, and I asked Brooks whether or not he was having his holiday. He had not been absent, had had no rest since the war. He applied for leave of absence, which was granted to him without salary, and I paid him the amount of salary which he was receiving, together with his transportation charges, during his absence.	-


Jean-François Pouliot: 
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It was paid every month, Mr. Speaker, from August until the day he -terminated his engagement with me.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The right hon. gentleman has referred to myself, when leader of the opposition, having taken with me a messenger, who was attached to the office of the leader of the opposition, when I was absent from Ottawa on one or two occasions. My right hon. friend did not say, though I imagine the omission was an inadvertent one on his part, that I personally paid all the travelling and other expenses of the messenger.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There was no question about that, but not his salary.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I paid the expenses of the messenger when I went away, and the messenger himself is a permanent official. I may say to my right hon. friend that he did not pay the salary of his messenger while he was absent, but the salary was paid just the same.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Quite so, when he was here.


Jean-François Pouliot: I wonder if I could not have gone in his stead.


CORONATION OF KING GEORGE VI-MILITARY CONTINGENT
Mr. REID:: 1.	Is there a contingent being sent to the coronation of King George VI?
2.	If so, is it to represent all branches of the service?
3.	What is the total number of such contingent?
4.	How many from each branch of the
service?	.
5.	How many from each province?
6.	How are they to be selected?

Questions


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: 1.	Yes.
2.	All arms (branches) of the three defence services will be represented. A detachment of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police will also be included.
3.	334.
4.	Royal Canadian navy, 1 officer, 9 ratings. Naval reserves, 3 officers, 17 ratings. Permanent active militia, 6 officers, 54 other
ranks.
Province
Prince Edward Island
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick.. ..
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia.. .
* Two officers to be decided upon.
5.	(b) So far as the permanent defence services are concerned:
Royal Canadian Navy:	Four (4) ratings
from the naval base at Esquimalt, B.C.; Five (5) ratings from the naval base at Halifax, N.S. One officer not yet selected.
Permanent active militia and permanent air force: Selection will depend upon the recommendations received from officers commanding and officers administering permanent units.
6.	Defence Services: Naval Service: Selection will be made at National Defence headquarters, on recommendations received from commanding officers of Naval Service units.
Militia Service: selection will be made at National Defence headquarters, on recommendations received from district officers commanding which will be on recommendations received from militia units.
Air Service: selection will be made at National Defence headquarters, on recommendations received from commanding officers of air force units.
Selection will be made from active, reserve and retired personnel; and a substantial portion, at least one-third, of those selected will be from personnel who were on active service overseas during the late war.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police:	Members of the force are to be recommended by
Non-permanent active militia, 50 officers, 130 other ranks.
Royal Canadian Air Force: (permanent), 3 officers, 1 airman. (Non-permanent), 5 officers, 21 airmen.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 2 officers, 32 other ranks.
5.	(a) So far as the non-permanent defence services and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are concerned:
Non-	Non-	RoyalPermanent	Permanent	CanadianNaval	Active	Air	MountedReserves	Militia	Force	Police2	6	12	11	1	31	10	24	50	2	33	54	15	51	12	3	42	13	2	62	11	-	53	13	3	320	180	26	32*
their respective officers commanding throughout Canada. No final selection has yet been made.


HUME, SASK., POSTMASTERSHIP
Mr. DOUGLAS:: 1.	Has the resignation of R. E. Juby, postmaster at Hume, Saskatchewan, been requested?
2.	If so, for what cause?
3.	Was any charge laid against him? If so, what was the nature of said charge, and by whom was it laid?
4.	Was an inquiry held in his case? If not,
why?


Mr. ELLIOTT (Middlesex):: 1. Yes.
2 and 3. The department was informed that this postmaster was a candidate in the Saskatchewan provincial election in 1934. The postmaster admitted the charge and as this constitutes political partisanship under the terms of section 55 of the Civil Service Act, he was called upon to resign.
4.	There was no necessity for an investigation in view of the postmaster's admission.


AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND EXPORTS
Mr. LAOOMBE:: 1.	What was the value of the agricultural production in Canada, in 1935?
2.	What was the value of such production in 1936?
636	COMMONS
Questions as Orders for Returns


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	The gross agricultural revenue of Canada in 1935 was $943,081,000. This figure is subject to slight revision when the 1936 estimates are made in the near future.
2.	Not yet available.


Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	What was the total value of our exports of agricultural products in 1935?
2.	What was the value of such exports in 1936?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1. Exports of Canadian farm products in
the fiscal year ended March 31, 1935, were as follows:
Raw materials	 $176,924,050
Partly manufactured	 6,809,275
Fully or chiefly manufactured		78,702,008
Total	 $262,435,333
2. Exports of Canadian farm products in the fiscal year ended March 31, 1936, were as follows:
Raw materials	 $194,433,947
Partly manufactured	 7,676,514
Fully or chiefly manufactured	 88,377,312
Total	 $290,487,773



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Did any officers, during the war, receive temporary promotions for the war period only, and, if so, who are they?
2.	Referring to the above question, who are
the officers whose temporary promotions:	(a)
have been made permanent, and (b) whose have not?
3.	With regard to question No. 2, upon what date was each temporary promotion made permanent?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: I regret that this question cannot be answered in the form in which it appears. If the hon. member would limit the question to members of the permanent force now serving, it can be answered.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am very glad to agree with that request.


DRILL HALLS
Mr. POULIOT:: 1. How many drill halls are there in Canada, and where are they located?

2. What amounts has the government received from commandants of military districts for the renting of each drill hall for other than military purposes, during each of the past five years from January 1 to December 31, in each year?


CANADIAN FARM LOAN BOARD
Mr. DOUGLAS:: 
Charles Avery Dunning: Return tabled herewith.


ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE-NATIONAL DEFENCE BARRACKS
Mr. PURDY:: 1.	At how many points in Canada where the Department of National Defence maintains barracks, drill halls, etc., are headquarters or premises also maintained for the use of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police?
2.	What is the annual cost for rent, light, heat, char service, upkeep, etc., of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police premises at these points?



MILITARY EQUIPMENT

Mr. BLANCHETTE:: What sums have been voted by this parliament, each year, from 1920 to 1936, for strictly military equipment?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. BROOKS:: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams, memoranda and other documents, exchanged between the government or any member or officer of a department thereof, and the fuel board or any member thereof, in connection with payment of subventions on Nova Scotia coal sold and delivered or to have been sold and delivered outside of the said province, during the year 1036.


Mr. CRERAR:: It will be observed that this is a rather unusual request. It asks for all the correspondence exchanged not only between two departments of government but between one section of a department and another, plus

Farm Rehabilitation Act
any letters that may have been exchanged between the fuel board and other departments of government.


Richard Bedford Bennett: For the year 1936 only.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes. My information is that these exchanges are usually considered as privileged. Subject to this reservation the matter will be examined to see what information can be brought down. But I might suggest to my hon. friend, if he will permit me, that the resolution in this form might be dropped. I think if he inquires of the fuel board he will get the information he desires. If he cannot get it, the matter would be open for consideration later.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If the motion is dropped it will have to be placed on the order paper in another form, because the information must be obtained before the estimates in connection with it are passed. It can therefore be dropped if the minister prefers to have it put in another form. I will put one on myself in a form which I think will cover it.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We will let the order
stand as it is, with the reservation I made a moment ago.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. FERLAND:: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, documents, judicial proceedings, judgment, statement of confiscation and deed of sale in connection with a seizure of tobacco and of an automobile, and legal proceedings against one Martin, of St-Alexis, in tile county of Montcalm, the judgment of the magistrate's court at St-Jerome, September 17, 1931, the execution of said judgment and sale of said automobile.



DISMISSAL OF G. R. J. WILSON

Mr. WOOD:: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, memoranda, evidence and other documents in possession of the Department of Transport, relating to the discharge from the civil service of Mr. G. K. J. Wilson, in charge of the Welland canal feeder at Dunnville, in 1931.



NORMANDIN, QUE., EXPERIMENTAL STATION

Mr. FONTAINE:: For a copy of all telegrams, correspondence and other documents exchanged since January 1, 1934, between the honourable the Minister of Agriculture or any officer of his department and any person, association or organization with regard to the choice of a breed of thoroughbred cattle for the experimental station at Normandin, province of Quebec.



PRAIRIE FARM REHABILITATION ACT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act so as to constitute committees instead of one advisory committee, and to appropriate the necessary moneys for the continuance and extension of the work under the act for the fiscal years 1937-38 and 1939-40.
He said:	In moving that this resolution
go to the committee of the whole I should like to make a brief explanation. Dealing with the matter of committees I may remind the house that in the act passed in 1935 provision was made for the setting up of an advisory committee. The membership of that committee was indicated, not in its personnel but in regard to the organizations which were to be represented on it. We have had certain experiences during the last two years in connection with the carrying on of the work in the different provinces which indicate that it would be desirable to have authority to appoint more than one advisory committee. This particular committee which is provided for in the act as it stands will not necessarily be done away with.
It was provided in another section of the act that an amount limited to a million dollars a year could be expended in the years 1936-37, 1937-38 and 1938-39. By the amendment we are removing that limitation. I may say that I will be prepared, either in committee on the resolution or in committee after the second reading of the bill itself, to give complete information with regard to expenditures.
At this stage I would only wish to add that the total amount spent up to date in the two years is a little over 8800,000. It is not thought wise to leave the limitation in the bill as at present because of the fact that many undertakings have to be refused consideration on the ground that there may not be sufficient money available, and we think the government can give consideration to the facts in each case to better advantage if that limitation is not there.
Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I think it has been the practice of this house, in any event under the present administration, not to make an appropriation in the form this resolution would indicate. The appropriation should be made in the estimates. In addition to that the minister will perhaps observe that he has left out the year 1938-39; the resolution refers only to 1937-38 and 1939-40. Presumably
63S	COMMONS
Harbours and Piers Act-Mr. Howe
that is not intentional; it must be accidental; the year intended must be 1938-39.
Originally the appropriation was made in the statute itself, amounting to a million dollars a year. The proposal now before the house to do away with any such limitation necessarily must imply, I would submit, on the statement of policy made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) last year, that the appropriation should be contained in the appropriation bill, so there will be no blank cheque for an unnamed sum to be used for this purpose.


James Garfield Gardiner: I should like to say that as pointed out by the leader of the opposition, there is a misprint in the resolution; it should be "to" instead1 of "and" between the two dates, so that the resolution would read, "for the fiscal years 1937-38 to 1939-40 inclusive."


Walter Edward Foster: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, if this is for the purpose of giving notice that at the next sitting the house will consider this resolution, and if that is all, I desire to say that I think it was wholly out of order for me to discuss the matter. In any event the statement should be made that the assent of his excellency has been obtained and that the bill is submitted to the house under those circumstances, under the provisions of the statute.


James Garfield Gardiner: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the house.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.



HARBOURS AND PIERS ACT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport) moved the second reading of Bill No. 9, to amend the Government Harbours and Piers Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, as I stated during the discussion of the resolution, the proposed amendments to the Government Harbours and Piers Act are desired primarily to meet changes in wharf and transportation requirements that have taken place since the act was last amended, but particularly on account of the provisions of the Consolidated Audit and Revenue Act, which requires that all the revenue of Canada shall be paid into the consolidated revenue fund. The act involves no change in practice as far as the department is concerned. The change contemplated under this amendment is exactly the practice which has been followed for many years, but conditions have 
changed over the years, and these are minor amendments which are designed to bring the act up to date.
Mr. C. G. MacNEIL (Vancouver North):: Before second reading is given, Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my opposition to this bill in its present form, because it proposes to perpetuate a form of taxation which in its application to the smaller communities is unjust and shows unfair discrimination. I would not take up the time of the house but for the fact that I have brought the matter before the minister and the officials of his department on several- occasions, and to my dismay they have expressed renewed determination to continue this system of collecting tolls and duties, leaving without redress the smaller communities, who have suffered in some degree because of the- methods employed in the past.
I wish to make it clear that I am dealing solely with the smaller communities, whose only contact with outside civilization or with the industrial centres on which they must depend for supplies and to which they must ship their produce is over the government wharf. In the tolls that have been charged under this act the people in these communities have been penalized in their endeavour to face pioneer conditions, encouraged as they have been to leave the cities and face the inconvenience of life as found at some points along the coast. My plea is for the residents of these smaller communities. They are taxed, as all citizens are, for highways, but they have no access to our highway system. They are taxed for various public works, but it is seldom that the}' have an opportunity to enjoy the facilities provided in this regard by this dominion. Citizens who reside on the inland waters and canals of the country, for instance, and who use the wharves there located, are not taxed to the same degree, even though they have access to our highway and railway systems. They are not required to pay an additional toll for the privilege of importing necessary commodities or exporting their produce.
To show the impracticability of the present system of taxation under this bill I would refer to the returns requested by me last session. They indicate that during the fiscal year 1984-35 the total revenue secured from the collection of top wharfage was $92,096.71. For the fiscal year 1935-36 the total revenue secured from that source was $87,951.29. Out of the total revenue the commission paid to wharfingers in 1934-35 amounted to $24,862.91 and in the subsequent fiscal year to $26,034.91. That is, in 1935-36 from the imposition of top wharfage tolls the net amount was $41,916.38.

Harbours and Piers Act-Mr. MacNeil
May I point out that out of about 900 government wharves within the jurisdiction of the act, during the fiscal year 1934-35 these tolls were collected on only some 216. During the fiscal year 1935-36 they were collected on only 220. I find upon inquiry that, for reasons which I have not been able to discover, there is frequently some delay in reporting to the Department of Transport, wharves constructed at public expense by the Department of Public Works; consequently not all these wharves are listed for the appointment of wharfingers or for the imposition of tolls. Only a small number of wharfingers are appointed and tolls imposed at such wharves listed with the Department of Transport, and I believe only a comparatively small number are so listed.
There is a reason for this, and I should like to direct the attention of the government to the matter at this time, because of the unfair discrimination. It is becoming increasingly difficult to secure wharfingers. The reason is obvious. The imposition of taxation in this form is extremely inconvenient to the residents in a small community. I believe the wharfinger is allowed fifty percent of the first $200 in tolls collected, and fifteen per cent of the tolls collected thereafter. He receives no other remuneration, and is not required to perform any definite service to the public. He is not required even to take a line when a steamer docks. So far as I can learn he is not required to afford proper protection to the commodities which pass under his charge. To illustrate the discrimination I shall refer hon. members to a specific instance which came to my notice, namely that of the appointment of a wharfinger last season at Robert's Creek, British Columbia. I brought this matter to the attention of the minister at the time, pointing out that most unfair discrimination had resulted. Robert's Creek is situated only a few miles north of another wharf at Gibsons Landing. No wharfinger has been appointed at Gibsons Landing and no tolls have been collected in that community. After all, as it stands the power of appointment within the act is permissive. Immediately upon the appointment of the wharfinger the collection of tolls become mandatory. The appointee was selected for no other reason, I believe, than that he had been a faithful follower of the Liberal party, and his appointment caused grave discontent in the community. As a matter of fact at one time I thought there would be a repetition of the Boston tea party.
As the situation developed the people of the community felt that their only recourse was to make it so extremely inconvenient
for the wharfinger that he might have to discontinue his duties. That was a most unfortunate situation, and one which I believe is not at all in the public interest. The two communities are connected by a road, and one can readily understand the feeling of the residents affected by the toll. Small storekeepers in that community, as compared with the storekeepers in the south, were penalized unfairly and discriminated against with consequent diversion of business. The residents of the community, many of whom are on relief, are required to pay the toll on every small shipment of assorted groceries. Although the amount charged may be exceedingly small, it amounts to no little inconvenience and hardship to people in straitened circumstances who are now suffering very definite distress. The dairy ranchers in the community who import or ship produce are unfairly penalized. True, supplies for fishing vessels and gear are exempt, nevertheless the supplies required by families of fishermen resident in the community are subject to the imposition of these tolls.
Under the act power is given to impose the collection of side wharfage tolls. That is, it is presumed that every steamship docking at a government wharf is required to pay a toll amounting to about 50 cents. However, steamship companies enjoy the privilege of a commutation rate, and on making inquiry at the department I find that the Union Steamship Company, plying between these points on the Pacific coast, and enjoying a subvention of $18,000 annually, does not pay side wharfage tolls at Robert's Creek. Consequently we have the situation under which the residents pay top wharfage tolls and the steamship company, already generously subsidized from the federal treasury, does not pay side wharfage. Upon inquiry I find they pay tolls only at two wharves in that district, *namely at Irvines Landing and Gibsons Landing, and even at these points they enjoy a commutation rate of something like $5 per month.
I have in mind another wharf considerably north of the points in question, where every hour of every working day one can hear the rumble of the wheels of trucks connected with an industry transshipping logs for the export trade. No attempt is made at that point to levy tolls on an industry far more capable of paying them than are the residents in the community I have mentioned.
I consider the situation unbusinesslike and unfair. No stipulated remuneration is indicated, and the wharfingers have no definite responsibility to render a service to the public.
640	COMMONS
Harbours and Piers Act-Mr. Bennett
The residents in the community in question pay not only top wharfage toll, but also side wharfage, whether or not it is collected. That toll is incorporated in the freight and express charges levied upon goods carried by the steamship company. They also pay their portion of any tolls which may be collected on goods going in or out of the port of Vancouver. As a matter of fact, when these tolls are added to the prices paid in the small communities I believe it is not unfair to say that tolls are collected three or four times over, and that they constitute an additional imposition and penalty upon people who can ill afford to bear that burden. I repeat that in comparison with other citizens of the dominion these people are discriminated against.
Before the bill reaches the committee stage I would urge upon the minister that he give some assurance of an amendment which would exempt from the imposition and collection of tolls these smaller communities entirely dependent upon traffic which passes over the government wharves serving them. In a measure larger than 'heretofore I suggest that for the construction and maintenance of wharves the government should rely for _ reimbursement upon the collection of side wharfage tolls. No steps should be taken to collect more than side wharfage tolls, because after all they are passed on to the consumers resident in the district. I see no reason why the poorer sections should pay tolls twice over.
May I point out further that it is not within the range of practicability to appoint wharfingers at all these wharves. Public sentiment is definitely against such appointments. As I have pointed out, their appointment occasions grave inconvenience, and only too frequently the situation becomes so unpleasant that the official appointed is compelled to resign. Frequently those offered this unpleasant work refuse to accept it at the remuneration stipulated. The wharfingers collect commissions in very small amounts from small assortments of groceries and other small shipments. It would be a better policy if the government attempted to collect side wharfage tolls, which could be accomplished more easily and in a more businesslike way. The collections could be made at a lesser expense at the head office of the steamship companies serving the communities.
I strongly commend the matter to the consideration of the government, in order that we may not by the second reading of this bill perpetuate an unsound, unfair and unjust principle of taxation which in its application results in grave discrimination.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, this bill embodies an amendiment to a statute, and it cannot be said to express any particular principle, apart from the one to which the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat (Mr. MacNeil) has referred1. However, there is another matter of some importance which I think may be discussed in committee. I refer 'to the question of appointments. The old statute provided that these were to be made by the governor in council; the new bill provides that they are to be made by the minister, but that the salary is still to be fixed by the governor in council. To this extent there is a complete change in the principle embodied in the old statute. I do not desire to take up the time of the house in dealing with the matter at this time, other than to say that the adoption of the motion for second reading must not be taken as agreement to every point in the bill. Our rights, such as they are, to discuss the matters involved in the various sections when the house is in committee we reserve at this time in order that the bill may be expedited in its passage.


Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Alberni):: Mr. Speaker, I assume that when the minister closes the debate he will deal with the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. MacNeil). I think the hon. member has a misconception of the situation. He refers to the imposition of wharfage charges on these government wharves as taxation. I consider such charges to be payment for services rendered. The hon. member referred to the imposition of this taxation upon the people in these small places, but he went on to say that out of 900 wharves owned by the government, these charges were made at only 220. He stated that the wharfinger gets 70 per cent of the fees, but I believe he gets only 50 per cent up to $200, and 15 per cent after that. The hon. member said that the wharfinger rendered no services for these fees, but I think he does render a distinct service.
The wharfinger checks the freight into a shed which is kept under lock and key. When the countryman or fisherman comes along and asks for his goods, there is a guarantee that they are there, that they have not been stolen or tampered with in any way. The wharfinger checks the unloading and hands out the freight upon the production of the bill of lading. The fisherman is assured that he gets the stuff for which he has paid. If this freight were left on an open wharf with no one to take care of it, the first person who came along might take something be-

Harbours and Piers Act-Mr. Neill
longing to someone else. The freight might get wet or the crows might destroy part of it. If I were living in one of these small communities I would infinitely prefer to pay the ridiculously small charge made in order to have guaranteed protection for my goods. The steamer arrives at many of these points at very uncertain intervals, and if there was no wharfinger it would mean the people would have to remain five or six hours waiting for the boat in order to take delivery themselves. I think the services rendered are worth far more than the charge made.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Many of the wharves
have no shed.


Alan Webster Neill: Many of them have no sheds; the freight is left in the open, and the crows can destroy a sack of com in a very short time. The sea gulls are not altogether innocent in this regard. I believe the great majority of the wharves do have small sheds into which the freight can be put if only to protect it from the rain.
The hon. member suggests that side wharfage should be charged and collected from the steamer. Such a practice would substantially increase the expense to these people on whose behalf he is arguing. If side wharfage is collected from the steamer it will mean that these fishermen will have to pay considerably more for their goods. The steamers will certainly either increase their rates or add the charge to the customer's bill.
There is a schedule of rates fixed by government regulation, and anyone who looks at them can see how ridiculously low they are. The charges average not more than ten or fifteen cents per ton, and the wharfinger gets fifty per cent. After waiting three or four hours for a boat to come in, he meets it sometimes in the middle of the night and checks off perhaps two tons of freight. There are many places at which these steamers call where even less than that is delivered. He checks in the freight and he goes home. The next day somebody comes along and wants 200 pounds of freight. The charges might be ten cents, of which the wharfinger's share would be five cents. He may have to walk a mile to the wharf from his home if he does not happen to live right on the wharf. Tom Jones who receives a small shipment has a guarantee that his goods are protected. The wharfinger gets five cents commission. He walks home again and shortly afterwards Mrs. Smith comes along and wants a crate of chickens, on which the charges are eight cents, the wharfinger getting four. The charges are very reasonable when compared to the services rendered. The 31111-41
charges on privately owned wharves are two, [DOT]three, four and sometimes five times as much as those on the government wharves.
The hon. member declared there was discrimination due to the fact that on one wharf there will be a wharfinger while on another one a few miles away there will be none. That state of affairs is not brought about by political pressure or instigation; it is simply due to the fact that no one will take on the position of wharfinger at that particular wharf. When a man is asked to take over the job he will reply that he cannot do it for the remuneration offered. This is what has happened at many wharves, and the result is that they remain without wharfingers and consequently without collection of wharfage.
The Department of Public Works build these wharves and then turn them over to the Department of Marine for operation. The hon. member for Vancouver North said he did not know why, and I do not know why, there is very often an interval between the time the wharf is built by the Department of Public Works and the time it is handed over to the Department of Marine. I have noticed this before but I have never felt inclined to kick about it. I have always considered that the wharf was better looked after by the Department of Public Works than it would be when handed over to the Department of Marine. Since the present minister took charge of the department he has sent out notices, I suppose of a general character, to all these places to the effect that he wants a wharfinger appointed. At times I have tried to get someone to take the position of wharfinger, but no matter who I asked or what his politics were, I have been unable to do so. In one or two places I have been told that the public preferred not to have wharfingers. They make a sort of day of it and go down to meet the steamers to get what freight is coming in. The great difficulty has been to get men to accept these positions.
I do not think the general public is discriminated against because of the charges made. I am quite sure that if I lived in one of these places I would be only too glad to pay the small wharfage charges in return for the services rendered. I repeat that it is not a question of taxation; it is a question of payment for services rendered, and these are out of all proportion to the revenue obtained. That is the trouble; you cannot get anyone at the revenue provided by the government. I think the government ought to give the wharfinger all he collects up to, say, $200 a year. I have no doubt the minister will deal with the matter when he replies.

Harbours and Piers Act

Hon,. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, the address of the hon. member , for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) has shortened mine considerably. A statement was made which I should correct, that no wharfage is charged on inland waters. That is entirely erroneous. Such docks as are built by the Public Works department and turned over to Transport for operation are provided with wharfingers where possible and exactly the same scale of fees is charged as on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. There are certain docks along the canals, and these charge a somewhat higher scale of wharfage. The revenues are taken into the canal accounts rather than into the accounts we are considering here.
The figures given by my hon. friend from Vancouver North (Mr. MacNeil) do not agree with mine. According to my figures there are 94S wharves under the management of the department, of which 381 have wharfingers and 567 have not. The gross collections for 19351936, that is, in respect of both side and top wharfage, were $146,697.07, while the amount retained from that as remuneration for the wharfingers was $26,034.94, leaving a net revenue to the department of about $120,000. Of the 381 wharves having wharfingers, only 282 yield revenue. For the remainder a wharfinger is appointed who makes his reports, but the reports indicate that there is no movement over the dock. Of the number yielding revenue only fifty-one yield $500 gross each; twenty-nine yield over $1,000 gross, and one wharf yields up to $15,000.
As for the abolition of wharfingers, I think that would be a backward step. Many of the docks require services other than just the tying up of ships and the counting of cargoes. Many of the docks have sheds used for various purposes, and of which the wharfinger is custodian. We have, for instance, potato wharves, some of them heated; many wharves have lights, and it would be quite impossible to operate lights for the dock unless someone is responsible.
I think it is a great pity to stir up feeling against the collection of wharfage at any point. Every town that asks for the accommodation of a public dock should) have enough public spirit to fall in with the appointment of a wharfinger and pay the trifling fees that are charged for the service. In fact I think each dock should have a wharfinger, whether there is any business there or not. If the government builds a dock at that point, someone should be responsible. We should) have the benefit at head office of reports from the locality indicating what repairs are necessary; and, where the traffic warrants, the dock

should be lighted, and someone should be responsible for the lights.
The suggestion was made that side wharfage should be charged and top wharfage eliminated), and that side wharfage should be collected at head office from the steamship companies. That could be done, although it would be simply substituting an indirect tax for a direct tax on the user of the docks, and probably the indirect tax would be much higher than any direct tax paid through a wharfinger. The difficulty in that method of collection is that we would have no one at the dock responsible for the operation andl condition of the dock, which is very important. Under all the circumstances, therefore, I believe the present system meets the case better than any other that has been suggested to-day.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
Section 1 agreed to.
On section 2-Application of act.
Richard Bedford Bennett: It says:
Nothing in this act shall apply to any harbour under the administration, management and control of the National Harbours Board or of any commissioners appointed under any act of the parliament of Canada.
Are there not a number of places where a certain form of commission is appointed which would hardly be covered iby this language? Is it broad enough to cover them all?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think it covers them all. I can think of no commission that is not appointed under an act of parliament. We appoint two commissions in some cases, and' sometimes one.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I had in mind cases where the municipality appoints its own commission.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think in that event there is a commutation of wharfage. There are municipalities where the dock is leased to the municipality.


Richard Bedford Bennett: As long as the minister is satisfied on that point, I am.


Clarence Decatur Howe: This corrects the old list of exempted wharves, which is now erroneous.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Toronto, for example, has -a municipal commission.
Mr. HOWEl Yes, but it is under a dominion act. We appoint two commissioners there.


Richard Bedford Bennett: We do not appoint the commission.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, but we appoint commissioners.

Harbours and Piers Act


Richard Bedford Bennett: We appoint only a certain number of the commission.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Quite so.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The commission is a municipal one, and as a matter of fact the harbour works are harbour works of the municipality. We give some assistance to them in connection with the harbour, and: we have a representative on the board. It was cases of that kind I had in mind when I raised the question. I wanted to be sure that there is no doubt about the legislation being comprehensive enough to meet the situation


Clarence Decatur Howe: My right hon. friend will notice that the word used is "commissioners."


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It says, "or of any commissioners appointed under any act of the parliament of Canada." I think that covers the situation.	.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I do not wish to take up time, but that is the point I was raising. These commissioners are not appointed under an act of the parliament of Canada; they are appointed by the city council. In the case of Toronto harbour, I think we named two commissioners-I speak subject to correction-


Clarence Decatur Howe: Ordinarily it is two, yes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It was the very words the minister has quoted which directed my attention to the thought that perhaps the language was not comprehensive enough. It says:
. . . under the administration, management and control of the National Harbours Board or of any commissioners appointed under any act of the parliament of Canada.
These commissioners are not all appointed by act of parliament. However, the minister's attention has been drawn to it, and that is sufficient.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 3-Appointment of officers and employees.
Charles Grant MacNeil: In view of the discussion on the second reading I should like further information from the minister as to what instructions are given to the wharfingers. There seems to be some misunderstanding, because in the district I represent I have had no evidence that wharfingers are required: to render service to the public of the kind to which reference was made by my hon, friend from Comox-Albemi (Mr. Neill). There is a haphazard performance of their duties. They do not assist in taking lines from vessels or share any responsibility for the care and protection of goods that are landed on the wharf. In the district to which I refer
31111-41J
very seldom do vessels bring in goods to any considerable quantity except during daylight hours.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The wharfinger has a general supervision of the dock. He is not necessarily a warehouse man. He does not assume financial responsibility for the goods that are put on the dock, though he has instructions to see that they are properly taken care of and distributed. He collects the fees at the dock, looks after the dock in a general way, takes care of the lighting if there is any, and so on.


Charles Grant MacNeil: I may remark in passing
that at the wharves I speak of there are no lights except such as the residents provide. In what manner are these appointments made?


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are made by the minister. The recommendations come from the member for the district or from the department's agency, in case the member is not able to nominate a wharfinger. We use every means at our disposal to get a man who is willing to act. The difficulty is to get men. I have some 500 letters outstanding asking for wharfingers, and have not been able to get satisfactory replies. The treasury have men checking up as well because they must look after the interests of the treasury.


Mr. HEAPS:: Why can men not be
obtained?
Mr. HOWE':	For the reason stated a
moment ago. There is some little agitation worked up at local points; they may decide that they will not have a wharfinger, and if one is appointed he is not allowed to act. It is a local revolution, and I hope that hon. members will have nothing to do with one.


Charles Grant MacNeil: I can assure the minister
that if there is any local revolution I have nothing to do with it. I want to draw his attention to three wharves within a few miles of one another connected by road-Gibsons Landing, Robert's Creek and Wilson's Creek. These wharves were constructed and are maintained at the public expense. No top-wharfage tolls are collected, but side wharfage tolls are collected at Gibsons Landing. At Robert's Creek a wharf constructed a number of years ago and which was recently transferred to the Transport department, the wharfinger was appointed last season. The minister can understand the resentment that arises in a community, when after they have been shipping produce for a number of years without paying any toll, to have- one suddenly imposed upon them at a time when hardship is bound to ensue. Immediately
Harbours and Piers Act

north is Wilson's Creek and as far as I have been able to discover that has not yet been transferred to the department. Those who enjoy the facilities established at public expense at that point pay no toll.
The hon. member for [DOT]Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) referred to the collection of side-wharfage dues. The rate is set by regulation under the act, and I believe it is something like 50 cents per call for vessels of the size that make use of these wharves, vessels under 500 tons. In the fixing of freight and express charges on goods moving back and forth, the side wharfage charges are taken into the calculation, and the residents must pay the side wharfage due in such case whether it is actually collected by the government or not at any of these points. On what basis this is computed in the carriage rates I am not sure. In view of the circumstance I have brought to the minister's attention, I should appreciate some suggestion from him as to how this obviously unfair discrimination might be eliminated. Even if it is extremely difficult to appoint wharfingers some other scheme might be devised so that one particular community might not be singled out while others escape the payment of the toll. The imposition of this tax on the smaller communities is quite unnecessary. The people do not enjoy the services which one would regard as only reasonable in view of the charges collected, and they suffer many inconveniences in addition. I suggest that the residents of these places should be encouraged to stay there instead of being discouraged by the government. Has the minister any suggestion as to how this unfair discrimination might be removed?


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend has referred ;o Gibsons Landing, which is perhaps a fair example of many of these wharves. In 1928 there was considerable correspondence in an effort to obtain a wharfinger for that point, but without success. The effort was renewed in 1930, again without success, and in 1931 there was again a good deal of correspondence. Efforts were made again at the end of 1935 and early in 1936 and we are still unable to get a wharfinger. I understand that this place is in the hon. gentleman's constituency and if he is willing to look into the matter and suggest a name for wharfinger, we will be delighted to appoint him.


Charles Grant MacNeil: Can the minister tell us why side wharfage tolls are not collected at all points and levied against the steamship company? I would point out to him that in these districts I have1 mentioned side wharfage dues are paid only at Irvine's Landing and

Gibsons Landing. At Robert's Creek, although top wharfage tolls are collected, side wharfage tolls are not.


Mr. ESLING:: At what points at West Kootenay, along the Arrow lakes and Kootenay lake, are there wharfingers?


Clarence Decatur Howe: AVith regard to the question asked by my hon. friend (Mr. MacNeil), the wharfinger should collect side wharfage tolls at all points. If he collects at some and not at others he is negligent. The act provides that the minister may commute wharfage with steamship companies by paying them a lump sum for the season or per month through the head office by arrangement with the department, and I can assure the hon. gentleman that there is no attempt at evasion. As regards the question asked by my hon. friend from Kootenay West (Mr. Esling) I understand that he wishes to know at what points on the Arrow lakes there are wharfingers. The following wharves are on interior lakes. I am not quite familiar with the geography: Naramata,, Peachland, Penticton and Sum-merland appear on the list as having wharfingers.


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: This seems to be the only clause in this bill of any great importance and I should like the minister to explain why he is suggesting this change, which is a rather serious one. Under the present law all the employees are appointed by the governor in council. It is quite true that the recommendations for appointments have always been made by the minister, but the onus of making the appointments rests with the government as a whole. In this clause the minister is asking that he shall be given the sole authority to make appointments without going to the governor in council. What possible reason is there for making such a change?


Clarence Decatur Howe: This practice goes back to 1923. Prior to that it was a duty of the civil service commission, and prior to that, when this act was drafted, it was done by the governor in council. The civil service commission found it absolutely impracticable to handle these appointments, probably because it is so difficult to get anyone to act. In 1923 an amendment was passed to the Civil Service Act excepting these appointments from the operation of the act and placing them under the minister. I do not know why it should be under the minister rather than the governor in council, except that the transactions are so small that it seems hardly worth while cluttering up the minutes of council with them.

Harbours and Piers Act


Richard Bedford Bennett: The council fixes the
salaries.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It approves the remuneration.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They are determined.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, the regulations are determined by order in council.


George Halsey Perley: I do not think the minister has given any good reason for the change. After all, this is the only clause of any importance in the bill. I quite agree that the civil service commission could not make these appointments satisfactorily, and I think the change was properly made giving the authority to the governor in council. But now the minister himself is asking for authority to appoint these people. It has been my experience that the recommendation of the minister has usually been agreed to by council. There must be some reason which we do not know why the minister seeks this change. Why does he not leave it alone? I take it the bill is brought in for no other purpose than to provide for the change suggested in section 3. I for one should like some satisfactory explanation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The present act provides that it shall be done by order in council. In 1918 the Civil Service Act provided that these appointments should be taken from the governor in council and placed in the hands of the civil service commission. In 1922 the Civil Service Act was amended to provide that these appointments should be made by the minister. That has been the practice since 1922; they are appointed by the minister by virtue of the amendment to the Civil Service Act of 1922. We are simply changing the act to conform to the existing practice. For the past fifteen years the appointments have in fact been made by the minister without reference to the governor in council, by virtue of the amendment to which I have referred.


George Halsey Perley: Does the minister mean that notwithstanding the way this act reads at present the minister has been making these appointments without referring them to the governor in council?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. We do it, as I say, by virtue of the amendment to the Civil Service Act of 1922.


George Halsey Perley: My memory of it is that it has not been done in that way, but if the minister is certain-


Richard Bedford Bennett: It was done by the governor in council on the recommendation of the minister.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My officers assure me it is done by departmental letter, and has been done in that way since 1922. In actual practice the minister is seldom consulted about it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is to see if they will take the position, but I can recall orders in council appointing wharfingers. The difficulty has been to find someone willing to be ap^ pointed, but when the time for appointment came I can recall some cases at least during recent years in which the recommendation of the minister was that so and so be appointed and that the salary consist of the fees which he receives; dozens of cases of that kind come to my mind at the moment. The minister is quite right in saying that there is no reference to the minister about it. When someone has expressed willingness to act, the appointment is made in the manner indicated in the statute.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps my right hon. friend is confusing wharfingers with harbour masters. They also are paid by fees of office. My two officers, one of whom has been in the department many years, assure me that no wharfinger has been appointed by order in council since 1922.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He should know. It may be that I confuse wharfingers with harbour masters.


William Kemble Esling: I think the minister will find that he is letting himself in for a lot of trouble, as far as the wharves serving small communities are concerned. Along the Arrow and Kootenay lakes there are about forty small wharves. In all my experience of forty years I have heard of only one wharfinger having been appointed in that district, and he had a rather unhappy experience. He had a consuming desire to possess a government job. He was appointed under the fee system. There happened to be an Anglican missionary parson there, and about the only real money that wharfinger ever collected was a dime. The parson was getting aboard the boat and happened to remember that he wanted to go back to the store. He left his suit case on the wharf. When he came back and took it up he was told to drop it; that it would cost him ten cents. The fact is that steamers along the Arrow lakes refuse to pay any fees; they just run the bow on the beach, throw out a plank and load or unload their freight on the beach. The communities protest against the payment of any fees. In one place they directed that their freight and express be unloaded on the wharf opposite and it would be brought over on the ferry free of charge. The wharfinger put
&46
Harbours and Piers Act

the freight into the shed, looked the shed, which was an unusual thing, and went home for the day. About six miles away there was a logging camp. The men came in the evening to get their week's supply of meat, and found the shed looked. They observed that there were strap hinges on the door, so they got a screw driver and took off the hinges and took their meat home. The next morning the wharfinger came down and thought that someone had been tampering with the lock, so he bought a new padlock at his own expense. The next week the same thing occurred. Then he took a logging chain and put it around the shed and through the handles of the door. Shortly afterwards the loggers came down for their meat, and they took off the logging chain, door and all, and threw it into the lake. It required an order in council to have the man appointed and an order in council to have him removed on a protest from the people at that point. So as I say, the minister will have a lot of trouble, first of all through protests against the fees, and then if it is to be a salary over and above any fees he will have a good deal of difficulty in satisfying the innumerable applicants for these posts.


Mr. McIVOR:: I think that is one case where the minister would be wise in not appointing anyone. It would be in the interest of the clerical gentleman.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There are many communities more law-abiding than the one just described.


Charles Grant MacNeil: I understand the minister corrected the figures. I may explain that these figures were furnished on an order of the house for a return last session. I understand that of some 948 wharves there are only a limited number on which top wharfage dues are collected. I am not so much interested in the appointment of wharfingers as in the exact number of wharves where top wharfage dues are collected. May I also ask if those 948 wharves represent the total number of government wharves or only those that have been transferred to the Department of Transport? Is there any considerable number of wharves over and above that number not yet transferred from the Department of Public Works?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I may say that exactly 282 wharves yield revenue, both side and top *wharfage being collected. There are many wharves that have not been turned over to us for administration, and are still under the Department of Public Works.


Mr. RYAN:: In connection with the appointment of wharfingers, is it the intention of the government to appoint them for a number of years?
[Mr Esling]


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are appointed during pleasure, which usually means that they are permanent during good behaviour.


Mr. KINLEY:: How does the department determine when a wharfinger is needed at any particular place?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We try to get wharfingers for all wharves, but that is not always possible. We have agents scattered all over the country; we get a report from our agent as to the business over the wharf, and if it is a very substantial amount we make a determined effort to secure a wharfinger. By law we are supposed to have a wharfinger for every wharf in Canada, and we make every attempt to do so.


John James Kinley: But there is not a wharfinger for every wharf?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.


John James Kinley: I assume this bill has nothing to do with railway wharves?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Nothing at all.


John James Kinley: In my county there is a
railway wharf at Lunenburg and another wharf at Bridgewater. It appears that the wharf at Bridgewater is controlled by the Department of Public Works and the wharf at Lunenburg is controlled by the railway company. There is no wharfinger at Lunenburg but there is a wharfinger at Bridgewater. I may say that the wharves which are under the control of the Department of Public Works are much better looked after than the wharves under the control of the railways; we find it much harder to get repairs from the railways. Very few of the wharves in my county have sheds on them, so that the service rendered in return for the top and side wharfage is not so apparent as it might be at other points. However, I must say that I do not think there is any attempt to collect wharfage from the small dealer who lands at the wharf; I think it is collected only from a ship with a cargo, and that sort of thing, and of course that is expected.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 4-Detention of vessel at subsequent port of call.
Richard Bedford Bennett: Should you not make it read "any other Canadian port" in line 9? We want to make it clear that we cannot claim the right to hold a ship anywhere else than in a Canadian port.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have no objection whatever.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Of course it is implied in any case.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.

Supply-National Defence
Sections 5 and 6 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
General-Civil Pensions-
Life pension to Robert Allen, $269.52.
Life pension to Walter Pettipas, $515.90.
Life pension to Florence Walker, $360.
Life pension to Arnold Truman Townsend $420.
Life pension to Michael Mountain, $420.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: This is a non-contentious item, some of the details of which have been in the estimates every year since about 1916, dealing with injuries sustained by civilians who have been working in connection with the Department of National Defence, or the widows of such who died.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It has only to do with special pensions arising out of injuries during the current year?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Out of injuries at various times, and for which provision could not be made either under the provincial compensation act or under our own Pension Act.


Mr. ISNOR:: I should like to ask if, after one particular item has been passed, whether it stands good for the year for which it was passed? For instance, I read: "Life pension to Arnold Truman Townsend, $420." That will be good for one year?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: The department could not withhold any part of that?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No, not unless there was some compensating arrangement. The amount must be revoted by parliament each year.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Then I would like to direct the minister's attention to the fact that in the case of Michael Mountain there is something like three or four months of 1936 for which the pension has not been paid.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I shall be very happy to look into that case immediately for my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
C-ivil Government-
Salaries, $640,248.
Contingencies, $42,088.70.
Richard Bedford Bennett: What does this cover?
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Acting Minister of Trade and Commerce): This vote involves an increase of $35,083. The increase is accounted for wholly by increases in salaries.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What are they?


Norman McLeod Rogers: In the headquarters staff and in the bureau of statistics. Shall I give the increases in order?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, because this raises a question which I want to discuss in some detail. There is the question of what Mr. Muir is doing, and matters of that kind. I should like to have the particulars of the increases.


Norman McLeod Rogers: As I said a moment ago, the total increase over last year is $35,083. The first increase is that of Mr. F. E. Bawden, $240.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What does he do?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Mr. Bawden is connected with the branch of the department which deals with steamship subsidies.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What is his present salary?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Mr. Bawden's present salary is $4,260, which is being increased to $4,500. His title is director of trade routes and steamship subsidies.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Would the minister prefer that we discuss this appropriation item by item as we go along, or wait until he finishes?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I believe there are officials of the department here, and I am quite prepared to deal with these matters now if it seems desirable.


Richard Bedford Bennett: We will wait until they
come, then. After the minister has made his statement we can deal with them further, when the officials are here.
Mr. ROGERS. I shall continue. Next, there is the salary of T. G. Major, transferred from Commercial Intelligence Service, $3,600; the salary of S. Cuddy, transferredi from weights and measures, $2,790. That covers the headquarters office. I no-w come to the salary changes in the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. They are these:	One statistician, grade 2,
vacant, $2,400; five clerks grade 2, at $1,080, totalling $5,400; one stenographer, grade 2,

Supply-Trade and Commerce
81,080; 2 office appliance operators at 81,020, totalling $2,040; one stenographer, grade 1, $720; 18 clerks, grade 1, at $720, totalling $12,960, one office boy 8600, making a grand total of $25,240. The column is completed by an item for statutory increases amounting to $3,213, making a total increase of 835,083, as indicated.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The minister will observe that this departs from the procedure with respect to statutory increases in connection with salaries on a higher scale. I believe statutory increases amount to approximately five per cent; up to a certain point, that is the maximum. The others are cases in which special provision is made for those in the higher brackets. It would require something more than has been said to explain why that should be dbne, if it is not to be left open to the criticism that there was discrimination.
The other question I wish to raise is one which has to do with the dissemination of information. Some years ago the last government provided a publicity agent in the Department of Trade and Commerce, in the person of Mr. Muir. From information which comes to me I gather there has been some change in his position. I should like to know what his present duties are, and the kind of information he is responsible for gathering and sending abroad. I should like particular enlightenment as to the information he sends out of the country by cable and how and under what vote the bills for cables are paid.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be pleased' to get
the information as soon as possible. With reference to the first point raised by the leader of the opposition, may I say that in the case of Mr. Bawden the salary increase would be fully in conformity with the five per cent.


Richard Bedford Bennett: But there is a maximum, and it exceeds the maximum.


Norman McLeod Rogers: It appears that Mr. Bawden was reclassified by the civil service commission, which accounts for his increase from $4,260 to $4,500. The other two in the headquarters staff were transferred.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I know about that.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am informed Mr. Muir
comes under the organization of the bureau of statistics and holds the office of an editor, grade 2. I take it that any information coming from him for publicity purposes would appear in the publications of the bureau of statistics.


Richard Bedford Bennett: So would I.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have no other information respecting the matter.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is the point about which I was inquiring. Apparently the minister and myself have the same appreciation of the situation. I should like to know whether my information is correct. The minister will observe I was careful to say that I was informed; I do not know whether my information is accurate, but it is to the effect that Mr. Muir has been sending abroad cables in the nature of propaganda with respect to certain matters. I should like the minister to look into it and see whether he has incurred any bills for cables in the last few months. If so, out of what moneys are those bills paid, and is the bureau of statistics or the Department of Trade and Commerce responsible for them? In some instances the information is of a kind available in the department and known to the public only when given to it by the department. I believe it would be found that in some instances he has advance information with respect to matters, and makes it available by means which are denied-I think that is the proper word- to those who are responsible for the dissemination of information to the public generally. I would like the minister to look into the matter, fully realizing that he cannot answer to-day. The matter involves a question of principle which, I believe, is of some importance, which has been dealt with on more than one occasion, and concerning which the present leader of the government on more than one occasion in days past expressed very strong convictions.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be pleased to look into the matter. Of course the leader of the opposition realizes I have not the information before me at this time.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Quite.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I should like to have a precise understanding of the nature of the complaint. As I understand it, the suggestion is that Mr. Muir was giving information in a capacity other than that of an editor in the bureau of statistics.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I do not know what he conceives his duty as editor to be. I was directing attention to information which had come to me, and I have asked the minister to ascertain whether that information has a foundation in fact, namely, that information has been cabled from this country at public expense. This information is in the nature of propaganda which at the time it was sent

Supply-Trade and Commerce
was not quite available to other organs of public opinion. I believe I have put it as fairly as I can.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I think I understand.


William Michael Ryan: Has any thought been given in the bureau of statistics to getting information respecting trade among the provinces of the dominion? It is almost impossible to learn from the figures obtained by the bureau what constitutes trade among the provinces. Some time ago the Duncan commission made a report on their inquiry into maritime claims in which they indicated that they had experienced difficulty in making a finding with respect to trade because they had not available the statistics to which I have referred. In the report of the commission we find at page 44 the following observation:
We have had brought before us the lack of any comprehensive measurement of the trade of the maritime provinces with other provinces and with foreign markets. We were ourselves disappointed not to be able to pursue investigations on trade matters along lines which such statistics would have enabled us to do. We found on inquiry at the Dominion Bureau of Statistics that consideration had been given some time ago to this very subject but, mainly through lack of organization in the statistics relating to certain phases of transportation, it was not possible to proceed with the plans that had been formulated. We strongly urge that these difficulties should be overcome, as they can be, and that on this phase of internal trade a system of statistics should be made regularly available from as early a date as possible.
There was a recommendation made some years ago by the Duncan commission and1 I do not think any steps have been taken since then to obtain the necessary information. I appreciate the fact that the acting minister is familiar with the difficulties about which I am complaining, and I should like to know if any efforts are to be made to obtain statistics along these lines.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be very glad to find out what progress has been made by the bureau of statistics in the direction suggested by my hon. friend. I can say now that there are very serious difficulties in the way of securing that information accurately. I recall some years ago trying to arrive at an approximate balance with respect to a single province, and I found that the bureau of statistics could give little more than the movement of carloadings in and out of provinces.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And by water.


Norman McLeod Rogers: And the movements by water. After all, we could not reduce those to terms of dollars and cents; it is quantities only. Much of the carloadings consist of less
than carload shipments and these could not possibly be reduced to dollars and cents. The bureau of statistics have done a very useful work in recent years in analyzing retail sales in the various provinces. I believe they have done that with a view to arriving at a more accurate measurement of internal trade than we have had hitherto. I should be surprised if the bureau felt at the present time that it could give us any assurance of being able to provide an accurate statistical summary of interprovincial trade. As a matter of fact the United States have encountered the same difficulty and have not been able to provide this information.


William Michael Ryan: Is the information as to retail sales available from the bureau?


Norman McLeod Rogers: If I remember correctly, this analysis of retail sales was commenced about five years ago. It was based particularly upon the census of 1931. Since that time there have been annual corrections and breakdowns of the retail sales in the various provinces.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is only an estimate, in the last analysis.


Norman McLeod Rogers: It does not profess to be accurate, although I believe a greater approach to accuracy is attained as the analysis is continued from year to year.


John James Kinley: May I point out that this matter is becoming increasingly important because of the fact that some provinces now have income tax laws. Exporters in Nova Scotia have been subjected to taxes in Ontario on the profits of their trade in that province. The acting minister will see that this will disturb the balance as between a province which has an income tax and thus taxes the profit on trade from another province, and a province which has no income tax. For this reason I believe it would be very enlightening to have these statistics. We in the maritime provinces will be able to show that while we are subject to an income tax on goods going into the central provinces, we buy infinitely more from those provinces.


Norman McLeod Rogers: When the item covering the bureau of statistics is before the committee this information requested by the hon. member for Saint John (Mr. Ryan) and the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Kinley) can be supplied. I have no doubt I shall be able to discover from the officials of the bureau just how far they have been able to make progress in the direction suggested, what obstacles still remain, and whether in their opinion they are insuperable.
Supply-Labour-Disputes

As Mr. Muir is attached to the bureau of statistics perhaps I could give the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) the information he desires in this connection when that particular item comes up.


Richard Bedford Bennett: This item could pass so long as we are not precluded from getting to the bottom of that other matter.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The item could be carried subject to the undertaking that the case of Mr. Muir will be dealt with when the bureau of statistics item comes up.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Conciliation and Labour Act, $35,000.
Norman McLeod Rogers: This item covers the
expenditures connected with the printing and publishing of the Labour Gazette, which is the official organ of the department. It also covers the salaries of persons employed as Labour Gazette correspondents, which range from $120 to $300 per year. At present there are only forty-three of these correspondents employed by the department. The item provides also for special work on rental and wage surveys, in providing statistics and for conciliation in labour disputes. I may say that it has been found desirable to make full use of the conciliation branch of the Department of Labour. Instead of encouraging the setting up of conciliation boards, it has been found that a conciliation officer from the department is often able to effect the same results at considerably less expense.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Could the minister
indicate what changes have been made in the correspondents during the last year? I had one communication in connection with this matter.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have before me a complete list of the correspondents but I have not a statement of the replacements. I can assure the leader of the opposition that there have been very few replacements.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I thought perhaps the minister could tell me what the changes were and why.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall have to speak from memory on this matter, but my distinct impression is that the changes made were due either to death or to retirement or, in certain cases, to the reinstatement of correspondents who appear to have been dismissed in 1930 or thereabouts. But there were very few cases of that kind.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There are only forty-three altogether.


Norman McLeod Rogers: To the best of my recollection there have not been more than half a dozen changes in the past year.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Perhaps the minister
would ascertain at what points changes have been made.


Mr. MAYBANK:: Would this item cover the expenses of the board which recently considered the dispute between the two railway companies and the men in connection with wage cuts?


Norman McLeod Rogers: That would come under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. Conciliation boards to deal with railway disputes or disputes in connection with public utility companies would be set up under that act, which is covered by another item.


Ralph Maybank: Just one other question. Under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, while I cannot quote the section exactly from memory, the terminology of one section is such as to prevent, or to attempt to prevent, employers from changing hours of labour or general working conditions without reference to the employees of the particular industry affected. I wanted to bring before the house at some stage, and I ask whether this is the proper time, the question of the changing of the hours of labour and general working conditions in the Post Office Department, and to ask whether this government takes the position with reference to its own employees of being under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. I should like the opportunity to discuss this question either under this head or at some other time, because it is most important that a government enacting legislation for the guidance of employers should itself be the best sort of employer, and ought to bring itself under its own statutes with reference to its employees. If this is not the proper time to discuss the question, I shall discuss it at some future time.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Without desiring in any
way to curtail discussion on any particular point, I think it would be more appropriate if my hon. friend's question were brought up under the vote covering the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. I might remind him, however, that the government has enacted a fair wages act, which does cover the wages and hours of labour of its own employees and also of those who are engaged on government contracts.

Supply-Labour-Disputes


Abraham Albert Heaps: Perhaps under this item I might ask the minister if he can give us any information in regard to the strike at the cotton mills at Welland.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Perhaps my hon. friend will recall that last week the hon. member for Welland (Mr. Damude) directed the attention of the house to the strike at Welland and asked what progress had been made towards its settlement. I informed him at that time that a request had been received by the Department of Labour for the setting up of a board of conciliation. That request was made by the mayor of Welland on behalf of the city council, and also by the employees concerned. It was pointed out, however, that for the setting up of a board of conciliation for a dispute which did not relate to a public utility it was necessary to secure the consent of both parties to the dispute. When the hon. member for Welland put his question to me a few days ago, we were still in communication with the representatives of the company and hoped that they might see their way clear to accept a board of conciliation, but over the week-end it has developed that the company does not feel it desirable to have a board of conciliation established. At the same time they have advised us that they would welcome a conciliation officer from the Department of Labour. They have asked particularly that the chief conciliation officer should go to Welland in order to reopen negotiations for a settlement. That is the position at the present time.
I am glad to say that the employees concerned have also communicated that they would welcome the assistance of the chief conciliation officer at this time. It has been a prolonged strike of some six weeks' duration, if I remember correctly. The Department of Labour from the beginning offered its good offices in the matter, but up to the present time it has seemed to be impossible to bring the two parties together. However, in view of what has taken place in the last few days, I think we may assume that settlement has been brought nearer.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am not criticizing anything that the department has done; for I think they have done all that is within their power to bring the parties together. But it does seem to me that the company concerned is playing for time, just in the hope that by keeping the men out longer and making their conditions more desperate they will ultimately compel them to go back on the company's own terms. I think that is a very unfortunate thing. I do not see myself why
a company, particular one enjoying all the privileges of protection which this company does, should refuse conciliation, especially when it has been requested both by the employees and by the council of the town of Welland. I do not see what difference it makes whether they have a conciliation officer or a board of conciliation. There is really little difference. Had the company accepted the board in the first place, I have no doubt that the dispute would have been amicably adjusted within a very short time, but as it is now, there is no telling how long the strike may continue or the direction in which it may develop. I am sorry that the company has adopted the attitude it has, and I had hoped that the government would have found ways and means of bringing a company of that kind to time, at least to the extent that they would deal1 directly with their own employees.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I might point out that the mere setting up of a board of conciliation under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act does not of itself ensure a settlement of the dispute, because it would still be open to either party to reject the proposed basis of settlement. So that the sending of a conciliation officer to Welland may conceivably have, and I certainly hope it will have, precisely the same beneficial effect as the setting up of a board of conciliation, and possibly within a shorter space of time.
I can inform my hon. friend that the Department of Labour did hope very much that the company would see its way clear to accept a board of conciliation, particularly in view of the fact that it had been requested by the city council and by the employees. We cannot do more than urge our views upon the company concerned. It rests with the company to determine whether or not under the circumstances it will consent to the setting up of a board.


Abraham Albert Heaps: All that I was pointing out, and it is borne out I think by what the minister has just said:, is that if the company were willing to try to bring about an amicable adjustment, it would have been just as easy for them to say yes to the appointment of a -board of conciliation as to say no, and it would at least have shown a willingness on their part to do something towards bringing about the settlement which I know the department so much desires. But evidently the company have thought fit to take a different course of action, and all I can do is to hope, as does the minister, that the chief conciliation officer will be able to bring about a settlement, which is much to be desired in the interests of all concerned.
Supply-Labour-Disputes


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: May I say a word supplementary to what has been saids by my colleague? The minister says: We cannot do more. I think the department can do more. It is only a few weeks since I chanced to be in Welland for a few hours. The strike was then on. I met a number of fairly representative citizens, and they were, so far as I could find, unanimous in wishing for a settlement and in denouncing the very low wages and the very bad: conditions that prevailed in that factory. The workers were trying to maintain order, and they were taking the only way open to them to press their claims for decent living conditions.
I received last night a telegram from the Welland textile workers strike committee, urging that this matter should be brought up in the house at an early day. They say they have done their part; they are willing to accept a board of conciliation. Indeed, they plead that a board be appointed. They refer to the very low wages and the bad conditions that have been revealed in the textile industry by the Turgeon commission.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Perhaps the minister
would state the facts so that we might have them on Hansard.


James Shaver Woodsworth: It seems to me, in view of the published facts with regard to conditions in the textile industry, and having regard to what the people in Welland call the arrogant attitude of the company in refusing to recognize the union or to accept a board appointed by the government, the state of affairs is such that it is not sufficient for the head of the Department of Labour to say, "We really cannot do anything about it."


Norman McLeod Rogers: My hon. friend is not fair in that statement. I said that we could not do more under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. The Industrial Disputes Investigation Act applies to public utilities generally. It can be applied to other industries provided that where a dispute has occurred in such other industry both parties to the dispute consent *to the setting up of a board. In the present instance the employees did consent, in fact they requested, that a board be established and that request was supported by the city council of Welland. It was communicated to the company.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Both parties to the dispute could not have agreed.


Norman McLeod Rogers: No.


Richard Bedford Bennett: After the decision of the privy council and the new act you had to have the consent of both parties or else the act was ultra vires.
TMr. Heaps.]


Norman McLeod Rogers: That is what I was trying to point out to my hon. friend. When I said that we could not do more I meant that we could not do more under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. We could not appoint a representative for the company.


Abraham Albert Heaps: When was the request made by the city council for a board of conciliation?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have not the file before me. I should think it was about ten days ago, and that request was communicated at once to Empire Cotton Mills, Limited, the head office of which is in Montreal. The communication received back from Empire Cotton Mills, Limited, was dated February 5, and was in the following terms:
We will, however, be glad to cooperate with your department in any efforts which may seem to afford any chance of bringing the unfortunate situation in Welland to a close, and therefore we would welcome any opportunity to discuss matter further with you.
That followed the statement of the refusal of the company to consent to the setting up of a conciliation board, and upon receipt of that communication the Department of Labour at once wired the Welland textile workers' strike committee in the following terms:
With further reference my telegram third letter received to-day from Empire Cotton Mills Limited declining for reasons stated to give consent to establishment of board of conciliation and investigation. This letter among other things states:	"We will, however, be
glad to cooperate with your department in any efforts which may seem to afford any chance of bringing the unfortunate situation in Welland to a close, and therefore we would welcome any opportunity to discuss the matter further with you." Copy of this letter being mailed to you to-day and shall be glad to have word from you in due course advising if in opinion your committee this department can be of further service.
Only this morning this reply was received from the strike committee:
Press reports M. S. Campbell coming here.
He is chief conciliation officer of the department.
We will appreciate his assistance immediately.
That comes from the strike committee, and the intention is that Mr. Campbell shall proceed to Welland at the earliest opportunity. Unfortunately he is ill to-day, but he hopes to leave for Welland with the least possible delay.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The minister limits the application of his words to what is possible under the conciliation act. I want him to go further than that. It seems to me that the government can go further in bringing pressure to bear upon the company and it

Supply-Labour[DOT]-Disputes
should do so. As my colleague suggests, this company, in common with other textile companies, has very great privileges under our tariff. I have not the slightest doubt tfyat if there were a strong and determined effort on the part of the government to impress upon the company very definitely that unless certain conditions were complied with these special privileges under the tariff would be withdrawn, not only would the company consider the matter twice, but pressure would be brought to bear by other textile companies to see that present conditions were remedied. When we have the abominable conditions that have been revealed to the public by the Turgeon commission-the public know all about it-I do not think we as a parliament can remain indifferent to this sort of thing. If the men riot and destroy property there is immediately a great cry and it is said that we must stand for law and order. Surely the most important duty of law and order is protection of the lives and welfare of the men, women and children of the country. In the textile industry men, women and children are being subjected to a degrading kind of life. They are not living as Canadians ought to live; it is impossible for them to live as Canadians should live. What is the use of safe-guarding law and order when we neglect the conditions that inevitably produce a breach of law and order-unless the people are content to become abject slaves. These textile workers, as far as I can gather, have proceeded in an orderly way and have been very patient. After a month their resources must be about exhausted, but this local company not only has its own resources but undoubtedly is backed by other aggregations of capital. I do not think the minister ought to stay within the bounds of the present conciliation act. In my opinion the department has a real duty to protect the interests of the workers, their standards of living and their right to organize.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The observations made
by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) induce me to ask the minister to be good enough to state shortly the facts of this case. I always think-and my experience has taught me this -that it is very unsatisfactory and unfortunate for us to get a partial statement upon which we predicate conclusions only to discover subsequently that our conclusions were based upon an improper appreciation of the premises. Perhaps the minister would be good to inform us as to the date on which the trouble commenced, what was the cause of it, and what is the real issue which brought about the strike. If that were before the
house it would be fair to all parties and would afford the members of this committee a fair opportunity to arrive at a much better understanding of the situation than can otherwise be expected. My hon. friend has used pretty strong language with respect to this strike, and I confess I do not know anything about it. That is why I was hopeful that the committee would have a statement which would enable each of us to apply such knowledge as we have to the facts that are agreed upon as being correct statements of the causes and of the point at issue between employers and employees, and as to what the contentions of the one and the proposals of the other are. The question of conciliation is another matter altogether. The Industrial Disputes Investigation Act having been declared invalid, presumably the minister would say that the Prime Minister of that day was responsible for creating a condition much worse than the condition which existed before, in view of the fact that the court had held that the act was invalid.


Norman McLeod Rogers: In some respects.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, I would expect that, the respects being purely political. But if we leave that aside, the position would be that the act having been declared by the court of last resort to be invalid in its application to an industrial dispute, let us say, we have upon the statute book a provision which means nothing at all. It merely says that if people agree to do something we shall do something. But if they can agree, they could agree to appoint a judge of the supreme court or anyone else as arbitrator. It is merely a statement that if they do agree, we shall appoint someone to represent us or we shall appoint the whole board. It is quite competent for two parties to a dispute to agree upon a mode of settling their difficulties. Our statute is merely declaratory, quantum valeat, of that right. The question of conciliation, however, stands upon an entirely different basis. There are a number of fair wage officers in the department-I am going to ask the minister about that presently -and those fair wage officers are charged with the duty and responsibility of investigating any differences that exist between employer and employees in communities.


Mr. MARTIN:: Are they conciliation
officers.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I say they are, broadly
speaking. I thought the minister spoke of them as conciliation officers for the purpose of endeavouring to bring about what one might call a peaceful adjustment of differences in respect of many matters which arise in in-

Supply-Labour-Disputes
dustrial establishments. My observation is that these conciliation officers have done remarkable work, and have brought about many adjustments of which I have had personal knowledge. In other words, in view of the fact that we cannot by law create a body charged with responsibility to determine the issue, for arbitration which was compulsory and therefore invalid!, they have substituted negotiation. And that negotiation has in my judgment, brought about very desirable results.
I think the court held that the provinces have complete jurisdiction, that this is a matter of contract-the doctrine of property and civil rights once more-contract between the employer and employees, and the jurisdiction over the contract is provincial, just as Ontario has claimed jurisdiction over certain contracts between the Hydro Electric Power Commission and private enterprise. So, if I appreciate the decision of the court it is that such contracts of hiring, wages and employment are under the direct and complete control of the provinces. If the press reports are accurate-I make the statement with that reservation-the effort we made here to limit hours of labour and to provide for minimum wages, under the conventions made, was held to be bad because the court declared that, notwithstanding the provisions of section 132 and the peace, order and good government provision, this jurisdiction still rests with the provincial legislatures and not with this parliament. Therefore neither conciliation by fair wage officers nor adjustment by a board of conciliation may now be available as far as this parliament is concerned, but they may under the provisions of the Ontario statute, I think they reenacted the Lemieux act in terms; am I right as to that?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I believe after the privy
council gave its decision the provinces did enact legislation which validated the Lemieux
act with respect to disputes of the classes named in the dominion act, but which came within provincial jurisdiction.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, that is my apprehension of the situation. That is why I was anxious to have the exact facts. If that be so, then the jurisdiction to make a compulsory adjustment of contractual relations between employer and employee would rest entirely with either the provincial authorities or a body set up by them for that purpose. But I should like for my own satisfaction-and I think the members of the committee are in the same position-to have the minister give us a short resume of the difficulties and of the situation as it now exists.
TMr. Bennett.]


Norman McLeod Rogers: The dispute was between
the employees of the Empire Cotton Mills, Limited of Welland and the company.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Is that a subsidiary of another company?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have no information before me which would indicate that. I am informed, however, that the head office of that company is in Montreal. It is possible that the same company conducts operations elsewhere. The dispute occurred on December 22 of last year. The matter at issue was a demand on the part of the employees for a twenty per cent increase in wages. A six per cent increase hadi been given by the company a short time before. The company took the position that, owing to the unprofitable operations in this particular plant, it was unable to grant the twenty per cent increase.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Could the minister give
us the hours of labour and the rates of pay that it was sought to increase by twenty per cent?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I would gladly give that information if I had it. As my right hon. friend realizes, these disputes are dealt with by a conciliation officer on the spot, and it is seldom that we have the record of all the facts until the dispute is closed, so to speak. I have before me a complete list of all the disputes which have been dealt with by conciliation officers and closed. But this present dispute is not yet settled and I am sorry that I have not before me the information asked for. If the committee so desire, I shall be glad to secure that information in order that it may be placed upon the record. It seems to me, however, that we are perhaps not in a position to judge the merits of the issue.


Richard Bedford Bennett: But we are; that is the very point. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has expressed views which must be predicated upon knowledge of the facts. I have no knowledge of the facts, and I am therefore not in a position to say whether his view is too tolerant or otherwise. If we are to discuss it at all, it seems to me it would be well if we could have before us the facts upon which we might exercise a judgment, which might be wise or unwise, but which at any rate would be based upon knowledge of the facts. I cannot join issue with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, for I have nothing before me which would enable me to speak with any authority. He has used strong language with respect to one of the parties to the dispute; whether or not his

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
language is warranted is a matter which I think we should be able to decide for ourselves in the light of the facts.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Then we shall let this item stand. I shall secure as quickly as possible all the information available and place it before the committee.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Would the minister find out whether this is a subsidiary of one of the larger corporations?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Yes, I shall be glad to find that out.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I think the minister, in reading the letter from the company in Welland said that for reasons stated they would not accept a conciliation board. Would he let the committee know what the reasons were which were put forward.


Norman McLeod Rogers: What I read was from a memorandum, not from the letter itself. I have not the letter before me. I shall be glad to look into that as well and see if that information can be placed before the committee.


Angus MacInnis: The minister has not before him at the moment the information as to why the company refused?


Norman McLeod Rogers: No; I have a memorandum which I requested just before the house convened this afternoon.
Item stands.
Fair wages and inspection, $11,000.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Would the minister tell the committee wherein, if at all, his department dealing with fair wages and inspection overlaps, conflicts with or duplicates the work of similar departments now operating in the provinces?


Norman McLeod Rogers: The fair wages act which was passed by this parliament in 1935 applies to federal works and works done under contract for the dominion government. There is no question, I think, as to our competence to deal with wages in works of that kind. On the other hand, I think it is equally clear that it would not be competent for a provincial legislature to interfere with wages established by the dominion government on such works. There is no essential duplication at all in the operation of the fair wage act of the dominion parliament and similar legislation in the provinces.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I wonder whether this
might be a convenient item on which to ask the minister if he could tell us how many
conciliation officers there are; what is the difference between a conciliation officer and a fair wage officer and what are the duties performed by the conciliation officers when they are not engaged in attempting to settle disputes? I might ask also whether any changes are contemplated as to their functions, their duties and their numbers.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am very glad this question has been raised at this time; whether under this item or another it does not really matter. There are four fair wage officers, with salaries ranging from $3,000 to $4,620, stationed at Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Ottawa. Their duties include the preparation of wage schedules for insertion in government contracts and investigations of differences arising on this point between contractors and workmen. Payments from the fair wages and inspection vote include travelling expenses of officers, telegrams, telephones, printing, stationery and sundries. It is found that these officers, by proceeding at once to the point of dispute, are often able to adjust differences, thus avoiding the expense of a board of conciliation under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act.
I should like to elaborate upon that. In this country we have only four full-time conciliation officers-


Richard Bedford Bennett: Who are they?


Norman McLeod Rogers: -who at the same time are burdened, as I have said, with other duties which really do not arise in connection with the conciliation of labour disputes. I may give their names. There is the chief conciliation officer, Mr. M. S. Campbell, who, I may say, has been extraordinarily successful in the settlement of industrial disputes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: His residence being
Ottawa?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Yes. Then there is Mr. Quirk, of Montreal, who covers the eastern district, including the maritime provinces; Mr. Compton, of Toronto, who covers what might be termed the central Canadian district, and Mr. Harrison of Vancouver, who covers British Columbia and the prairie provinces.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He was formerly at Saskatoon.


Norman McLeod Rogers: That is true. Last year I discovered that two of these gentlemen were approaching the retirement age. One of them is already over that age, and in the Department of Labour there are no understudies who are in a position to follow on after these men, who within a few years will have to

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
retire. The work, as I see it, is one of great public importance, and I think I may say to the committee at this stage I felt it desirable that we should make arrangements at once for the appointment of four junior conciliation officers who would have the advantage of the experience of these older men before they were retired. That matter is not before the committee at the moment, but I believe it is in the interest of the efficiency of this branch of the department that this should be done, and I trust the necessary provision will be made for it very shortly.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Apparently the information has leaked out.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I do not think I can particularly complain of that, since I believe the change is in the right direction.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There is only one point to which I might speak, and it is one that arose in the years before 1935. Under the decision of the courts it is competent for any employer to say to a conciliation officer, "I do not want you here at all." That has been one of the difficulties which has appeared in a practical way. I wonder whether the minister has anything to say as to any further development in that connection. Perhaps the best illustration of that was found in a case some years ago in which the employer said, "I am quite capable of carrying on my own negotiations. Thank you: I do not want vou." If my appreciation of the law as it stands is correct, we have no right to say to him that he must or should do so and so. Is that still the department's appreciation of the law?


Norman McLeod Rogers: The conciliation service
operates more particularly under another statute, the Conciliation and Labour Act, which leaves it to the Minister of Labour at his own discretion to dispatch a conciliation officer to the scene of a dispute. But experience has proved that if the employer is entirely unwilling to accept the conciliation officer, to send him there may even prejudice a settlement which otherwise might be obtained. I believe actually this conciliation service of the Department of Labour is making its way through a recognition, on the part of employees and employers alike, of the fact that it can provide a very useful service in solving these disputes, and I doubt whether the matter can be dealt with upon any other basis. Compulsion is not going to induce employers or employees to accept willingly the services of a board of conciliation or a conciliation officer.


Abraham Albert Heaps: How do they do it in Australia?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I had intended to come to that point. They have worked upon a somewhat different basis there. They have what in effect are wage courts.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Not in effect; that is what they are.


Norman McLeod Rogers: They operate as wage courts, originally under state law and now, I believe, under commonwealth law.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There were two. Mr. Bruce ran one election on the theory that there should not be two and that the federal court should be preferred to the state courts. The response was not quite as general as might have been expected. There are still two courts, the state court and the commonwealth court, and the very difficulty the minister has mentioned here applies in that country as well as in New Zealand. The decision of the court is not binding as a judgment of the court and therefore, notwithstanding the decision of the court, there have been strikes or cessations of effort. The ever present difficulty is the one to which the minister has just referred. You may negotiate and arrive at what you conceive to be a reasonable arrangement. Then, after you go away, one party to the dispute may say, "Well, after all we do not think this is satisfactory," and there is no power anywhere to give finality or effect to the decision that may be reached.


Mr. LANDERYOU:: Would the minister give us an idea of what value he places on these men, since apparently these matters seem to be under provincial jurisdiction?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Perhaps I may answer that in this way. The determination of wages and hours of labour would seem to fall within provincial jurisdiction, with the exception indicated as to federal public works and contracts for the federal government. But there is nothing to prevent the federal Department of Labour from offering the services of a conciliation officer to adjust any dispute whatsoever, provided the parties are willing. As a matter of fact, so far as the duties of a conciliation officer are concerned, it is not essential but it is obviously desirable that both parties be willing.


John Charles Landeryou: In this particular instance the one party was not prepared to accept these gentlemen.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I believe there is some
confusion in the hon. member's mind. A little while ago we were speaking about a board of

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
conciliation which might be set up under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. Within the last few minutes we have been speaking about conciliation officers of the Department of Labour.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Who are negotiators only.


John Charles Landeryou: Are they not the
same men?


Norman McLeod Rogers: No; the board of conciliation is set up in this way:	The employees'
organization nominate a board member; the employers nominate another member, and these two bodies try to agree on a third member who will act as chairman. If they do not agree, the nomination of the chairman is left to the Minister of Labour. That is the way in which a board of conciliation is set up. On the other hand, a conciliation officer of the Department of Labour is a permanent officer of that department who gives his whole time to work such as I have described.


Richard Bedford Bennett: In a situation of some
difficulty in which we were interested we had the province pass an order in council naming the same board as was named here, thereby eliminating the question of jurisdiction.


Angus MacInnis: In my experience, conciliation officers have done good work. Even if such legislation were within the competence of the federal parliament, upon this occasion I am not going to express an opinion as to whether or not we should have compulsory conciliation or arbitration. Many observations could be made both for and against the convention. In industrial disputes usually one side or the other may not wish to negotiate. If the labourers or workers believe they have the advantage they take this position: "We have made our demands, and we are not going to discuss them." On the other hand, if the employer thinks the advantage is with him, and that he is within his rights in refusing to negotiate, he takes the same position. The conciliation officer may bring them together and point out to them that the dispute would not only affect the employer or the workers, but have social consequences as well, and in many instances he is successful in bringing the parties together. I believe every possible assistance should be given in the settlement of disputes, but it is my view that in the future the government may have to go much further than they have done in the past. In looking over the present world situation we find that in those countries where trade union movements have been generally accepted by employers and have become a part of the general life of the country, in the last few 31111-42
years labour disputes have been much less than in countries where employers have not accepted the trade union movement.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Great Britain, for example.


Angus MacInnis: Yes, and the Scandinavian countries. Although in past years there have been many important strikes in Australia, despite compulsory arbitration, in the last few years it has been fairly immune from protracted strikes. I believe the government will have to give the matter further consideration than has been given in the past.


Abraham Albert Heaps: There is one matter I should like to bring to the attention of the committee. I notice that in the item fair wages *are implied. I still receive complaints in regard to wages paid on government contracts, and I am wondering to what extent the Department of Labour goes in its investigation of these matters. Complaints are not so much about contracts let directly by various departments of government as about contractors to whom the government, contractor has sublet, over which subcontracts the government may have no control. I wonder how far the Department of Labour can go toward seeing that the proper rate of pay is paid to workers on government contracts.


Norman McLeod Rogers: A schedule of wages is inserted in the specifications of all government contracts, and that specification also covers subcontracts. When a complaint is made an investigation is entered upon by the fair wage officer of the department. I believe one may say the sanction behind the discovery of any offence is the power of the government to withhold the balance of the contract price. I do not believe it is possible to have every government contract under continuous supervision. We have acted upon the principle that when there is a complaint it will be immediately investigated, and when proved, the remedy will follow.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Must there be a complaint before the department will make an investigation?


Norman McLeod Rogers: It is not necessary to have a complaint before making investigation, but on the other hand up to this time the department has not accepted the principle that we should employ enough inspectors to give continuous supervision to the performance of all government contractors.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I think there has been a good deal of confusion in connection with the fair wage stipulation in government contracts.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Not on the part of the contractor himself.



Supply-Labour-Fair Wages


Abraham Albert Heaps: It may be on tbe part of the subcontractor. I am speaking in a general way, and am not directing my remarks to any particular person who may perform government work. I do not believe the government, which has some responsibility in the matter, should wait until a complaint is received. The experience in all provinces has been that there is a tendency for employees to be afraid of submitting their complaints to union or government officials, because of the discrimination which ultimately might be exercised against such person.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Dismissal from his job.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I have known of cases in certain parts of Canada where proper wages have been entered in employers' pay-rolls, but where in fact the employers have not paid the wages prescribed by the provincial law and the terms of the contract. I do not suggest that there should be continuous supervision of the pay-roll of employers who are doing government work, but I do suggest that occasionally a fair wage officer should visit the concerns in question and examine the payrolls. Sometimes they might do well to get into contact with the officials of the union. Such action would no doubt have a salutary effect upon employers who may attempt to avoid responsibility.
Further, I have had complaints from good employers who want to pay reasonable wages as prescribed by law, or as arranged between themselves and trades unions. They complain about undercutting carried on by certain employers who are trying, by deducting from the wages of their employees, to make up the amount they have lost through a low bid. That is why I suggest to the minister the adoption of some method whereby a fair wage officer or some other employee of the department would have an opportunity of visiting these factories working on government contracts in order to see that the contracts are being lived up to.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be very glad to accept the suggestion of my hon. friend. I might say that there is quite effective supervision of the larger contracts. Also the schedule of wages is posted on the premises where the work is being done and is available to the trade unions particularly affected. In the nature of things, the complaint would come to the Department of Labour from the trade union whose members were adversely affected.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Supposing there is no trade union?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Any individual may make a complaint.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There is always somebody to write an anonymous letter.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Moreover, under the terms of contract, it is required that all fair wages schedules must be conspicuously posted on the premises, and it is therefore difficult for the contractor to avoid payment of the rates specified, as each workman employed can readily see for himself the rate to which he is entitled for the class of work which is being performed. The experience of the Department of Labour is that in individual cases where the proper wage rates are not being paid, word to this effect has generally reached the department either through the inspections made by departmental officers or through complaints from union officials, or from the workmen themselves. Very many of these adjustments made have to do with the proper classification of the work being done by individual employees. In all cases where it is found that workmen are not receiving proper payment for the class of service rendered, there is no hesitation in enforcing payment of the rates provided in the specification, for the full period involved.
In conclusion, I should like to say that when the department is enlarged, as I hope it will be, we shall be able to pay more attention to this phase of the work. However, I would not want to suggest that there has been any negligence on the part of departmental officers with respect to the enforcement of the fair wage clause. Any complaint which comes into the department is attended to without delay.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I realize that it would be impossible to carry on a strict supervision of all contracts let by the government, and I am glad to have the assurance of the minister that when the department is enlarged more will be done than has been done so far. No doubt there is in the files of the department a list of firms which have been notoriously unfair. Under these circumstances I do not think it would be out of the way to strike off the list of firms allowed to tender on government contracts those concerns known to be unfair, no matter what political stripe they might be. Perhaps the government could make up a sort of blacklist. In the past, blacklists of employees have been issued, so perhaps a blacklist of employers could be made up. I think this would have a good effect on employers in general and would tend to make other employers live up to the terms of their contracts.

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages


Richard Bedford Bennett: I know of no case
during the last few years in which any successful complaint has been made as to a violation of the fair wage provision of government contracts. There have been cases where it was contended that there had been a violation of the fair wage clause by subcontractors. I recall vividly the language usedl ini this house by a former Minister of Labour in connection with wages paid on government contracts. The terms of the contracts are as strict as it is possible to make them in our language. It is provided that the wages to be paid shall be indicated on a notice to be posted up in a prominent place on the work so that every person working there shall have a clear appreciation of the wages to which he is entitled. However, on the other hand you have the subcontractor. In five cases out of every ten the work is not done by the original contractor. He lets a subcontract for his plumbing, for his foundation and excavation work and for his heating. This is where the real difficulty lies. In many instances the material was fabricated before the contract was even thought of; it is only when the material is delivered that they claim that particular establishment is unfair in the payment of wages. Bathtubs, copper piping and radiators may all be used in a building and may all come from subcontractors about whom complaints are made.
The minister is familiar with the clause in the contract, but that situation cannot be met in its entirety. We might as well face that quite frankly. I do not think any more men are required in the department to deal with all that we can legally deal with-I refer to the law as it now stands-because we cannot project the mind of the owner, the government in this case, into the past before a contract is let in order to determine that fair wages have been paid in the fabrication of certain materials. That was the fact in certain cases to -which I could refer. Pipes, radiators and various items of that sort had been in stock at the time the contract was let. I had to investigate several of these matters and as I felt there must be something wrong, I went as far back as that. We then added to the contract the clause which is now in it referring to subcontractors. That did something to cure the evil.
A clerk of works is appointed on all large contracts. The duty of that clerk is to make a report to the Department of Public Works. Since his attention has been directed to this matter, this clerk now reports, first, that a notice has been placed in a proper place upon the premises. Them he reports as to whether or not any complaints have been made and
31111-42*
as to whether or not the going wages as provided by the Department of Labour are actually being paid to the workmen. His job is to watch the progress of the undertaking. He is not. the contractor's man; he is a government man. This is what he has been doing and I believe the complaints with respect to that phase of the matter have disappeared.
But we have not got past the subcontractor phase in its entirety. I cannot agree with my hon. friend in his suggestion as to blacklists. The very use of that word recalls memories of speeches in this house about the evils of blacklists; it was contended that these were almost as bad as the black plague or the black death. I do not think the government should do something which, if done by a private individual, would place him in a most difficult position in the courts of the country.


Mr. COLDWELL:: Mr. Chairman, I have in mind a different sort of contractor from the one referred to by the leader of the opposition. In connection with many of these contracts there will be subcontractors doing some excavating work. It is men like these who are usually the culprits. They hire people who are more or less connected with or dependent upon them, particularly in times of unemployment. They pay very small wages and no one knows anything about it. I remember several years ago we had a fair wage clause in the contracts let by the city of Regina for the erection of an additional building at the general hospital, and it was thought that fair wages were being paid. Not until some time afterwards did we discover that there was something which seemed to be collusion, and as a matter of fact the men who had been employed at lower than the fair wage were able to collect substantial sums. That is the type of subcontractor whom it is very difficult to deal with; yet he is the one who is something like a parasite upon labour. I thought it well to bring this to the attention of the department so that it might be guarded against so far as possible, although I know it is a very difficult matter to deal with.


James Shaver Woodsworth: There is another situation which I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. I had a memorandum sent to me only this morning in regard to the condition on the waterfront in Vancouver. It seems that until a short time ago the freight handling, carloading, on the government owned Ballantyne pier and Lapointe pier was done by a certain group of longshoremen at the rate of 60 cents per hour straight time, that is from eight a.m. to five

Supply-Labour*-Fair Wages
p.m., and 90 cents per hour overtime, which is any time outside those hours and all day Sunday. Now the rate is 50 cents per hour for any hour of the day or night, and the overtime rate applies on Sunday only.
The suggestion is that these rates have been altered by the Shipping Federation of British Columbia. The shipping federation is said to consist of certain dock operators and stevedoring companies and agents or representatives of various shipping lines, mostly foreign lines, together with harbour officials of the Dominion of Canada. It seems that these harbour officials sit in with this board. I do not know their exact relationship to the board, but the wages are determined by the shipping federation. This board refuses to recognize the I.L.A., the International Longshoremen's Association, as the name suggests, an international union. The question arises, what chance, under those conditions, have thesse men of having any voice in the fixing of their wages?
The men in their memorandum refer to what they state is order in council 7143, dated July 11, 1918. I have not checked this up, but I assume it is correct. Order in council No. 7143 provides that all employees have the right to organize in trades unions; that this right shall not be denied or interfered with in any manner whatsoever, and that through their chosen representatives the employees shall be permitted and encouraged* to negotiate with employers concerning working conditions, rates of pay and other grievances.
Now these men have organized, but the shipping federation refuses to recognize them; it will not deal with them, and consequently they have no voice whatsoever. The men say. Why should the dominion government not carry out the spirit of this order in council and insist upon the recognition of the union, more particularly when the dominion government, through its representatives, sits in with the shipping federation which determines the rate of wages?
There is one other point which they bring up. They refer to what they say is the fact that during the waterfront trouble in Vancouver in 1935:
A delegation of longshoremen were told on Tune 13, 1935, by a committee of the Shipping Federation of British Columbia that the Shipping Federation of British Columbia intended to smash all unions in British Columbia ports, take control of all waterfront work in British Columbia, and after that to give their fullest cooperation to the Pacific Coast Waterfront Employers in a campaign to crack open all unions down the Pacific coast. That proves the international interests of this body, in which the Canadian government is an acquiescing partner.

It does seem to me that the government has a distinct responsibility in a matter of this kind. This may possibly be a matter which comes under the new transport department, but at the same time the conditions are directly related to the work of the labour department. I wish we could have a statement from the minister in regard to the policy of the government.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I take it that this memorandum relates back to a situation which developed on the Vancouver waterfront some time ago.


James Shaver Woodsworth: That condition prevails to-day.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Quite, but as a result of the situation which developed more than a year ago. As a matter of fact, a commissioner, Mr. Justice Davis of the supreme court dealt with the dispute then in existence.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Between the international and the other union.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Between the international and the shipping federation. As a result in large measure of his report, peace eventually was restored upon the Vancouver waterfront. My hon. friend will no doubt suggest that peace was restored, but not upon a satisfactory basis. As I understand it, the present position is this. The shipping federation of Vancouver has entered into an agreement extending over a period of years with two other longshoremen's organizations in Vancouver, and the bulk of the membership of these two organizations which now have an agreement with the shipping federation were formerly within the membership of the International Longshoremen's Association. The International Longshoremen's Association at present contains a smaller number of members than the two organizations which made this agreement with the shipping federation.
The right of association clearly does not carry with it any compulsion upon an employer to adopt the principle of the closed shop. There is a clear distinction between the two things. The right of association does mean and ought to mean that no employer should be guilty of discrimination; in other words, no employer should deprive any employee of his employment because he has been active in the organization of a union. But that does not carry with it the recognition of a particular labour organization as the exclusive organization with which a particular employer should enter into an agreement.

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages


James Shaver Woodsworth: What about the reduction of wages which has recently taken place?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am informed that the
shipping federation has these agreements with these two organizations, and that the officers of the two organizations have agreed to the existing working arrangements. I am not prepared to answer further the point raised by my hon. friend, but if I can obtain any additional information during the dinner recess I shall be very glad to do so. I think, however, the main points are as I have described them.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Do I understand
that the shipping federation has entered into agreements with two other associations of longshoremen-


Richard Bedford Bennett: Which claim the right
to make collective bargains.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I should like to
know the exact relationship of the government representatives to the shipping federation board.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be glad to inquire during the dinner recess.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Before the dinner recess the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) asked whether I would place before the committee the letter from Empire Cotton Mills, Limited, in which that company declined to consent to the setting up of a board of conciliation. I have the letter before me. It is rather long, but I doubt whether it would suit the full purpose of my hon. friend if I did not place the entire letter on Hansard. It is addressed to the Deputy Minister of Labour, who is also registrar under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. The letter reads:
February 4, 1937.
Dear Sir:
We beg to acknowledge your letter of the 28th ultimo referring to an application on behalf of the textile workers formerly employed in our Welland plant for the establishment of a board of conciliation and investigation under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act.
Although it seems clear that the act, a copy of which you enclosed, does not provide for such a case as the present strike at Welland, where some of our former employees struck without notice, and without any intimation of any desire to discuss any alleged grievances,
and although the present application has not been made until after thirty days from the commencement of the strike, so that none of the strikers are employees within the meaning of the statute, we have, nevertheless, given very careful and sympathetic attention to your request that we should give the application favourable consideration.
We should add that you will observe the applicants have been unable to complete the required statutory declaration which is a condition precedent to the valid establishment of a board, because, of course, they have been unable truthfully to declare that "a strike will be declared."
If we are right in our conclusion that there is no statutory authority in the present circumstances to appoint a board, any board which you might appoint would lack what authority would be conferred upon it if it could be validly appointed under the statute, and further than this, it would have no authority to inquire into many other circumstances related to this strike, amongst which we may mention the circumstances under which a United States union now under suspension by the American Federation of Labour, has attempted by methods of intimidation, the use of the administration of public relief funds, and illegal violence, to induce many of our former employees to join that union.
This union was not present at the commencement of this strike, but has apparently seized upon the opportunity presented to further its own objectives. Whilst doing this it ignores the true facts of the situation and for its own ends, through promises of impossible rates of pay, uses the workers to their own detriment as well as to the general detriment of the community, thereby demonstrating this union's incapability of assuming any of the responsibilities usually undertaken by such bodies. These circumstances have been important contributing factors to the continuation of the strike, and while we would welcome investigation by competent authority we have come to the conclusion that it would be inadvisable to concur in the appointment of a board which would, in fact, have no statutory authority.
We will, however, be glad to cooperate with your department in any efforts which may seem to afford any chance of bringing the unfortunate situation in Welland to a close, and therefore we would welcome any opportunity to discuss the matter further with you.
We have already written to your chief conciliation officer on the 15th January outlining our views in connection with the strike and we wish to emphasize:
First: That we have already restored approximately the 1929 wage scale or better before the strike was commenced. That our policy is to pay the wage rates prevailing in the textile industry in Canada for the same class of work and efficiency under similar conditions, but in many instances we pay higher than the current rates.
Second: That while we have every desire to keep the mill operating, we can afford to go no farther under present conditions. We have already filed returns and given your department information as to this and will be glad to furnish any further particulars you may require.
Third: That -while there has been some talk of grievances with regard to mill conditions,

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
etc., you will see that the enclosed draft agreement sent to the company under date of 9th January, 1937, apparently dealing with the demands of those directing the strike, provides for an increase of wages, but makes no reference to any other grievances with regard to conditions except for the general provision for discussion of such grievances as might arise. As we have already granted the greatest amount of increase which we can afford, we regret that we cannot suggest a compromise on wages. We always welcome, however, constructive suggestions for improvement of working conditions, and apply all reasonable remedies found to be within the means of the company, but this does not appear to be a real factor in the present strike.
Several of the former employees who desired to go on working, and desired to confer with us with regard to the strike, have been physically prevented by illegal methods of mass-picketing and violence from conferring with our officers. On one occasion, the mass-pickets on the public streets seized and turned the motor cars in which some of our former employees were endeavouring to come to the mill for a conference with our officers. On other occasions our office employees have been assaulted, traffic, including shipments of goods in and out of our premises was interfered with and for a time prevented by violence in the public streets.
While we deplore the continuance of the strike and the resulting unemployment of many of our former workers who desire to work, including those who have been misled by outsiders, we find that it is simply impossible for us to make further increases under present conditions other than those which have already been made.
We are, and have always been ready to meet our employees and discuss grievances with them, but we cannot think that it would serve any useful purpose to have a board of conciliation and investigation established without statutory authority on the request of an affiliate of a foreign union which has, at least, joined in conducting this strike by illegal methods.
The letter is signed by F. L. Mitchell on behalf of Empire Cotton Mills, Limited. He signs as assistant to the president.


James Shaver Woodsworth: What is meant by a foreign union?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Perhaps I ought not to try to explain what was in the mind of the person who wrote the letter. I would assume that he would be referring to a union which has its head office in the United States.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Or other foreign country.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Or other foreign country.


Angus MacInnis: To anyone who has not listened to or read some of the evidence which came out before the Turgeon commission, it is really touching to note this company's concern for the welfare of the employees, and the way in which they are being exploited by these foreign agitators. It is really very touching to anyone who does not know the circumstances, but it seems to

me that their refusal, at any rate as far as the letter which the minister has read is concerned, is very weak. What statutory authority could a board of conciliation have? If the company were willing to have a board appointed, the board could hear evidence and investigate any matter which they might be asked to look into. I have taken part in the proceedings of many boards of conciliation and am quite well aware that their findings are not binding on either side, but I also know that the side which refuses to present its case has not a very good case with the public. Speaking broadly, I believe it is seldom that one side or the other refuses to accept the award of a conciliation board, because generally when they do they lose the public sympathy that they might otherwise have. So there are few awards turned down, even if they are considered by one side to be unsatisfactory, as is bound to happen in any case.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) also asked if I could make a more extensive statement as to the matter at issue in this dispute. I have looked up the file and I find it contains the wage rates now applicable in Welland.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I wonder whether they should be placed on Hansard.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I doubt whether it would serve any useful purpose. They cover the entire field of operations. They are provided confidentially to the department, as they are to the bureau of statistics, from time to time. They cover many pages. Perhaps I might repeat what is, after all, the essential matter at issue, namely, that the employees had asked for an increase of twenty per cent in the existing wage rates; the company declared that it had already granted an increase of six per cent, that the wage rates had been restored to the 1929 level, and that the operations of the company in Welland did not permit it to grant the increases demanded by the employees.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I should like to ask the minister a question under item 179, limitation of hours of work.


Norman McLeod Rogers: That is a later item.


Mr. SENN:: Certain articles appeared in the press to the effect that married men were receiving only $9 per week in the Welland mill. I should like to know if those were full-time or part-time employees.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The information we have
does not make a distinction between married

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
and unmarried employees. I doubt whether we have the information which would enable
me to confirm or dispute that statement.


Mark Cecil Senn: I asked whether these were
full-time or part-time employees.


Norman McLeod Rogers: That information does not appear to be on our files. Generally speaking, the low paid employees in textile operations are women, and the wages of women are governed by the Minimum Wage Act in Ontario.


Mark Cecil Senn: My information is that the
notices which appeared in the press to the effect that married' men were receiving only 89 per week were perhaps erroneous in this way, that they were only part-time employees, not full-time.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am sorry I have not that information before me. It is material, certainly; I shall be glad to secure further information on that point.


James Shaver Woodsworth: It seems to me that the document read to us a few minutes ago is so drawn as to prejudice people generally against the claims of the workers. For instance, as regards this foreign union business, the fact is that nearly all1 the unions in this country have their headquarters in the United States, the international unions. We have had Tom Moore here a considerable time and in this house again and again he has been lauded. He presided until recently over the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, which may almost be said to be the Canadian section of the American Federation of Labour. It is ridiculous that we should have these held up as foreign unions, and then, as soon as a Canadian union starts up, be told that it must be disregarded because "we want to deal with the well-established, recognized, international unions." Further, we are told that these organizers came in later. What can the men do but bring in the organizer of the union with which they wish to unite? We were told this afternoon that in a great many concerns the wage scales are posted in the plant. Is that true in this case?


Norman McLeod Rogers: If I might correct my
hon. friend, the reference was to fair wage scales applicable to public works and work done under contract with the government.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am glad to have the correction. It seems to me that in a matter of this kind where there has been no union recognized, where apparently the company refuses to recognize the union, it is very difficult indeed for the employees to know what is the prevailing wage. They know
what they are paid, but they do not know what is the general wage. Whatever may be the ethics of the department in not giving this information, to the public. I would say that, especially where there is no union, it is of interest to the public to know what wages are being paid in these factories. It is absurd for us to spend time in parliament discussing this case if all we know is that there has been a gain of six per cent. We do not know what it means; we do not know what the wage was before that increase. All we hear now is that this company adheres to the prevailing rates. Well, if the rates prevailing in Welland are those which prevailed in the factories which the Turgeon commission has been investigating, it is a disgrace to this country that any such institution should be allowed to keep its doors open. I think the responsibility is on the Department of Labour tc make an investigation in this particular case and let the public know the facts. That is the only way the employees have any chance of defence unless they take the law into their own hands.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I hope my hon. friend will acquit me of any intention of placing upon Hansard information which is prejudicial to the employees in this case. He will1 recall that I placed this letter upon Hansard at the request of the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis).


James Shaver Woodsworth: No; I am speaking of the tone of the letter and the form: in which some of the statements are made.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It occurs to me that not only may the minister be warranted in doing it, but it is his duty to indicate the rate per hour being paid to workmen in that factory. It is obvious that if there were a public inquiry those wages would be made known. In the Turgeon investigation wages were always made public. I cannot think that a letter sent to the minister or the department indicating the wages paid can be regarded as a confidential communication. On the other hand, I would not suggest that the minister should undertake to place on Hansard all that vast mass of material, but he should be able to indicate what those working on the looms receive per hour and the number of hours they work per day. He should be able to indicate what other classes of workmen receive for instance, spinners, and those having to do with other branches of activity in the manufacture of the product. I think there is force in what the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) says when he suggests that we are discussing a matter about which unfortunately our knowledge is

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
limited. I suggest to the minister that it is no violation of any possible confidence if he makes known to the committee and the country the rate of wages per hour being paid to the various classes of employees, both men and women, and I believe this could be done without much difficulty. I should think it would not take more than half a column in Hansard, because the divisions of labour are not very numerous, unless it is a mill that makes many products.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I assure the committee that I have no desire at all to withhold this information, but in the form in which it has been presented I doubt whether it would be intelligible. The schedules cover a great many different piece-work operations. Perhaps this is a confession of ignorance upon my part, but I am bound to say that it does not convey to me the information which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre desires to have. I shall be glad to see if it is not possible to put it into the form suggested by the leader of the opposition.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That should be possible.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be glad to see if that cannot be done.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The several divisions are not numerous and the rates per hour can be ascertained.


Mr. COLD WELL:: If we are going to get any information of that sort, I would suggest that the last suggestion be looked into, that of giving the hours of work. After all, a moment ago the minister mentioned piecework in these factories, and we know that in some factories men are not able to work the maximum number of hours per day or per week. Consequently a wage of $9 a week for part-time work is not uncommon. But that part-time work is really all the work these men can do on account of the operations they perform. I think in dealing with social security legislation and labour conditions, we shall have to take that factor in industry into account. I know that in a large plant of which I had some knowledge several years ago, men would go out and stand around for four or five hours a day waiting for work which would last three or four or five hours. While the rate probably looked all right, the aggregate amount of money that one of those men could earn in a week was relatively small.
I think a community is interested in the matter from this point of view: If men are unable to make enough money in their ordinary avocation to maintain themselves and their families, then when times become bad

they become charges upon the community, and the community really has to bear part of the cost of industry, which I think should be borne by industry itself. If this matter of wages and hours could be looked into and reported upon, that side of the question might also be investigated.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I should like to say just one further word on this point. I am informed by the officers of the department that this particular information is given to the department confidentially. I mention that for this reason, that so far as I am aware there is no law which compels these companies to provide this information, inasmuch as it may affect their competitive position in relation to other companies operating within the same fields. I would think that at all events it would be desirable to look into that aspect of the question. I simply state that as a reservation upon what I said just a moment ago. For my part I have no objection whatever to bringing this information before the committee provided it can be done without prejudice to the position of the Department of Labour in relation to these firms that are reporting to us for statistical purposes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Could the item
stand, then, until we hear the decision of the minister?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Perhaps the point could be discussed upon some other appropriate item, with the clear understanding that meanwhile I shall look into the point raised by my hon. friend. I can assure him that I shall obtain the information without delay and present the reasons for or against the policy which has been followed in the past.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If the information is
received as confidential, it must be treated as such, but I suggest that it cannot possibly be treated in that way, notwithstanding what the officials say, for the simple and obvious reason that at the recent inquiry the evidence was forthcoming as to what was paid in every factory in Canada.


Norman McLeod Rogers: An investigation by a royal commission.


Richard Bedford Bennett: By a royal commission,,
of course, but a royal commission is the creature of this parliament, by a statute, it is true. But let me put this to the minister:	This cannot possibly affect the competitive position of anyone, for the very letter which was read indicates that they were paying the going rate, that it was the 1929 rate, and further it is alleged that it is an even higher wage than is warranted by the scale in the locality. I wholly agree that the min-

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
ister must assume a position which will protect the information that has been given to a minister of the crown or to a department as confidential, and that confidence can be removed only by the people who, relying upon it, furnished the information. But I submit that this cannot be so regarded. What is sought is not what the officials are talking about. It is the rate per hour and the number of hours per day that men work. I would undertake to get that information in half an hour in Welland to-night. This story about not being able to understand something -why, it is the duty of these officials to clear it up so that the minister can understand it. It seems to me absurd that in the twentieth century a minister has to rise in his place in the house and say he cannot understand what these figures mean as to the wages paid in industry. How much do they pay per hour to men and women; what are the classifications, and how many hours per day do they work? It seems to me that information should not be difficult to obtain. I am sure if the minister and I went to Welland to-night we would have that information before bedtime without any trouble at all. There is nothing of secrecy or anything like that about it; it is a plain, simple story as to what people are getting per hour and per day, and the number of hours they work per day.


Norman McLeod Rogers: My statement, as I think
the leader of the opposition fully acknowledges, was made in recognition of the position which a minister must maintain with respect to information which is given to him confidentially.


Abraham Albert Heaps: What is so confidential
about it?


Norman McLeod Rogers: My right hon. friend has
referred to the fact that the royal commission on textiles has secured this type of information. That is quite true, but a royal commission has full powers under the Inquiries Act to take evidence of this kind under oath. In other words, the information may be said to be extracted even from an unwilling witness. On the other hand, I am informed that this information was presented to the department confidentially, and that is the only reservation I make. I would have no desire at all to withhold anything from the committee or the house.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Then, would the
minister secure the information from the employees, who would be quite willing to give it? Would it be possible for the department to secure a statement from the employees as to what they were paid?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I can only say that I shall secure it in the best possible way with the least possible delay.


Mr. WALSH:: In securing this information I hope the minister will bear in mind the peculiar manner in which a good part of the help employed in the cotton industry is paid; that is, by the piece, and also the fact that if these men worked a certain number of hours for a certain number of days they might earn so much. But from my experience, after many hours of labour in a cotton mill, it is difficult to gauge what the weekly wage is going to be, for a weaver in particular.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Exactly. In other words the schedules do not mean a great deal.


William Allen Walsh: They do not mean a great deal. For instance, if a mill is rushed, they will see that the weaver is amply supplied with the wherewithal to continue operating, but I know that in cotton mills where there is not a tremendous amount of work on hand, work is backed up either in the slashing room or in the spinning room, and for that reason a weaver is unemployed for a certain period of time during ithe day. He is there, but probably he is running only fifty per cent of his looms, or even fewer than that.
Then we must also bear in mind this fact, which I have always felt was unjust to the labourer: He will weave his piece, which will be taken to the cloth room. There it is examined and flaws are discovered. These flaws may be the fault of the weaver or they may be the fault of anything else connected with the development of that piece, but he is called up and fined for these errors or omissions or mistakes. There again the wage of the man is affected. The fine might be only twenty-five cents or it might run as high as two or three dollars. That has a very definite bearing. So, if these figures are to be secured, in justice to the men I feel some reference should be had to the conditions under which they work. I do not want figures placed on the table showing that a weaver running six or eight looms is getting $15 per week, when that figure would represent only what he could earn if he were running those six looms for six days a week, eight hours a day.
Some one has already pointed out that probably his wage for the week is only $8 or $9. Personally I believe that through the Department of Labour some adjustment in the wages of these people should be made. They can be dealt with most unfairly, and can be made pay the cost of slack time, although being actually within the mill for the full length of time during any one week. The minister ought to

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
bear that in mind when he is getting the information, and make absolutely certain that we are getting correctt information and not that which is liable to be misleading. Probably if he got it from the employer and also from the employee, and struck an average, he might get a figure which would be nearer the truth than if he were to obtain the information from only one source. Then, again, I would not place too much confidence in any report which might be developed through the recent inquiry, which is more or less a political window-dressing-the Turgeon inquiry into the textile industry.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Angus MacInnis: When the committee took recess, the minister was answering some questions asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) concerning the situation on the Vancouver waterfront. Has he that information now?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I take it the particular point in the mind of the hon. member is that the harbour commission was represented in the shipping federation, which entered into the agreements of which he makes complaint. I believe he is correct in his belief that the representatives of the harbour commission in the past have sat in with the shipping federation with respect to the determination of wage agreements with longshoremen.


Richard Bedford Bennett: But since the harbour
commission went out, what? What has happened since it ceased to exist? There is no longer a harbour commission.


Norman McLeod Rogers: No; but there is a port manager, and the harbour commission still functions as such in the city of Vancouver. Perhaps the Minister of Transport (Mr. Howe) could give us information on that point.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The previous local harbour board was a member of the shipping federation. Since the central board came into being, consideration has been given the matter, and my view is that we should not be members of the federation. We are large employers of waterfront labour. Just at the time we were dissociating ourselves from the federation, the labour trouble came on and made it inadvisable to change the position at that time. However, I believe I can say that within the next few months we shall dissociate ourselves from the federation.


Angus MacInnis: The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre gave briefly the information he had received from the International Longshoremen's Association in Vancouver. As

I understand it-and I had some contact with the organization last summer-the situation is this: In 1923 there was a strike on the waterfront between the International Longshoremen's Association and the employers. The longshoremen lost that strike and from then until 1933 there was no workers' organization on the waterfront. In 1933 another organization known as the Coastwise Longshore and Freight Handlers Association was formed. Then, in 1935, there was another strike. In the fall of 1935 a local of the International Longshoremen's Association was organized but was not recognized by the shipping federation. The unions that were recognized by the shipping federation were the strikebreakers who had been taken in during the strike. Nevertheless men connected with the International Longshoremen's Association were doing some work on the waterfront, particularly for the Kingsley Navigation Company Limited.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Coastwise shipping?


Angus MacInnis: I am not sure, but I
believe they had deep-sea vessels; at least I was so informed.


Mr. MULOCK:: How much were they being paid?


Angus MacInnis: I cannot say what they were paid, but I shall show later that the pay as well as the work was satisfactory. On October 1 of this year the International Longshoremen's Association was informed by the Kingsley Navigation Company Limited that they would not continue to employ association members, because that company was a member of the shipping federation, and the federation insisted that they do not employ members of the association. The minister stated before recess that recognition of a union did not necessarily mean recognition of a closed shop, but I suggest that in this instance it does mean a closed shop. It means a shop in which certain workers belonging to certain unions cannot obtain work.


Norman McLeod Rogers: But does it not follow, when a company enters into an agreement with a particular union, that employment shall be given to the members of that union?


Angus MacInnis: Yes, but the union had an agreement with the Kingsley Navigation Company. However, this company was a member of the shipping federation and this federation, which controlled all shipping on the coast, insisted that only members of their union should be employed. The complaint of the longshoremen is that officials of the Vancouver harbour board sit in with the shipping federation and agree to this unjust

Supply-Labour-Fair Wages
discrimination. I hope the Minister of Transport will find ways and means of overcoming the difficulty, and the federal government will not be associated' with a condition of this kind.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Prior to the recess the Minister of Labour said: he would try to find out something about the Empire Cotton Mills, Limited, of Welland. He said he would try to learn whether they are part of another corporation, and, if not who the officers of the organization may be.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I had not forgotten the question. During the recess I was informed that the Empire Cotton Mills, Limited, was associated with the Woods Manufacturing Company, with head office at Hull. I have not been able to determine precisely the nature of the relationship between them.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Does not the government give fairly substantial contracts to the Woods company?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am not able to answer that question.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am under the impression that the Woods company of Hull at different times have been the recipient of government contracts. If such is the case, I believe there is ample opportunity for the government to bring pressure to bear.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Conciliation and Labour Act, $35,000.
Norman McLeod Rogers: This item was allowed to stand1 this afternoon until certain information asked for by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) had been obtained1. He asked as to what changes had taken place during the last year in connection with Labour Gazette correspondents. I now have this information before me. At Westville, Nova Scotia, Mr. Hale was appointed to succeed Mr. Swan. This was a case of reinstatement as Mr. Hale had been correspondent prior to 1930. At Sherbrooke, Quebec, Mr. J. Alfred Martin replaced Mr. Adelard Mollette. This was another case of reinstatement as Mr. Martin had been Labour Gazette correspondent prior to 1930. At Kingston, Ontario, Mr. H. F. Mooers replaced Major Allan Stroud. This change was made because Mr. Mooers was employment officer. Generally, where an employment office is in existence, the position of employment officer is united with that of Labour Gazette correspondent. Much of the information requested from the Labour Gazette correspondent relates to employment conditions in the particular community.


Richard Bedford Bennett: How long had Major
Stroud been correspondent?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am not absolutely certain as to the length of his service, but I think he was appointed shortly after the war. At Brandon, Manitoba, Mr. Edward Fulcher replaced Mr. W. A. Elliott. This was another case of reinstatement as Mr. Fulcher had held the position prior to 1930. At Calgary, Alberta, Mr. Frank Cusack replaced Mr. McPherson. This was not a case of reinstatement. The explanation of this change is that Mr. Cusack apparently was about to be appointed when, on the recommendation of Mr. Stanley, the former member for Calgary East, his appointment was held up and the position was given to Mr. McPherson. Subsequently this condition of affairs was rectified and Mr. Cusack was appointed to the position which he expected to obtain in 1930.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What were Mr. Cusack's qualifications for the position?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I judge they were of the same order as those of the man he succeeded.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That does not answer my question; this man did not succeed Mr. McPherson. Mr. Cusack was not appointed to the position, although he expected to be.


Norman McLeod Rogers: He is now.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I was asking about his qualifications. I could give some myself, but I should like to know.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The Labour Gazette correspondent supplies information to the Labour Gazette office with respect to employment conditions in the community in which he resides and also with respect to wages and other general information as will assist in the compilation of statistical returns. I would judge that Mr. Cusack had the requisite qualifications to carry out the necessary function of the office.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is judgment based upon assumption but not upon any knowledge.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have not the pleasure of the acquaintance of Mr. Cusack or of Mr. McPherson.


Abraham Albert Heaps: What remuneration is paid in these positions?


Norman McLeod Rogers: The remuneration runs from $120 to $300 per year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Labour
[Stage Direction]
Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, $10,000.
Richard Bedford Bennett: Perhaps the minister
could tell us how many investigations were held last year, and their cost.


Norman McLeod Rogers: There were nineteen applications and seven boards were established under the act.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The auditor general's
report lists eight boards. Could the minister explain to the committee the procedure of appointing one of these boards?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I think this brings us back to the discussion of this afternoon. The Conciliation and Labour Act permits the Minister of Labour at his own discretion to send a conciliation officer to the scene of any dispute.


John Ritchie MacNicol: You do not have to be asked?


Norman McLeod Rogers: It was pointed out this afternoon that there was a decided advantage in having the consent of both parties to the dispute, even though this is not necessary.


John Ritchie MacNicol: When the minister mentioned seven cases, did he have in mind the Bridge River gold mining dispute and the Canadian Collieries Limited dispute?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Those were in the previous year.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I expected that answer and it gives me an opportunity to say that it is almost impossible to understand what we have before us when the report is a year behind.


Norman McLeod Rogers: My hon. friend should read the Labour Gazette.


John Ritchie MacNicol: A few minutes ago the leader of the opposition asked the number of disputes and the minister said seven. I turn up the auditor general's report and I find there were eight. The minister now tells me that these eight were in the previous year. I should like to see this bookkeeping speeded up so that we shall have before us the particulars of what we want to discuss.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The Labour Gazette, which is published monthly, gives that information from time to time. It will also be found in the report of the Department of Labour which is tabled each year.


Mr. LAWSON:: The minister said there
were seven investigations; would he tell us what the expenses were in each one and where they were held?


Norman McLeod Rogers: For the fiscal year 1935-36 there was the Canadian National Railways and Western Stevedore Company and dock employees, costing $342.85. There was the Bridge River gold mining dispute, costing $2,883.65.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Those are all in the
report.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Then my hon. friend must have the correct information. I am giving the expenditures for the fiscal year 1935-36.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That ends on March 31 of this year.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I was quoting the expenditures with regard to the fiscal year 1935-36. Perhaps I should have given the expenditures for the fiscal year 1936-37, to December 31, 1936. I think that will explain the difference between the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicoI) and myself. I shall begin again and assume that the earlier information is not required.


James Earl Lawson: The minister is giving it
for the calendar year?


Norman McLeod Rogers: For the fiscal year 1936-37 to December 31, 1936, as follows:
Western Stevedore Company v. Canadian National Railways, $1,537.10.
Winnipeg Electric Company v. employees in gas production department, $1,835.14.
Algoma Steel Corporation v. employees, $1,438.27.
City of Edmonton v. employees (Street Railway), $1,662.18.
Hamilton By-Product Coke Ovens v. employees, $844.22.
Canadian National Railways v. pursers and stewards of the Pacific Coast Steamship Service, $969.30.
Canadian National Railways, Canadian Pacific Railway Company and subsidiary railways v. employees, $315.90.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And the ones the minister read first?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Were of the previous year. I was in error.


Angus MacInnis: What have been the results following a report by a board? Has there been further trouble or did the report terminate the trouble?


Norman McLeod Rogers: The boards were successful in every case.


Angus MacInnis: That ought to be a good argument for conciliation in labour disputes.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I agree.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Labour
Employment Offices Coordination Act, $9,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: What does this item cover?


Norman McLeod Rogers: This appropriation is intended to cover expenses for printing, stationery and other supplies, travelling expenses, and so forth in the administration of the Employment Offices Coordination Act. The amount of $9,000 submitted for the fiscal year 1937-38 is $750 less than was voted for the current year, leaving for the supplementary estimates any deficit arising out of the reorganization.
There is another item in the estimates of the department providing for a statutory contribution under the Employment Offices Coordination Act.


Richard Bedford Bennett: How many of these offices are there now in Canada?


Norman McLeod Rogers: There are sixty-six throughout the dominion.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Do our Canadian employment offices carry on the same work as the employment offices in Great Britain?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I would not go so far as to say that the service of the employment offices in Canada has yet reached a state of usefulness equal to that of the labour exchanges in Great Britain. The present situation is not wholly satisfactory. The dominion government makes an annual contribution to the provinces, and the aotual employment offices are maintained by the provinces, which select the site and determine the personnel. The dominion office exists largely for the purpose of coordinating the work of these offices and compiling information on a national scale. My feeling is that much still requires to be done in order that the employment service in Canada may do the work that it can usefully do.


John Ritchie MacNicol: At the moment there is a boom or the prospect of a boom in steel foundries throughout the country. A few days ago I was talking to a foundryman who told me that he had increased his staff to about two thousand men, and would be taking on more. I wondered at the time whether the Canadian employment service, either federal or provincial-apparently from what the minister says the federal office does not do much along the line of employment-assists, like the employment offices in Great Britain, in transferring steel workers, for instance, who may be out of work in Welland to, say Sault Ste. Marie, or steel workers out of work in Owen
Sound back to Hamilton. Do our employment agencies do anything along the line of transferring men from one part of the country to another as they do in England?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Yes. I think it might be useful if I gave the following information.
During the fiscal year 1935-36 the offices of the employment service of Canada registered for employment a total of 677,408 applicants, men and women; listed 375,169 opportunities for work, notified by employers; placed in work 351,886 applicants.
In 7.787 cases of placement, applicants were assisted to move to employment by a special reduced transportation rate of 2-7 cents per mile given by the railways for use by the employment offices, where persons being placed are travelling to employment at a distance where the fare is more than $4.
Of the total of 353,802 placements made, 114,731 were non-local, that is, were made in municipalities other than those in which the placing offices are located.


Charles Grant MacNeil: I agree with the statement of the minister that the operation of these offices is quite unsatisfactory. Is it not true that the employment council of Canada acts in an advisory capacity to the minister? Did the council meet in the last calendar year, and were recommendations made to which the assent of the provincial governments might be desired?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am informed that the National Employment Service Council met early in 1930, or at any rate at some period in 1930, and has not been convened since. I would point out that to some extent the functions which would be performed by the council have been transferred for the time being to the National Employment Commission. I am far from saying that the composition of the National Employment Service Council was not such as would make it a really useful body, particularly at a period when there was expanding employment. I assume it was not summoned in the last six years because it was felt that there was not sufficient opportunity for it to render service.


Mr. NEEDHAM:: Who is responsible for the staff of the labour bureaux throughout Canada?


Norman McLeod Rogers: The staff of the bureaux is selected entirely by the provincial governments.


Charles Grant MacNeil: How many offices are in operation in British Columbia?
Supply-Labour


Norman McLeod Rogers: Eight: at Kamloops, Nanaimo, Nelson, New Westminster, Penticton, Prince Rupert. Vancouver, Victoria.


Charles Grant MacNeil: What are the functions of these offices with respect to the registration of transient unemployed?


Norman McLeod Rogers: No duties with respect to
the registration of transient unemployed are imposed upon these officers by the federal government. It is possible they have been utilized by provincial governments for that purpose, but we would not necessarily have knowledge of that fact.


Abraham Albert Heaps: The minister indicated that
approximately half of the requests for work are filled by employment offices throughout the country. Has he a classification of the type of work that was found for these people?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have not that information before me. I am not certain at the moment whether it is obtainable at once in the form suggested by my hon. friend. I take it he would wish to know how many have been transferred to woods operations, how many to relief work, how many to factory work-


Abraham Albert Heaps: And farm placement.


Norman McLeod Rogers: As far as farm placement
is concerned, under the existing scheme with the province that information is available, but I suppose my hon. friend is interested in farm placement apart from any scheme of government assistance.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Is there no farm placement
within this category?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I have before me for the
previous year a report printed by the Department of Labour. The hon. member would have no difficulty in securing a copy of it. I could read or place it on Hansard, but I shall be glad to see that he receives a copy of it.


Charles Grant MacNeil: Does not the Department of Labour assume responsibility for the policy of placement in Canada? I have reference to the policy as applied to single, unemployed women transients and the difficulties they encounter in being placed in domestic service. Does not the federal government assure these women suitable protection when migrating from one province to another for placement in domestic service? Does the government see that they are protected against unscrup-pulous employers? It has been brought to my attention recently that there have been sent to questionable sections of cities a number of young women in destitute circumstances whose situation has been taken advantage of by the touts of the underworld.

Cannot the federal government exercise supervision to ensure that when any young woman seeks employment and is sent to some address she shall be given reasonable protection and be placed with respectable people?


Norman McLeod Rogers: On that point, we do not
interfere directly in the administration of employment offices within the provinces. We have assumed, rightly I believe, that the provincial officers who have special responsibility in this matter would! have the same desire that our own officers would have to prevent the sort of abuses described by my hon. friend. If, on the other hand, he has any complaint or if we receive complaints that these abuses do occur, we shall certainly be pleased to take them up with the provincial governments concerned, The general administration has, however, been left to them.


Abraham Albert Heaps: What is the total cost to the federal government of the operation of these offices?


Norman McLeod Rogers: That comes under another item in the labour estimates, authorized by statute-the organization and coordination of employment offices, under the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927. The cost is $150,000 a year.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Is that all it costs the federal government?


Norman McLeod Rogers: That is the total federal
contribution.


Abraham Albert Heaps: What is the total cost of
running these offices throughout the dominion?


Norman McLeod Rogers: Perhaps I might put on
Hansard in parallel columns the total expenditures for employment service and the contribution of the dominion government in the several provinces:
	Total	F ederal
	expenditure	subvention
Nova Scotia	$ 12,857 48	$ 4,040 13New Brunswick. ..	14,040 87	4,411 97Quebec	101,949 79	32,035 04Ontario	196.804 93	61,840 78Manitoba	30,764 31	9.666 88Saskatchewan. . ..	40,354 15	12,680 23Alberta	37,166 51	11,678 60British Columbia..	43,428 85	13,646 37Total	$477,366 89	$150,000 00


Charles Grant MacNeil: Returning to the question of single unemployed women, I have no complaint against the officials in charge of the various offices, but the impression seems to be that they lack adequate facilities to deal with this very serious matter, and I was wondering whether the minister would not consider some extension of this service so that

Supply-Labour
a more satisfactory placement might be accomplished and proper protection afforded young women in the circumstances to which I have referred.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I shall be glad to look
into the question raised by my hon. friend with a view to removing any abuses that do exist.


Charles Grant MacNeil: To what extent are these
various offices in Canada attempting to reclassify the unemployed? I understand that many are now engaged in a reclassification to determine those who are actually unemployable.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The employment commission has been proceeding with a re-registration and classification of the unemployed on relief, and some provinces may be supplementing that by an attempt to reclassify the unemployed whether they are on relief or not. We had a discussion on this point last year. It does not seem feasible to take a general census of the unemployed. Indeed, it is doubtful whether such a census could be taken accurately without taking a complete census of Canada. That has been the experience of the United States. It was thought at one time that they could take a census of the unemployed separately, but I believe the conclusion has been reached that they could not obtain accurate results in that way. I agree that the employment offices might serve a useful purpose in the direction suggested by my hon. friend, and certainly, with employment opportunities improving, it is all the more important that there should be a more precise classification of all those who register at employment offices.


Charles Grant MacNeil: If, in the reclassification
now actually under way, a person in receipt of relief is listed as unemployable, what steps are taken to determine responsibility for further payment of relief to that individual?


Norman McLeod Rogers: At the present time those who are listed as unemployable are so listed by the municipalities, and I think we are justified in taking it for granted that the test of unemployability is almost entirely a health test. That is, I do not believe that what might be termed occupational disabilities are taken into consideration. I mean by that phrase not disabilities attaching to the occupation, but rather the loss of power to practise an occupation owing to long years of idleness. I do not think one can say that our present test of unemployability is wholly satisfactory. There is a strong pressure on municipalities to narrow the definition, for the reason that it has generally been accepted that care for the unemployable is primarily their responsibility; therefore the tendency is for municipalities to put a rather narrow construction upon that term, and to confine it to those who are completely incapable of performing physical labour.


Charles Grant MacNeil: Who then accepts responsibility for their relief?


Norman McLeod Rogers: In most of the provinces unemployables have simply gone on the relief rolls. That is one question we have to face in this country, namely, that our relief rolls do not consist solely of unemployed who have become unemployed as a result of the depression. That is one element, and we can still say the predominant element, but our relief rolls also contain those who formerly received poor law assistance in some provinces and municipalities and those who might be termed charitable cases. In fact, where formerly we had a number of distinct classifications, those classifications have now tended to disappear; the boundaries, such as they were, between them have been blurred in consequence. It is going to be a problem of great difficulty and magnitude to restore that distinction between unemployment due to physical disability and unemployment due to lack of opportunity for work.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Where would the minister draw the line between the two?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I would prefer not to be drawn into a statement on that point at this time. I think that discussion would be more appropriate when the special supplementary estimates are before the house. I have no desire to curtail discussion on the point, for it is most interesting, but there will be full opportunity to bring it up at that time.


Mr. POOLE:: Would the minister say there are more unemployables to-day than there were prior to the depression; that the depression has caused many to become unemployable?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I would agree that it is probably so, but I do not know of anyone who can state accurately the extent to which long idleness tends to create unemployability.


Major James William Coldwell: If the distinction is reestablished between those who are unemployed and those who are unemployable, and that distinction is made in order to place upon the local authorities the responsibility which they formerly had, then, if that is the purpose of making the distinction, I submit that is an almost impossible burden in view of the financial condition of the municipalities.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I was careful to avoid saying that was necessarily the purpose.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Major James William Coldwell: I noticed the minister was careful to avoid making that statement, but I wondered whether that had been considered, because I think it is impossible for the municipalities to bear the cost of those who have become unemployable as a result of the depression.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mines and Geology Branch
For administration of the Explosives Act (Chap. 62. R.S. 1927), $8,000.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: It might be useful, with the indulgence of the committee, if I made a brief statement concerning the reorganization of several departments into the Department of Mines and Resources. Hon, members will recall that the legislation necessary to effect this reorganization was passed last session. That legislation provided for the possible setting-up of eight directorships. A committee consisting of the proposed deputy minister of the department and several of the other senior officials spent about two months in working out the details of the reorganization. It finally resulted in the setting-up of five branches in the new department. Those branches consist of the Mines and Geology branch, the Lands, Parks and Forests branch, the Surveys and Engineering branch, the Indian Affaire branch, and the Immigration branch. In addition, there was set up under the immediate direction of the deputy minister the Administrative services branch, which supervises the work of all branches in relation to personnel. The purchasing of all departments is centralized in this office, also the legal section, the editorial and publicity section and the mail distributing section. It will be recalled that this new department is a combination of four former departments, namely the Department of Mines, the Department of Immigration, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Indian Affairs. As hon. members will recall, most of those departments had editorial sections, publicity branches and engineering services.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They did not have in 1935.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Well, I think they had.


Richard Bedford Bennett: No.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: 
Richard Bedford Bennett: About $8 a head.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes, almost $9 a head. Medical services and hospitalization for the same period required $940,000, and the amount spent on education was $1,936,000.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is the largest item.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes, that is the largest item. For the current year which will end on March 31 next, I am afraid our relief costs and our costs for medical care and hospitalization will be even larger than they were in the previous year. This is due to the fact, as far as relief is concerned, that the manner of living of the Indians has changed as compared with the way they lived in years gone by. For instance, in the northern part of the prairie provinces, and to a great extent in British Columbia, the Indians lived mainly by trapping and fishing. I believe I stated to the house a year ago-if not I shall give the information to-night-that twenty-five years ago there was an annua, shipment from the northern part of Manitoba of from 750,000 to 1.000,000 muskrat skins per year. In recent years it has declined to a mere fraction of 1hat number. There are vast areas in Manitoba suitable for no purpose other than the raising of fur-bearing animals. The same holds true of eastern Manitoba.
Last autumn in Winnipeg one of our Indian agents told me that if something were not done to improve trapping conditions in that part of Manitoba, within five years practically all the Indians would be on relief. We spent a small amount last year and, if I can



Supply-Mines and Resources
get the appropriation, will spend some money this year in creating conditions to bring back the fur, particularly in the northern part of Manitoba. It has been demonstrated elsewhere that this can be done. For instance, muskrats are bred in the state of Louisiana to a point where the annual production of muskrat skins approximates about 6,000,000. The pelts are much inferior to those produced in Canada, and if we go about the business in a proper manner I can see no reason why fur cannot be brought back in Canada, as it has been elsewhere. Indeed, practical experiments conducted on a small scale have proven beyond question that it can be done.
The great difficulty, so far as the Indian is concerned, has been the invasion by white trappers. The white trapper traps clean. It will be of interest to hon. members to know that in the winter of 1936-36 a trapper in the northwest territories used an aeroplane to look after his trap lines. He had qualified for a pilot's licence, had bought a plane, and his trap lines stretched over about 125 miles, following a series of waterways and lakes. The effect was to drive the Indians from that trapping area. We are regulating the trapping by aeroplane because we have learned there are other trappers qualifying to get pilots' licences, and it would have been only a short time until a considerable amount of relief would have been required in this part of the northwest territories. I am already discussing with one or two of the provinces the possibility of setting aside areas adjacent to Indian reserves at which points the trapping will be confined exclusively to Indians. Those negotiations are not yet to a point where I can give further information to the committee. I feel, however, that this aspect of the Indian problem is one of considerable gravity.
I am hopeful, too, that we may be able to make some improvements in our educational endeavours among the Indians. May I bear willing tribute to the splendid work done by the Christian churches of Canada in their effort to raise the standard of living among the Indians. We have seventy-nine residential schools, and in addition a great many day schools. The difficulty in the past in the residential schools was that at perhaps six or seven years of age the Indian boy or girl was taken from the reserve and spent eight or nine years in residential school, where he or she learned about the white man's way of living. When their school terms were over there was nowhere for them to go. other than back to the reserves. This matter is now engaging the serious attention of some of the depart-

mental officials. It is hoped that we may give a training which may be of a more vocational nature than it is at present and thereby make it more valuable to the students. After all, the Indian people in Canada had a culture of a kind. The Indian woman, who perhaps had never seen or been close to white civilization, had developed arts, among which was the art of tanning leather, and making leather goods, some of which were of fine quality.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And bead work.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: For instance, we find that
the Indians of Nova Scotia made excellent axe and pick handles, and excellent baskets, but there was no means by which they could market them. We hope to improve that condition, and I feel quite certain it can be done. Far too often when the Indian had acquired a few furs or something he could turn into cash, advantage was taken of his inexperience in marketing and in values. I believe that this offers a useful field for our educational and welfare departments.
Medical costs are very high, and I am not altogether satisfied with the basis upon which our medical services are being carried out. If the Indian has a slight ailment, in too many instances he is taken to the hospital, and -heavy expenses incurred. I make that statement not wishing in the slightest degree to reflect upon the administration. After all, the expenditure is so large that I do believe steps must be taken to try to keep it within bounds, and if possible to reduce it. We have had enough experience to warrant us in the assumption that this can be done. It is a mistake to think the Indian has not intellectual equipment. He has, but it must be directed along the right channel. Above all, our Indian agents and the people entrusted with the administration must have sympathy and understanding, if we are to obtain the best results. I have almost concluded my observations concerning the Indians. Those associated with Indian administration need something -of the missionary spirit and zeal.
The immigration branch is, of course, a stationary one. It may be of interest to hon. members to know that a total of 27,000,000 people were passed last year by immigration authorities. That number, of course, includes people who may have gone back and forth many times across our borders but who, on each occasion, would have to pass the immigration officials. In the fiscal year 1935-36, 11,103 immigrants were admitted to Canada, and in the calendar year 1936, w'hich,

Supply-Mines and Resources
of course, includes part of the figure I have just given, there were 11,643. For the calendar year 1935 there were 11,277. It would appear, therefore, that at the moment immigration to Canada is practically stationary.
I thought lion, members might be interested in this brief review of the organization of the department, and some of the problems in administration we are facing.


John Ritchie MacNicol: When the Minister of Mines brought down his estimates a year ago, he told us that he intended to make a survey of the different branches of the departments under his control, such as mines, Indian affairs and so on. It is encouraging to have the minister state to-night that he has carried out this promise. Personally, I always like to compliment anyone who makes an effort to grasp the matters under his control. It is not my intention at the moment to discuss any branch other than that of mines, particularly iron. During my surveys this summer I came across several places where the minister had been. When the Indian estimates are up later on, I shall have something to say on them. I was very much pleased to hear what he said about the Indians, and I shall be ready to support him in that connection.
In connection with mines, I should like to throw out a suggestion to the minister in connection with a national iron policy. I know the minister was over the Algoma Central last year because I was told he had been there when I made a survey of the Helen iron mine. He may have something along this line in mind. I remember a year ago I said something about the necessity of an iron policy in Canada, and to-day I am more convinced than ever that the time has come when Canada should plan such a policy. A short time ago when there was some talk of trouble in Europe, the great republic to the south passed legislation prohibiting the exportation of war materials to certain European countries. I have been associated with the iron and steel business for some time and I was wondering what would happen in Canada should Great Britain get into some kind of trouble that we could not or should not keep out of and the United States determine that there would have to be a prohibition of the exportation of iron to Canada. Such action would disorganize completely the iron and steel plants in Canada, particularly those which might be engaged in the manufacture of war materials.
As the minister knows, nearly all the iron ore coming into Canada, particularly into Ontario, comes from the Mesaba and other great iron ore regions south of lake Superior. When he was going over the Algoma Central,
31111-43J
the minister undoubtedly heard a good deal about the Helen iron mine and those other great mines up there which are able to produce a low grade ore. The minister may have given considerable thought to this matter, but I should like to see some encouragement given to the development of this so-called low grade ore in Algoma. While I was up there, some engineers and geologists were making a survey as to the possibilities of this ore. I learned that over in Minnesota, where most of the iron ore used in America is produced, outside what is produced in Alabama, they were commencing to use low grade ores. These low grade ores are roasted or sintered in order to take out the carbonate and reduce it to iron _ oxide. I learned that they figure that within reasonable length of time, perhaps twenty-five or fifty years at the outside, the great ranges of Mesabi and those along Iron river and south of lake Superior will become more or less exhausted. In order to protect the great iron and steel industries of the country they are beginning to mix low grade ore with the high grade.
I am informed-the minister and his department heads will know more about this than I do-that with a reasonable expenditure the new Helen mine could be reopened and a commercial product produced by roasting or sintering the ore. If that could be done it would be a great boon to Canada as the iron and steel industry would be safeguarded and the employment of thousands of men protected should the contingency to which I referred before occur.
I went to the top of the Helen mine. This was rather a hard journey for me as it is about 2,800 feet up and it was quite steep in many places. At the top I was able to see the trenches which had been cut across that mountain to reveal the ore. I forget the number of trenches which had been cut, but I was told that there were plainly visible 100,000,000 tons of ore which could be got out quite easily. I went into the mine about 900 feet to the point where they had stopped taking out the ore, I believe in 1918. If the department could plan some economical and reasonable way in which this iron ore could be developed in Algoma, there would be tremendous possibilities for that fine city of Sault Ste. Marie and the other cities in the south which would be able to obtain iron and steel needs from the plant at Sault Ste. Marie. While I had a word or two to say last year about the iron ore industry in Canada, since that time I have covered a lot of territory. I was very much interested to find that in townships of Leeds and Lanark occurred the first iron smelting in Ontario.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Mr. REID:: Is that hematite ore?


John Ritchie MacNicol: It was a very high grade ore in Leeds when it was taken out.


Thomas Reid: Is it hematite?


John Ritchie MacNicol: It would be hematite
quality. Hematite means a high grade of iron oxide, and it was high grade ore that was taken out of Leeds. I cannot understand the hon. gentleman as his Scotch is too broad for me, although I am part Scotch myself.


Thomas Reid: I asked the hon. gentleman
if it was hematite in order to find out whether he knew just what it was.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The Algoma ore that
was taken out of the old Helen mine was hematite, and the ore that is in the New Helen mine is called siderite or iron carbonate.
I know a little bit about the iron business.
I found out that the first iron ore production in Ontario was in the county of Leeds. There was also some production at about the same time in Lanark county, but the larger production occurred in Leeds.
It is very interesting to read what the early administrators of this province had to say about it. About 1784 Major Edward Jessup, a resident, I assume, of either Leeds or Grenville-I used to know a Jessup family in Grenville, in the town of Prescott some years ago, and it may have been one of that family, as they were a military family writing to the governor, said:
As iron is a necessary, expensive and heavy article to transport, and as we are told there is an iron ore bed and a good place to build iron works between the settlements of Oswatia and Catraque, I beg leave to suggest to His Excellency the setting apart of these lands.
That would be for the development of iron ore. It was 1801 before they commenced producing and they produced until 1811. The next start was at Normandale in 1820 on the shores of lake Erie, where for twenty-seven years they produced what is called swamp iron, a very soft iron, almost 100 per cent pure' iron. Then later on production took place at Marmora. All these mines are extinct to-day or, at all events, are not being worked.
The best place to commence, as far as I can see, a national iron ore policy, is the Helen iron mountain in Algoma. Other countries are developing their low grade ores. I read only a few days ago an article stating that the German government had issued orders that all their low grade mines should be put into operation. New methods of roasting the low grade ores make it possible to develop them commercially at not too great a cost. 
The minister, I am sure, has in mind what the former Ontario government did in 1923,
I think it was, to encourage the production of iron in Ontario. The Ferguson government offered to any body of men who would undertake the production of iron ore in Algoma a grant of one cent a unit, about 75 cents per ton for the finished ore. In the state of Minnesota they are mixing a low grade ore to-day with their high grade ore, and if something were done-the government may have already done it, I am speaking from the point of view of one who does not know what is being done-to encourage the development of the New Helen mine, I am sure that that ore could be taken down to Sault Ste. Marie, to be roasted there, and a large tonnage shipped over to Minnesota for mixing with their high grade ore. Of course, the government cannot give a bounty to iron ore that is exported, but such a development would promote the production of a large volume of iron ore for consumption in Canada. We have large steel plants in Hamilton, for example, and I was told in the United States when I was visiting that country last summer that a company over there was entertaining the idea of erecting another steel plant in Canada just as soon as things got a little further advanced. In view of what the government is now doing to assist the railways in spending about $20,000,000 in rehabilitating cars and so forth, the production of iron ore in Canada would help us, if any effort could help us at the moment, by promoting the expenditure of money on every side right from the production of the ore down to the finished product in the cars.
I believe the time is ripe to commence a national iron policy for the production of iron ore in Canada. I was happy to learn recently that the Hepburn government-I cannot very often say anything good about the Hepburn government; perhaps hon. gentlemen opposite can, but they will forgive me for not saying anything particular in its favour-had announced that it would give a grant of one cent a unit for the development of iron ore in Ontario. I am told by engineers that it would be difficult to produce it for a bonus of one cent and that there is little encouragement in one cent a unit, but if the federal government would do what the Ferguson government expected it would do, also vote one cent a unit for the production of iron ore in Ontario, I honestly believe the iron ore business could be started in Canada again, many thousands of men put to work, and great assistance given to the iron foundries in Canada. It would also be of great advantage, in the event of trouble, if the importa-

Supply-Mines and Resources
tion of iron ore into Canada from foreign countries were prohibited. We would then have our own iron for our iron and steel industries, and iron and steel constitute one of the basic industries of the country.


Mr. DEACHMAN:: May I ask how much is one cent per unit?


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is the equivalent of 75 cents a ton of the finished ore. That would be approximately $1.50 per ton of finished ore, if both governments contributed. I am not going to get into an argument with my hon. friend.


Charles Avery Dunning: The hon. member is very wise.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is not a case of fearing the hon. gentleman in any way. I have been associated with men working in the iron and steel industry for a long time, and it is difficult for me to argue with someone who knows absolutely less than nothing from the practical standpoint about the production of iron and steel. I would gladly discuss the matter with some practical man who has served in the industry for more than a month or two, and then perhaps we could get somewhere, but economists and all that ilk-save me from them, and save them from me too.
I have finished what I had to say. I rose first to congratulate the minister because I crossed his path on several different occasions this summer, and I was pleased to see that he thought enough of his department to go out through northern Ontario and elsewhere to find out just what could be done about improving his department. I hope that great benefits will result from his trip.
Second, I rose to try to encourage, even in a very humble way-because I have not tried to elaborate on this subject at all as it is hardly up for discussion at the moment- the reopening of what is undoubtedly one of the best low grade iron mines in this country, and the reopening could be done economically I am told, because of the vast improvement in iron roasting machinery. I am told that the New Helen makes really good iron when sintered.
Third, I rose, in the hope that Canada will be placed in the position, in the event of her not being able to obtain ore from outside, of producing her own ore necessities so as to keep her own steel and iron plants in operation in times of trouble, or, better still, in times of peace.


The CHAIRMAN:: I hesitated to interrupt the hon. member in his interesting remarks, but I wish to remind the committee that we are on item 144 for administration of the Explosives Act, and I would suggest-


John Ritchie MacNicol: I followed in the footsteps of the minister.


Frederick George Sanderson: I would suggest to the committee that if they passed this item, the next two would afford opportunity for a discussion of the subject started by the hon. member.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The discussion was not started by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNieol). The minister, in introducing his estimates, stated to the committee that he thought it desirable to make a statement with respect to the administration of the whole department, and in the course of his remarks he spoke of the mineral resources of the country and the development of the gold industry. The hon. member for Davenport confined his observations to the development of another mineral, namely iron ore, and the discussion initiated by the minister and carried on bv the hon. member for Davenport would seem to be appropriate now in view of the fact that the minister, in opening his estimates, discussed the whole subject matter covered by them.


Frederick George Sanderson: Item 144 was called.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Quite so.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I have very great respect for the leader of the opposition, but I do not agree with his logic on this occasion. I expressly said that I wished to take advantage of the opening of the discussion of the estimates to give a brief survey of the work of the department. That could have been done if the Speaker had been in the chair and the house were going into committee of supply, but it was the only opportunity I had of making the statement and it was after the item had been called by the chairman. I think it is desirable that the discussion should be kept to the item affected; otherwise, if the logic of the leader of the opposition is sound, we might get into a discussion of parks or water powers or anything else. If we keep to the particular item under discussion we shall probably make greater progress. I have no criticism to offer concerning the hon. member for Davenport, but I think the ruling of the chair is correct. The hon. gentleman's remarks would be entirely appropriate under the next item.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have no desire to waste time, but when the minister opened his estimates he discussed parks; he mentioned the sum of money spent in Nova Scotia and the sum he proposed to ask for additional parks. He mentioned the sum of money in Prince Edward Island and told of the total

Supply-Mines and Resources
investment in parks. He took mines and spoke of the production in Canada of gold and of baser metals and he also turned to Indian affairs, dividing the expenditures into the sums used for education, medical services and relief. He then turned to the fourth branch, immigration, and said it was stationary. My submission is that it has been customary for ministers-the custom was started in this house by a minister of railways under Sir Wilfrid Laurier-to open their departments to the house, and that precipitated a minor debate with respect to the whole subject matter, giving rise to speeches such as we have heard from the hon. member for Davenport, and to which I understand the hon. member for Huron North (Mr. Deaeh-man) was about to make an appropriate reply. Surely, once there has been an opening of the department by the calling of an item-and this could not be done until the item was called-the item having been called, and the minister having made a statement, we must take it for granted, unless the chairman stops the minister, that those who follow him should have the same latitude. That is logical, and on that assumption I propose to act.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I shall certainly not get
into a controversy with my right hon. friend, but I believe I did state in my opening remarks that I wished to have the indulgence of the committee to make a general statement.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And I think it is a
very proper thing to do; I compliment the minister upon it.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It might facilitate matters
if this item were allowed to pass. It is a stationary item that has been in the estimates each year, having to do with explosives administration. It covers the expenses of travelling inspectors for the administration of the Explosives Act. If this item is passed, then the way is wide open for the hon. member for Davenport or the hon. member for Huron North or anyone else to take part in the discussion we have been having.


Richard Bedford Bennett: When I hear the minister suggesting that, by the declaration "carried" by the chairman, one can convert a discussion that is otherwise out of order into one that is in order, I think it is time we ceased to quibble about parliamentary procedure. If it will help the minister more readily to accommodate himself to further discussion, I shall not object. The chairman will say "carried" and call the next item, whereupon the member for Huron North will proceed with his speech, after which I may make one myself.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I did not suggest that the
chairman declare the item carried. I suggested to the committee that it might pass the item inasmuch as it is non-contentious, and there would then be an opportunity for hon. members to take part in the discussion of iron deposits.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
For investigation of mineral resources and deposits; of the mining and metallurgical industries, and of mineral technology; wages, expenses of testing and research laboratories; for publications, English and French, for purchase of books and instruments; for miscellaneous assistance and contingencies; and for investigations by the Dominion Fuel Board, including salaries and all other expenses, $273,000.
Robert John Deachman: Now that the uproar
has ceased, I wish to ask the minister a question as to the difference in cost tO' the public between iron ore produced from Ontario mines and iron ore when imported, as we do import it now, from the United States. Perhaps the minister could give us information in that regard, because I noticed in the speech of the hon. member for Davenport at least the implication that, provided the product were, made in Ontario and made by workers in Canadian iron and with Canadian capital, it did not make very much difference what it cost. He cited the case of Germany and the progress which that country was making in connection with the utilization of its products in the manufacture of certain commodities. I read an interesting article in Harper's Magazine a short time ago. It pointed out that Germany was making rubber at six times the cost of producing it from imported raw rubber. Germany is also making gasoline from coal but at a cost which is four or five times what that commodity would cost if imported. I should not like this parliament, at the suggestion of the hon. member for Davenport, to adopt, such a policy in connection with the administration of affairs in Canada. My reason for that objection is that the great basic industry of agriculture in Canada is not in a condition to bear these burdens, and so I protest against having them imposed upon us at anybody's behest. After all, true economy is to bring your raw material from wherever you can get it and to manufacture the product cheaply, and distribute it to the people at the lowest possible cost, and1 if Canadian capital had thought it worth while to tackle this problem of using Canadian iron I venture to say it would have done so. But we are told that they could do it if you gave them a cent a unit, and an additional cent, or perhaps $2 or $2.50 or whatever it is, per ton of finished ore, for the privilege of producing iron ore in Canada.

Supply-Mines and Resources


John Ritchie MacNicol: Not $2.50; it is $1.50.


Robert John Deachman: My hon. friend wants
help from the dominion government, help from Ontario; both hands are held out.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I have a very tender place in my heart for the agriculturists; anything I can do to help them will be gladly done, and any industry I have been associated with has always been happy to help agriculture. But we never find my hon. friend having a good word to say for labour men or industry; we always find him opposing them; he has nothing good to say for anything except agriculture. I like to help agriculture, but I also think of the 800,000 to 1,000,000 men working in industry.


Mr. BRADETTE:: I should like to say a few words about this important item. I commend the Department of Mines and Resources for the wonderful work it has done, under both the present minister and his predecessor from my neighbouring constituency, Hon. Wesley Gordon. I praised him both personally and publicly when he inaugurated the new policy of sending out geological parties covering practically the whole mineral area of Canada. I was glad to see that last year and this year again this vote is enlarged, as this work has resulted in greatly adding to the knowledge of our country and its mineral formation.
There is one other item for which I beg the government to enlarge its appropriation in the supplementary estimates if at all possible; that is road construction to the newer mining sections. There was a time when northern Ontario and, indeed, the whole of northern Canada was thought to be a barren waste. Northern Ontario has shown not only to Canada but to the whole civilized world that we have there the greatest potential mineral wealth under the sun. There are occasions when, through lack of roads, it has been impossible for some of the new mines to be developed. I should not like to see the government embark upon a policy which would favour certain kinds of wild-catting, which exists to some extent at this time. There may be a little too much speculation at the moment; this is not the time or the place to mention what has been going on, but I know it came to the ears of the department that in some sections the public had been taken for a ride, and I hope the provincial governments more particularly will see that at the present time when we are emerging from the depression the people will not be fleeced. But the responsibility rests upon the federal administration to help road construction in some of
the new mining sections of Canada. I would never be in favour of a policy of spending large sums in sections where there are merely new prospects not proved by actual development. But the fact remains that at present there is a shortage of roads, summer roads and winter roads, but more particularly summer roads, to give access to new mines.
I commend very highly the Department of Mines and Resources for their policy of road construction inaugurated last year, and hope they will find it possible to enlarge it. Perhaps it is not divulging any secret if I say we thought that in northern Ontario, in Temiskaming and Cochrane, and also in northern Quebec, not enough money had been spent. Doubtless the committee have heard some talk about secession from some of our newer sections, but there is nothing in that. At the same time the government must know that as far as northern Ontario and northern Canada are concerned, the mineral industry is a source of great riches and of revenue to both provincial and dominion governments. We do not want all the money to be spent in our own section, but we feel we are entitled to a fair share. The words of praise and commendation which I spoke of Hon. Mr. Gordon apply just as forcibly to the present minister. I was also able very sincerely to compliment the former Minister of Mines of Ontario, Hon. Mr. McCrea, and I feel that the same commendation is due to his successor, Hon. Mr. Leduc. Their work has been of great help in bringing the country out of the depression. Again I express the fervent wish that the federal government will find it possible to spend more money on road construction and also to increase, if possible, the geological parties we have had for the last two years.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If the faith of the minister is anything like that of his predecessor, whose footsteps the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Bradette) says he follows, one can suggest that he continue his activities. The explanation which he has given of the consolidation of his department I think merits the approval of this committee. When he suggests that the total saving in personnel is forty-seven in the Ottawa administration, it is important to ascertain what the effect was on what one might call the outside service, about which we may have occasion to speak later. The monetary saving at the moment is apparently over $100,000.
I sympathize with the minister when he refers to the difficulty of dealing with men who have been long in the service. When the Department of the Interior parted with

Supply-Mines and Resources
the natural resources and they were turned over to the provinces, the same difficulties arose and they have not yet been disposed of, for many of those who took pension at that time were not old men, and although orders in council were passed that they should, whenever possible, be afforded opportunity for employment, many of them are still out of the public service. So the difficulty the minister has had to contend with has been considerable.
He divided his observations into four heads. He spoke of the mining industry. May I say to this committee that in the mining industry as such the Dominion of Canada has a very limited interest; for the natural resources belong to the several provinces and not to the federal government. The federal government is no longer trustee for the natural resources of the country except in that part which is not under provincial control. In the Northwest Territories we have still direct control of the mineral wealth. The extent to which, without compensation by way of taxes, the federal government should interest itself in mining ventures is a matter that is open to much discussion. In South Africa 60 per cent of the profits of the great Premier diamond mine was taken by the state. And in the great mining development which goes on in that country 50 per cent of the increased price of gold is paidi to the exchequer; it is less than 50 per cent in some mines, but broadly speaking that is the proportion. Why? Because the nation is responsible, and not the individual provinces, for the increase in the price of gold and the values thus created. That matter is one which has been dealt with by this parliament in a manner without precedent, as was stated in the speech of the Finance minister last year, about which something will be said later. That is the position in South Africa, and in other parts of the king's dominions.
Here we are rendering a very distinct service, and we have it on record that the government do not propose to ask that any contribution be made by the gold mines other than that which they pay as income tax, like other industries. In no other part of the world has gold itself been so looked upon-and why it should be here, is, as the late Rudyard Kipling would say, another story. But I do point out that in dealing with the question of mines and minerals we have some obligations in respect of the unexplored territories, and it is our duty so to conserve those resources as to see that the utmost value enures to the people for whom they

are held in trust. I have no doubt it would be desirable for the dominion government to carry on gold-mining operations in the Northwest Territories. If we should be successful in finding a large deposit of gold, it would enable us to make a payment of our national debt on a scale that otherwise is denied to us, for the only method by which we can hope to make any large payment on that obligation is through some effort of that kind.
The same applies to some of our provinces. That, however, is a matter which involves policy, which need not now be discussed. It must not be forgotten, however, in dealing with our mines and minerals, that the rearmament program of the nations has provided a new market for lead, zinc and copper, and already there are distinct signs that with respect to these metals there is a diminution of demand and an increase of supply. So we must not think that by substituting mining for agriculture we can bring about anything like a restoration of the prosperity of the country. Although it is new wealth it must not be forgotten that it is a failing asset. It is an asset that disappears once and for all, as far as the country itself is concerned, and our only direct receipt of income from these organizations is through the income tax which is paid. I think it was well worth while, as the hon. member for Cochrane has said, to take the steps which were taken by the former Minister of Mines, because at that particular moment this country was in such a position that any increase in its new wealth by methods such as were pursued was greatly to be desired.
I would be loath to believe that of all men the Minister of Mines and Resources had concluded that the mining industry could ever take the place of the agricultural industry in a country such as this. We have conditions here that are very difficult for us to overcome. No man ever realizes that more than when he goes away from home. Climate, the nature of our soil, drought, and matters of that kind make one realize the magnitude of the problem with which our people have to deal. In connection with mining we have the uncertainties to which the minister alluded, as compared with the certainties that prevail on the Rand in South Africa, where they have a completely developed territory and know exactly what can be found, because they have a uniform quality of mineral deposit that is certain to produce results from their operations, which is not quite true in this country at the moment. I think we can reserve further observations

Supply-Mines and Resources
with respect to the mining industry for another occasion, because there will be ample opportunity on one of the other items.
With respect to the Indian problem I confess that I share the minister's view as to its seriousness. We have less than 125,000 Indians in Canada. The population has increased slightly. At one time it was diminishing. It has increased because we have taken such good care of the Indian population, and in my judgment that in itself is to the credit of the Canadian people. The minister has very properly pointed out that the cost seems to be out of all proportion to what reasonably might be expected for the service rendered. I must say that there are two items I have always found it difficult to understand. When estimates were prepared; when one had to consider the question from every angle in days of great depression, I must say that I found it difficult to ascertain by any explanation which could be afforded what value we got for nearly $2,000,000 spent on education. I say that to the minister very frankly, and I agree with every state>-ment he has made. Sometimes I used to fear that there was more interest in getting a per diem allowance with which to enable institutions to continue their work than there was in anything else, because it goes without saying that what the minister has indicated is true. You cannot take boys and girls out of teepees at five and six years of age; put them into residential schools; turn them back to their homes during summer vacation and finally back home after they have completed their education, and expect them to give that account of themselves which one would expect for the moneys expended. Not long ago I heard of a Cambridge graduate who had gone back to his coloured country people in Africa and had reverted to the customs and habits of his tribe, despite all the effort that had been put forth in regard to his education.
I have been close to the problem in various parts of my own province, in connection with the Blood Indians in the southern part of the province; the great tribe that lies just west of my own constituency, the Stonies, the great hunters; the Sarcees, who are not far from Calgary, and that great tribe which has its headquarters near Gleichen. At Macleod, at Morley, at Sarcee and at Gleichen there are four distinct tribes of Indians, and certainly the effort which has been made to preserve their health, to teach them some of the elements of sanitation and to give them some ideas in the way of education has been highly successful in this sense, that they now realize the value of a hospital; they realize the value
of cleanliness and they realize that preventive medicine is more to be preferred than any curative efforts that may be made. We have established doctors upon the reserves; we have built hospitals. In some cases the band funds have been responsible for it; in other cases we have made direct grants, but I do not see how we can lessen those contributions to the well-being of the Indians if we are to maintain the ground that we have won by such great effort. I have seen the change which has taken place since I have been in western Canada. At one time there was a diminution in the Indian population. It is now increasing, and this is a distinct tribute to the efforts that successive governments have made to provide medical services and teach the rudiments of preventive medicine to the Indian population.
I have thought, and perhaps the minister will agree, that in some of these places they might be more successful in their grazing operations. They have raised cattle with indifferent success, for some strange reason. At Gleichen they have a coal mine which they operate with success, and the herds on the Blood reserve are substantial, but whether the operations of the department in that regard can be expanded, I do not know. That is a matter which, I imagine, would engage the attention of the minister and his officials. In connection with the question of education, however, I believe the minister's observations are entirely warranted.
Having exhausted what he had to say with regard to mines and the Indians, the minister turned for a moment to the position in connection with parks. I sometimes think we exaggerate the exact value of the tourist traffic in this country, but that it is a very, very important industry for the purpose of adjusting unfavourable trade balances, as an invisible item, goes without question. When one contemplates the number of people who cross and recross the boundary between this country and the United States and the amount of money that is left here from year to year, it is difficult to estimate it exactly. The parks have played an ever-increasing part in that tourist traffic, and we can afford to spend money in developing them, because that money will produce a real dividend. I am not sure that, as far as the federal government is concerned, the tourist traffic does not give us a greater direct dividend than the moneys we receive, for instance, from one industry at least that has been mentioned. The tourist traffic is so important from the standpoint of an invisible item in our trade relations with other countries that it is difficult to overestimate its value.

Supply-Mines and Resources
With respect to the various park administrations. one can only say that the expenditure of $30,000,000 includes administrative costs as well as capital costs. I hardly think it is fair to include administrative costs, in that sense, but the minister has given them to us only for the purpose of information.
With respect to immigration, I find it difficult to understand why, on the set-up, the services of the deputy minister were dispensed with, for of all the men engaged in the public service from 1930 to this day, no other single man brought about such economies in the public service as did that man. He took the soldier settlement and allied problems connected with loans, and made adjustments such as saved this country more money than is involved in what the minister has now done. Instead of there being forty-seven less people in the employ of the country, the number is very much larger. Before we conclude our discussion of the estimates I shall be able to ascertain what the number is. I remember having noted it, because it struck me as being very large. I do not believe any public servant during my time made a greater contribution to the economic and efficient operation and administration of a department than did the gentleman whose services were dispensed with. However, that is by the way. This does not seem to be the proper place to discuss a question which I believe is very important, namely, whether or not the question of the movement of people into Canada should longer remain stationary. This is a problem which will have to be considered at greater length than I feel disposed to deal with it to-night. But the time is rapidly approaching, if in fact it has not already arrived, when we must realize that the burden of taxation imposed upon our people, and the revenue necessities to meet the charges against our income, have become so very great that an additional number of units is necessary, if we are not to overburden per capita those who are in this dominion.
In addition, there is a larger problem connected with the issue, which need not now be discussed, namely the problem of the waste places of the country being peopled, and the necessity for a readjustment of population in the world. However, this is not a matter with which I shall attempt to deal to-night.
The hon. member for Davenport (Mr. Mac-Nicol) referred to the iron industry, and I believe the hon. member for Huron North (Mr. Deachman) also dealt with it. I have only this to say: On more than one occasion I have investigated the matter, and I fancy the minister has done likewise. In Canada
fMr. Bennett.]
we have not, in quantities, iron ore of a quality which would enable us, without importation from some source, to produce the pig iron essential for the production of various kinds of steel. We have iron ore; we have good iron ore, but we have not iron ore located in quantity and quality so as to enable us to deal with the problem in its entirety. Successive ministers have grappled with the problem; successive governments have investigated it, and I regret to say that successive reports have shown just what I have indicated.
At this time, apart from importations from the United States, we import a quantity of ore from Newfoundland. As is known, Newfoundland sells large quantities of ore to Germany. Great as are the German deposits, they still have to rely upon importations. Britain no longer finds herself able to supply her own requirements, and iron ore importations to England come from Sweden, some even from Wabana, Newfoundland, and other parts of the world. The only countries in which I have seen deposits of iron ore located within reasonable distance of the sea in quality and quantity sufficient to produce the highest grade of pig iron and steel, are in South Africa and Australia. The plant at Newcastle, Australia, is one of the four great steel plants of the world: yet we never hear of it. The one in South Africa is far inland, at Pretoria, where they have iron ore situated at some distance from the city, and of a quality which enables them to produce pig iron and steel of the highest grade.
I agree with the observations of the hon. member for Davenport. It is highly desirable that if there is any iron ore in Canada capable of being developed to produce pig iron or steel, we should develop it. I can say to the hon. member, however, that successive governments have made the most extensive investigation, and without the importation of certain qualities of iron ore from other countries we are not in a position to produce the quality of pig iron essential to the development of a great steel industry in this country. I say that with great regret, because it has always been my opinion that the Mesaba range should have been part of Canada on any fit and proper adjustment of boundaries. However, it was decreed otherwise. If one will take the trouble to read with care the life of the late Sir William Van Horne, he will find how nearly the iron ores in that range were to being in possession of a Canadian company rather than a great American company. However, that is not a matter of importance at this time. It is important only because we

Supply-Mines and Resources
rely to a great extent upon another country for our supplies of iron ore to serve our blast furnaces.
The minister has before him a very great opportunity. I can only say to him that I sometimes envy him that opportunity, for in days of great depression the visions and hopes which one had of being able to make reorganizations and adjustments along business lines in some of our departments were never realized. In part, they were realized in the Department of Finance, but outside that they were not. Attacks made when the Department of the Interior was reorganized by reason of resources being passed on to the provinces brought about an almost intolerable position, even in this community, because of the resultant superannuation of so large a number of persons. The very fact the minister has been able to reduce the staff by consolidation only by forty-seven indicates not only the difficulty but also something of the strength of that imponderable force which one has to meet whenever an effort is made to improve the public service of Canada by any reduction in its numbers.
If he will study just one front page of one document, one magazine which came to my hands the other day, he will realize clearly exactly what I mean. If consolidation is to be brought about, we shall all have to help in doing it. There is not a general disposition on the part of all of us to see our friends, as distinct from somebody else's friends, deprived of the employment by which they earn their livelihood. We are all perfectly willing that somebody else's friend should leave his position, but none of us Is prepared to think our own friend should, with the result that a reduction of forty-seven is the net result of the effort the minister has made. I congratulate him upon it. I miss my guess if between now and the time when tired and worn, he surrenders the seals of office, the forty-seven has not been reversed and the figures show plus, not minus.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I shall try to be brief, but I should like to commend the minister for his hearty cooperation in helping to develop the north country. I believe it is the duty of members from mining constituencies to make themselves familiar with everything in those constituencies. I found that while I visited mines in other places I was not familiar with those of my own constituency. When I got off the train I made a trip of twenty miles in to a mine. May I say it took five and a half hours to go in and five hours to come out. Perhaps the truck ran better on the way home. I think we could have walked much faster. I
thought that mine was being forced to operate under unfair conditions. I got into touch with the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crerar); he got into touch with the Minister of Labour (Mr. Rogers) and with the provincial members, and we were finally able to get $4,500 for the improvement of the road into that mine.
I answer the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) with some fear and trembling, and I congratulate the minister upon the progress he has made in taking care of the Indians. I visited three bands of Indians north of lake Nipigon and I found there something which I did not think existed in Canada, that is, cooperation being practised on a very large scale. I saw the finest patch of potatoes I have seen since I left the Emerald Isle. This patch was thirty acres in extent and the potatoes were all large and clean. These boys knew how to raise, plant and cultivate the potatoes. I think our Indians should be taught how to live as well as how to make a living. With the exception of two old people, not one person in those bands was receiving relief. I think the minister should be commended for the progressiveness and the educational features of the Indian affairs branch.


Mr. CHURCH:: I should like to say a word or two about this very important item. I consider it to be one of the most important to be considered by the committee of supply. It deals with mining and metallurgy, with the Dominion Fuel Board and all that sort of thing. I must say that there is only a skeleton department to handle this very important phase of the natural resources of Canada. There has been a steady increase in the number of students enrolling at McGill, Toronto, Queens and the other Canadian universities for courses in mining and metallurgy. We should compare this item for this very important work with the items voted in the United States. There may be concurrent jurisdiction as between the dominion and the provinces, but I do not think it goes far enough. There is no coordination, and there should be.
The universities have been coming to this parliament for many years but we are doing nothing for them. Three years ago the Canadian Council of Mining and Metallurgy met in Ottawa. This organization is composed of the great men in this great profession. Many of these men are graduates of the universities of this country. We should consider the work being done along these lines in Germany. Many students who are in thieir third and fourth year of practical science spent last summer working at pick

Supply-Mines and Resources
and shovel jobs in the mines. These students should be taken care of the way they are taken care of in Germany; they should be put to work making a scientific study of these problems. We are absolutely behind the times. We are voting only three-quarters of a million dollars to provide merely a skeleton department to handle this very important work. This is the same sort of department as we have in connection with health matters.
If the government want to do something to bring about better times, they should take note of what is being done in some of the large universities of the world. In those universities every provision is being made for the advanced study of these great problems. The government would derive untold revenue if they provided further assistance along these lines. Many of our great engineers have gone to South America, South Africa and Australia. The number of students enrolling for these courses has increased in recent years. At one time civil engineering, chemistry and other courses used to be popular, but now it is mining and metallurgy. The former government voted about $2,000,000 in order that surveys might be undertaken throughout the country. This was only a drop in the bucket to what could be done.
The latter part of the item deals with the Dominion Fuel Board. This board does very good work. As all members know, this is one of the coldest countries in the world. We have from seven to eight months of cold weather and we are still dependent upon American supplies of coal. We are not doing very much to provide the working classes of this country with cheaper fuel. The two inquiries which have been held into the matter of fuel supply did not touch the national fuel problem. Ten or twelve years ago this house adopted a national fuel policy. Under this policy all the fuel used in Canada would be British mined, that is, mined in England, Wales, Nova Scotia or Alberta. In answer to a question the other day the Secretary of State (Mr. Rinfret) said that they could not give the movement of coal from the mari-times to the head of the lakes. There is a booklet issued by the Department of Labour containing fifteen or twenty tables which deal with this fuel problem and its relation to the work of the fuel board. Are we going to be dependent forever upon the United States? Why do we not develop our own fuel supply?
Why do we not utilize the latent talent now lying idle in the universities of this country? The last commission's report shows that they did nothing and they did it well. I think the work of this Dominion Fuel Board should be expanded. The universities should be given

the opportunity of cooperating with the government. We should develop a policy of Canada for Canadians. The engineers who took part in the great hydro development were all graduates of Toronto, McGill, Queens and other Canadian universities. I can see very little hope in this item for our universities. What we should be doing is voting several million dollars to provide for surveys all over the country which would utilize every student in our universities. This opportunity should be given to the poorer students who are dependent upon what they can earn at such work to pay their fees. I hope in the not too distant future we shall wake up in this dominion. We are miles behind the times. I direct the attention of the committee to what is being done in Germany and also in Wales. There are very good men connected with this Dominion Fuel Board, but their hands are tied and they can do nothing. I commend the minister and his officials for the good work done already, but much better work can be done if an opportunity is given to these men to do it.
The deputy minister has a national reputation. and I want to compliment him upon all he has done for the mining industry. If we are to increase the wealth of this country and have a greater output from our mines, I plead with the government to utilize students during the summer time so that when they graduate they will not leave their country but will stay here and be a credit to Canada after all the toil and labour which they and their parents have put into their training.


Mrs. BLACK:: Mr. Chairman, coming from a mining constituency I should like to say a few words to the hon. minister (Mr. Crerar).
For the past few years, as he knows, we have had geological surveys coming into the Yukon, and they have done wonderful work. I believe it has been intimated that in the future men are to do some prospecting for the government. I hope that is so. We have an enormous territory covering over 200,000 square miles, and we export only gold, silver, copper, zinc, lead and a few other metals. There are some coal mines in that country, but so far the coal has not been of a quality that we could use comfortably.
The gold mines have been far more valuable in the last few years because of the rise in the price of gold to $35. In Dawson district one company has operated very largely, and it did very much better in the past year than in previous years. I spoke of their camps last year. This summer when I went north I found that new camps were built, and that the men were far better looked after than in all the years I have been north. At one of

Supply-Mines and Resources
the camps the superintendent told me it was only a temporary camp. I looked at him when he told me it was only a temporary camp because to my certain knowledge it has been a temporary camp for seven years, and is likely to be so for another seven years unless somebody gets after it. But generally the camps have been improved, and that part of the country is doing infinitely better.
They have not done what I feel they should do with regard to their hours of labour. They work their men ten and twelve hours a day, and I do not believe a man can work properly at mining for ten and twelve hours a day. In the silver mining camp, at Tread-well-Y'ukon, the men work eight hours a day.
The Mayo district is dependent almost entirely upon the output of silver. In the early twenties when silver went to SI.38, a new high, the district was a beehive of industry ; we were fortunate in having in charge of the Treadwell-Yukon mine a mining engineer who was a worker himself, an ambitious man, and he did the best he could for that part of the country. In 1925-26 silver went down to 58 cents, and in 1928-29 to a low price of from 25 to 27 cents, and the mines were closed down and hundreds of miners were thrown out of work.
The silver mining industry is a difficult industry in that country because the ore must be sacked. At first it was raw-hided, taken fifty miles to the river bank, stored on the river bank during the summer, then put on barges and steamers and taken down to Stewart on the Yukon river, then moved up river to White Horse, and from White Horse transferred to barge and steamer, then put on flat cars and taken to tidewater at Skag-way and brought out, and again transferred from steamer to train. It is pretty difficult when one has to carry ore in that way. At the Treadwell mine in Juneau, the ore can be worked at a profit of from 90 cents to 82 a ton, but in the Yukon there is only a very small profit when silver is 40 cents an ounce. That I think the minister can readily understand when he knows what our transportation system is.
Owing to the very high water we had this summer there was trouble along both the Yukon and Stewart rivers. Several barges were lost; some ore was lost; other ore had to be resaeked and transferred, not once but several times. If it had not been for the ore stacked on the shore at Mayo, the town would have been almost washed out. In that town there were only three buildings which were not under water: the government liquor store, of course, and this was a blessing in a way;
the Roman Catholic church and the Anglican church. The one person in the town of Mayo who seemed to have a sense of impending disaster was a Cbeechako, a newcomer who warned people that the river was going higher. The manager of the local bank moved out the bank books and valuables and stored them in the tower of the Catholic church, and the bank furniture was the only furniture that was saved.
I hardly intended to go into all this detail to-night, but I did want to speak of it and convey a very hearty invitation to the minister to come to the Yukon and see for himself what we need. I believe the people in the Mayo district would be more than pleased if he did so and it is almost a necessity for them to have a mining engineer settle in that country for at least one year. He could help our prospectors, help the men who have the silver mines, and do a great deal of work for us.
I see it is now eleven o'clock, and with the permission of the Chair I should like to resume when this item comes up again. I thank you.
Item stands.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, February 9, 1937