1938-06-06

THE LATE ALEXANDER McKAY EDWARDS

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, I have again to ask the house to pause in its proceedings to permit mention being made of the sudden passing of another of our number, who but a few days ago was in his accustomed seat, to all appearances in the best of health. I refer to Mr. Alexander McKay Edwards, the deputy whip of the conservative opposition, who for nearly thirteen years past has represented the constituency of South Waterloo in this house.
At the end of the week before last, when the hon. the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Mackenzie) left Ottawa to address a meeting in the city of Galt, Ontario, in the constituency of the hon. member, the minister was accompanied by Mr. Edwards, who on the day following introduced him to his audience. Later in the day Mr. Edwards complained of not feeling well, and was obliged to rest. It was not thought, either by himself or by others, that his condition was serious. On Friday last this house had only begun its afternoon's proceedings when word was received that the hon. membei had passed away.
Mr. Edwards was in his sixty-third year. He was born at Bothwell, Ontario, but at an early age went to live in Waterloo county. His personal, business and political interests were centred in the county of Waterloo, and, more particularly, in and about the thriving and industrial communities of Galt and Preston. His career, however, had its intimate association with the affairs of his native province and with the larger and wider interests of our dominion.
By marriage, Mr. Edwards was related to the late Hon. George Clare who for many years represented the constituency of South Waterloo in this parliament. Like the late George Clare, Mr. Edwards held an enviable place in the esteem and confidence of his fellow citizens. He was successful and prominent in business; the head of an important manufacturing enterprise, and the director of several others. For eight years he served the city of Galt as an alderman, and for two years as its chief magistrate. He was first elected to the House of Commons in the general election of 1925, and was reelected at each of the three subsequent general elections, representing the constituency in all, as I have said, for nearly thirteen years.
During his years in parliament, Mr. Edwards represented his constituents with fidelity and ability. He was held in high personal esteem in parliament as he was in his constituency. In this house he was regular in his attendance, was active in the work of its committees. When he participated in the debates he spoke to the point, and was listened to with attention and respect. As assistant to the chief whip of the Conservative party, he rendered services which were much appreciated by all parties in the house.
It is not without significance that his last public act should have been the one to which I have already alluded, an act of courtesy and chivalry towards a political opponent. It was the expression of a nature which was essentially kindly, cheerful, and generous, and which won for him many strong and enduring friendships among members of all parties.
We shall all greatly miss his pleasing personality. His was a career of quiet, unobtrusive conscientious service to his community and to his party, one which maintained and served to further the amenities of public and parliamentary life. Not his party only, but the entire membership of this house, has suffered in his passing a loss which will be deeply felt.
I extend to hon. gentlemen opposite, and to their leader, the very sincere sympathy of my colleagues and myself, and, indeed, of all hon. members on this side, in the loss of so old, trusted, loyal, and valued a colleague and friend.
I should like to express our sympathy as well to the constituency which the late member represented so faithfully over many years.
To Mrs. Edwards, and to her son and daughter, who have been thus greatly bereaved, and to the aged mother of Mr. Edwards, who shared his household and now mourns the loss of her son, the sympathy of all hon. members of this house goes out in fullest measure. It would, Mr. Speaker, be appreciated by all if this expression of our sympathy could be conveyed by Your Honour, to Mrs. Edwards, and to the other members of the family.
Hon. H. A. STEWART (Leeds):: Mr. Speaker, may I first thank the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) for his kindly sympathetic and appreciative references to the gentleman whose loss we mourn to-day, one who was a prominent member of the official opposition. The house meets under the shadow of death of one of its members. This has happened so frequently during the present parliament that we are reminded of the saying that there is nothing certain about man's life but this, that he shall lose it.

Questions

As has been ably pointed out by the Prime Minister, the late Mr. Edwards by his activities in his home town and constituency was well qualified to be a worthy representative of that constituency in the House of Commons. He became a member in 1925, and since that time has continuously represented South Waterloo. His membership in the house was characterized by regularity of attendance, industry, careful attention to his many duties in the house and to the deliberations of the important committees upon which he served. His zeal for his constituency was outstanding, and the confidence of his electors was expressed as has been indicated here. Although his speeches in the house were not frequent, they showed careful preparation and a knowledge of his subject, and were delivered in a calm and reasoned manner which commanded respect, carried conviction, and made a lasting impression upon his hearers. His relations with his fellow members were cordial, and in a large measure he enjoyed their confidence.
The sympathy which will go out from this house and from the large number of people who knew the Late Mr. Edwards will in a measure help to sustain his mother, his widow and family in their sad bereavement. With the right hon. leader of the official opposition and hon. members supporting him I join in requesting that Your Honour convey to them our expression of deep sympathy.


Mr. A. A. HEAPS (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to associate myself with what has been said respecting our late colleague, Mr. Edwards. I am sure it will be consoling to his family to know of the high esteem in which he was held by members of the house. In my association with him I always looked upon him as a kindly and generous man, one who had no hate in him. Such characteristics in these days are in certain quarters no longer regarded as virtues, and it is well that we lay special emphasis upon them. With the other members of the group to which I belong, I wish to associate myself with what has been so well said by those who have preceded me.


Mr. JOSEPH NEEDHAM (The Battle-fords) :: Mr. Speaker, the group to which I belong wishes to associate itself with the expression of appreciation of services rendered and sympathy for the bereaved. When we met the late brother in the lobbies and through the Various activities of the house, we learned to respect and honour him. With other hon. members who have spoken we would request you, Mr. Speaker, to convey our sympathy to the bereaved family.



BANKING AND COMMERCE

[Stage Direction]
Mr. THOMAS VIEN (Outremont, for Mr. Moore) moved that the third report of the standing committee on banking and commerce, presented on June 1, be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. WALSH:: 1.	Has any member or employee of the national harboui's board, Department of Transport, or any other government authority, either directly or indirectly, entered into any special arrangement or agreement, verbally or otherwise, with any Canadian or foreign company, partnership or individual or with any carrier, to handle grain through Quebec or other government owned elevators in the St. Lawrence at other than published tariff, either by rebate, commutation, lump sum payment or any other medium, based on the quality of grain exported through the said elevators during a specified or unlimited period?
2.	If so, what are the rates charged under this special agreement?
3.	Were the terms of the said agreement submitted to and approved by the board of grain commissioners prior to its acceptance and completion?
4.	Were any special arrangements made with any grain firm or carrier which would have the effect of reducing the cost of transportation and/or handling charges on grain already shipped, about to move, or to be forwarded in the future from Bayports to Quebec and through the Quebec elevator?
5.	Will the free storage concession granted at Quebec be extended to grain exported from Montreal elevators?
6.	If so, will this concession apply also to part cargo lots exported by liners?


Mr. HOWE:: 1. No.
2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.
4.	No.
5.	Published tariffs apply.
6.	Answered by No. 5.


MOTION FOR PAPERS
Mr. BEAUBIEN:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, orders in council, agreements and other documents having to do with the construction of the Piney highway, Morden Snrague highway, Brandon Clear Lake highway, in Manitoba, carried on between the province of Manitoba and the dominion government, as well as all other correspondence in relation thereto between the Minister of Labour, the Prime Minister and any other parties, between the dates of August 20, 1935, and October 15, 1935.

Unemployment Insurance



NATIONAL HOUSING ACT


[Stage Direction]
-PROVISION WITH RESPECT TO LOW RENTAL HOUSES AND MUNICIPAL TAXES
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved,-That it is expedient to bring in a measure which in part I thereof repeals The Dominion Housing Act, 1935, and reenacts certain provisions thereof with amendments and additions so as to provide inter alia that the amount of loans to be made and expenses to be incurred shall not exceed $20,000,000 less loans made under the said act, and to enable the Minister of Finance to guarantee approved lending institutions or local authorities against loss up to certain maximum amounts in respect of small loans in order to encourage the making of such loans in small and remote communities and in certain districts of other communities and to make payments to lending institutions to cover the special costs of making such loans; which in part II thereof authorizes the making of loans at low interest rates to local housing authorities to assist in the construction of houses to be leased to families of low income at rentals less than the economic rentals therefor, such loans not to exceed $30,000,000 in the aggregate; which in part III thereof authorizes the payment to municipalities of a proportion of the municipal taxes levied during a three-year period upon new low-cost houses constructed prior to December 31, 1940, for owners for their own occupation, but excluding houses constructed under part II of the act; and which authorizes the employment and remuneration of technical and clerical staffs and the payment of other expenses in connection with the administration of the act.
He said:	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 agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. J. BARBER (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, based on considerable correspondence, and also on copies of petitions I have received, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King). I have been urged, and I have no doubt other hon. members have been, to support a measure, promised in the speech from the throne, which would set up in Canada a system of unemployment insurance. Will the Prime Minister inform the house whether he is
likely to bring down such a measure during the present session? Perhaps he has a general statement to make in the matter; if so, I believe the country would be pleased to hear it at this time.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, at the moment I am unable to recall the exact words which appear in the speech from the throne. So far as I recollect however they were to the effect that the government hoped to be in a position, through the cooperation of the several provinces, to bring in a national unemployment insurance measure. It has been understood from the outset that in the opinion of the administration a scheme of national unemployment insurance is the one which would be most in the interests alike of the provinces and the dominion. For that reason it has been hoped that the dominion would have the hearty cooperation of the provinces in permitting an amendment to the British North America Act which would give this parliament full jurisdiction with respect to the enactment of unemployment insurance. The hon. member who has just spoken, and no doubt all other hon. members of the house, know that the government has not received from some of the provinces endorsa-tion of the view that this parliament should be given power to enact an unemployment insurance measure. We are still hoping that in this matter the reasons which may be actuating the provinces referred to will be further considered and that ultimately all will see the wisdom of cooperating in a national unemployment insurance measure. However, it is not the intention of this government to seek to coerce the provinces with respect to any legislative measure which is in the nature of a social service measure. Our aim rather is to be helpful and to further if we can mutual interests. We do not want to appear, let alone in reality, to seek in any way to coerce any province of the dominion. It would look at the moment as though it will not be possible to get that cooperation with respect to unemployment insurance before the present session comes to its close, but if it should be obtained the measure will be introduced.
The reference to this matter in the speech from the throne was as follows:
The cooperation of the provinces has been sought with a view to an amendment of the British North America Act, which would empower the parliament of Canada to enact forthwith a national scheme of unemployment insurance. My ministers hope the proposal may meet with early approval, in order that unemployment insurance legislation may be. enacted during the present session of parliament..
51952-226J
Municipal Improvements

I may say we have the measure drafted and as soon as the proposal meets with approval, it will be introduced.



UNEMPLOYMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. G. MacNEIL (Vancouver North):: I should like to inquire of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Rogers) if a satisfactory settlement has yet been reached with respect to the grievances of the single unemployed now occupying the Vancouver post office and the art gallery
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of Labour): My latest information is that the situation has not altered since the matter was last raised in this house.



MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, June 2, *consideration in committee of Bill No. 143, to assist municipalities in making self-liquidating improvements-Mr. Dunning-Mr. Sanderson in the chair.	-
On section 2-Definitions.
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister *of Finance): When this bill was last in committee, sections 2, 9 and 10 were allowed to stand in order to give me an opportunity to consider representations which had been made regarding the desirability of certain amendments. I think all the suggestions made were constructive in character. I have an amendment to suggest to section 2, which I shall ask my colleague to move, as follows:
That paragraph (b) of section 2 of the bill be amended by adding thereto at the end thereof the following words: "and also includes any . board, commission or agency duly authorized to act on behalf of one or more municipalities in the construction and operation of a self-liquidating project."
Mr. CRERAR:: I move accordingly.


Mr. DUNNING:: A number of members thought that it would be desirable to have some wording which would deal with cases where a joint board was acting for one or more municipalities or where a municipality acted through a joint board with respect to a particular utility.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: This amendment would seem to meet every possible condition referred
(M.r. Mackenzie King.]
to by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett). In Ontario we have public utility commissions and I assume that in other provinces there are similar organizations. It is possible that in the operation of certain utilities two or three municipalities may be united. I think it is fortunate that the bill has been broadened to enable these commissions or agents of municipalities to take advantage of its provisions.


Mr. STIRLING:: What would be the procedure in connection with an unorganized district? With whom would the minister, with the approval of the governor in council, enter into an agreement?


Charles Avery Dunning: Of necessity with the
provincial government. There is no other entity in such a case. "Municipality" includes "a province where such province is administering directly territory not organized into county or municipal units." I suppose some provinces may think that we are degrading them by including them in this definition, but there appears to be no other way of dealing with an unorganized territory except through the only authority which has jurisdiction therein. It would mean a great deal to British Columbia particularly, and also to some of the other provinces, if there were not some method of dealing with the unorganized territories.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 6-Aggregate amount of loans.
Charles Avery Dunning: As a necessary consequence of the amendment we have just agreed to, I must ask the reconsideration of section
6.	The population relationships are affected by what we have just decided in relation to these boards. I am going to ask my colleague to move the following amendment:
That subsection 2 of section 6 of the bill be amended by adding thereto at the end thereof the following proviso:
"and provided further that in the case of a loan made to a board, commission or agency acting on behalf of more than one municipality, the aggregate amount of the loans to be made to such board, commission or agency and the municipalities concerned shall not exceed the maximum amount of loans which the municipalities would be entitled to receive if acting separately and shall be apportioned between the board, commission or agency and the municipalities concerned on a basis to be approved by the governor in council."


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I move accordingly.


Charles Avery Dunning: I think the diflfculty
which is sought to be remedied by this amendment will be obvious to all.

Municipal Improvements


Charles Grant MacNeil: What would be the position of a municipality whose affairs are being administered by a provincial commission?


Charles Avery Dunning: Does my hon. friend
mean a municipality at present in default?


Charles Grant MacNeil: Yes.


Charles Avery Dunning: I think the definition
is broad enough. It would still be a municipality within the meaning of the law and would not on that account be debarred from consideration.


Mr. TAYLOR (Nanaimo):: There is just the question whether the amendment covers the case of a municipality wishing a loan for itself while at the same time it is acting jointly with other municipalities under a board receiving a loan. Does the minister get my point?


Charles Avery Dunning: Yes. I sent the amendment back to the law officers this morning to make sure that it would cover that point, and the language does cover it.


James Samuel Taylor: Thank you.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Mr. Chairman, I gather that the purpose of the minister and of the government in introducing this legislation has been to assist in the relief of unemployment. Unemployment is most severe in several of the larger cities, and the bill contains a provision limiting a loan to any one of those municipalities according to the municipality's population in proportion to that of the rest of the dominion. I am inclined to think that in some respects that provision will defeat the purposes of the legislation, because the smaller municipalities that might desire to take advantage of it and come under its provisions have probably no great number of unemployed. For example, in a town of ten or twenty thousand or a city of fifty thousand there may not be many unemployed, but such municipalities come within the scope of this legislation. On the other hand, in Montreal there are probably one to one and a quarter million people in the city and surrounding suburbs; under this provision they would get for all that area possibly only one-tenth of this appropriation. So many of the smaller municipalities will desire or need to take advantage of the legislation that it seems to me a considerable amount of this money will not be employed if you impose this limit upon it. The whole of this money cannot be expended under the plan of thi3 legislation unless every municipality takes advantage of it.


Charles Avery Dunning: I do not think my hon. friend is quite right in his conclusions. In the first place, I think he is wrong as to his premises.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: That would make it all wrong.


Charles Avery Dunning: I think he is wrong in assuming that the smaller municipalities do not have any unemployment problem.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I did not say they would
not have any.


Charles Avery Dunning: Or materially less in proportion than the larger municipalities; and he forgets probably one feature when he refers to the city of Montreal. Under this bill the city of Montreal is one municipality, the city of Verdun is another, the city of Westmount is another, the town of Mount Royal is another, the city of Lachine is another. These, arc all separate municipalities.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Would that alter the proportion they could receive?


Charles Avery Dunning: Oh, yes; because the
smaller municipality would be able to borrow up to the $200,000 limit, although by the population calculation they would not on that basis be entitled to it. Frankly I do expect this amount of money to be utilized if the provinces and the municipalities right across Canada take advantage of it in the manner contemplated. It all depends on them, of course, but judging from requests already coming in from municipalities from one end of Canada to the other for information regarding their ability to take advantage of this scheme, there is no doubt as to the desire of the municipalities for something of this sort to enable them to do work which in very many cases would have been done years ago but for the conditions which have prevailed. I am, in fact, very hopeful of this scheme, given that degree of cooperation which alone can make success possible.


Mr. MARTIN:: We have had an intimation from the press that the Minister of Finance received a delegation from the mayors of Canada, and perhaps he might find opportunity to tell us their reaction to this proposal.


Charles Avery Dunning: The delegation from the mayors who sought an interview with me expressed on behalf of the body they repre-' sent approval of the bill now under discussion:. We had a general discussion about it, and there was no criticism but very evident appreciation of the purpose of the bill.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: In years gone by it was the custom once a year or oftener to call
Municipal Improvements

together the premiers of the provinces and to discuss their problems with them, particularly those relating to unemployment; proposals of this kind would be outlined and submitted for their approval, or sometimes initiated by them. Has this legislation been approved at any such conference with the premiers of the provinces?


Charles Avery Dunning: No.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: When was the last conference of that kind held?


Charles Avery Dunning: I cannot recall the date of the last dominion-provincial conference. I think there was none in 1937. There may have been one early last year, but I am doubtful about that.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 5-Securities for loans.
Charles Avery Dunning: This section was allowed to stand because of the possibility of its requiring amendment consequent upon the change in the interpretation clause, but the words "or other securities" in line 35 fit in with the amendment to the interpretation clause, and therefore no amendment of this section is necessary.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 9-Orders and regulations.
Charles Avery Dunning: The leader of the opposition suggested the desirability of publication in the Canada Gazette of certain of the regulations covered by this section, and I therefore will ask my colleague to move that subsection 2 of section 9 be amended by adding thereto, at the end thereof, the following words:
and all such orders and regulations as are of general application or abstracts thereof shall be published in the Canada Gazette.
The object is a widely diffused knowledge of what is going on under the act.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I move accordingly, Mr. Chairman.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I think it is quite in
keeping with the practice that has been followed under these acts for the relief of unemployment, that the orders in council or summaries thereof should be published shortly after they are passed when the house is not in session, and laid on the table of the house when the house is in session. Perhaps it might be well to add that a copy shall be laid on the table of the house.
	Till


Charles Avery Dunning: That is covered in the next section.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 10-Report to parliament.
Charles Avery Dunning: This section was left
standing because of the suggestion that it would be desirable to have the year made the calendar year instead of the fiscal year. I find that that would be very helpful to the Department of Finance, as in fact it would in connection with other matters requiring reports to parliament, if the year were the calendar year instead of the fiscal year, having regard to the time the house usually meets. I shall ask my colleague to move an amendment:
That section 10 be amended by striking out the word "fiscal" in line 34 on page 3 of the bill and substituting therefor the word "calendar."


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I so move.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Mr. STEW'ART: Was the minister correct when he said that section 10 provided for the regulations being laid on the table? All it provides for is a report. The report would not necessarily cover the regulations.
Charles Avery Dunning: I have never tabled a report yet which did not include the regulations made under it.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The report would be
simply of the operations and number of projects and loans.


Charles Avery Dunning: Loans made under the provisions of the act. A report could not be made which did not include the regulations. That is always the case.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I do not agree with the minister. I think you could make a report as to the operation of the act, leaving the regulations out entirely. The only suggestion I make is to have it read: "report and regulations".


Charles Avery Dunning: All regulations should be tabled here, in a report. If it is desirable I am quite willing to consider an amendment to make that certain. But to my mind a report would be incomplete and would not give parliament a chance to understand the basis of operation unless it included all regulations.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I think I am familiar
with some reports brought down which do not include regulations.


Charles Avery Dunning: Departmental reports.

Indian Act


Hugh Alexander Stewart: However, if the minister will assure the committee that the regulations will come, I do not want to delay the passage of the bill.
Section as amended agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



INDIAN ACT AMENDMENT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, June 3, consideration in committee of Bill No. 138, to amend the Indian Act-Mr. Crerar-Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
On section 1-Leases and licences to prospect for minerals.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: When the bill was before the committee the other day, two amendments were suggested to clause 1. As I recall, the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) suggested that after the words "Superintendent General" in the second line there should be something to indicate that the section related to Indian reserves. In the opinion of the law officers of the crown there is no objection, although their view is that it is not necessary, since the Indian Act relates only to Indian administration. But I suggest an amendment to subsection 2, which will be moved by my colleague the Minister of Public Works:
That section 1 of the bill be amended by adding after the words "Superintendent General" in line 2 the words "in respect of any reserve."
Criticism was made also of the last lines in subsection 2, which read:
... to issue leases upon such terms as may be considered proper in the interests of the Indians and of any lessee or licencee.
I explained at the time the purpose of the last four words. But in order to make it clear that it does not apply to any who may be getting mineral leases I suggest a further amendment to that section:
That the words "and of any lessee and licencee" in line 4 be struck out and the following substituted therefor:	"and of any
other lessee or licencee of surface rights."
This will make clearer the purpose of the inclusion of those words.


Mr. CARDIN:: I so move.


Mr. NEILL:: Would it not be better to say "Indian reserves"? There are a number of
other reserves throughout the country. In the act being repealed the words "Indian reserves" are used.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: "In respect of any reserve"?


Alan Webster Neill: It is not proposed to issue leases on any reserves, but only on Indian reserves. Why not call them Indian reserves?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The section does not deal with anything but Indian reserves, but there is no objection to the inclusion of the word suggested by the hon. member.


Grote Stirling: The clause will now end with the words "in the interests of the Indians and of any other lessee or licencee of surface rights"?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes.


Grote Stirling: What lessee of surface rights could there be other than the lessee referred to here?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There might be a situation under which the surface rights to pulpwood or grazing or hay or something else had already been disposed of. Then subsequently you dispose of another kind of right, the right to prospect or mine. This merely provides that the leases may be issued upon such terms as may be considered proper in the interests of the Indians and of any other lessee or licencee.


Alan Webster Neill: I submit that the word "other" is confusing. "Other" suggests something else from which you are making a distinction. but there is nothing else. The superintendent general is given power to issue leases in connection with minerals, and in my opinion the language, to make the meaning clear, should be "and of any existing lessee or licencee." That is the idea. If a man has the right to take pulpwood or firewood the superintendent general is given the power to make an arrangement that will be in the interests of the Indians, and of these prior holders. That is what it is intended to convey; but when you say "and of any other lessee or licencee" that meaning is not very clear. I submit that the words I have suggested, "and of any existing lessee or licencee," would cover the meaning which the bill intends to convey. As it stands it is rather obscure. "Other" implies two things (a) and (b). We have (b) but we have not (a). What is it to which "other" refers? It does not seem to be very clear. The minister wishes to take power to grant such licences as shall be fair to the Indians and to any existing lessee or licencee. That is what the section means.
Indian Act


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That is the purpose of
it. We explained that purpose to the law officers of the Department of Justice and this is the amendment that has been proposed. I think it is quite clear as it stands. There might be a difference of opinion as to whether the word "existing" should replace the word "other," but I submit the purpose is manifest.


Alan Webster Neill: It is all right with me, but
I submit that it is not clear.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Alan Webster Neill: Did the minister agree to
put in the word "Indian"-"Indian reserve"?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes.	.


Alan Webster Neill: Will the chairman be good
enough to make a note of that?


The CHAIRMAN:: "In respect of any
Indian reserve"; it has been noted.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 2-Advances for assistance to Indians.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The hon. member for
Comox-Alberni the other day suggested the advisability of tabling a report on the transactions carried on under the operation of this revolving fund, and I have an amendment which I will ask the Minister of Public Works to move.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I move:
That section 2 of the hill be amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"The superintendent general shall annually prepare a report with regard to loans made under the provisions of this section during the preceding calendar year, and such report shall be laid before parliament within fifteen days or, if parliament is not then sitting, within fifteen days after the beginning of the next session."


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Alan Webster Neill: The minister did not give consideration to the suggestion made by several members on this side of the house that it would be well if the act included some reference to the payment of interest. It merely provides that money shall be lent but there is nothing to indicate whether interest shall be paid. I am doubtful whether, if you asked a man to pay interest under this act, it would be authorized. You have not taken the power to charge interest, but only to lend money, and no limit is set regarding amount or time. Is it to be a kind of perpetual loan?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The regulations can provide for rates of interest. I am not prepared

at the moment to suggest either a maximum or a minimum rate. It is possible that where there are different types of loans the interest rate might be varied to facilitate the carrying out of the purposes of the bill. There was another method by which we could have attained the end sought, namely, to vote it directly in the estimates year by year, but I explained why we were adopting this departure. It is experimental but I can well conceive that in certain instances it might be desirable to vary the rates of interest charged as between different types of loans. That, I think, might more wisely be left to be set out in the regulations that will govern the operation of the act.


Alan Webster Neill: The minister did not quite catch what I meant. The other day I expressed the view that the rate of interest should be defined; to-day I am only suggesting that it should be made quite clear that some interest must be paid.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not think there is any question about the scope of the regulations as to the charging of interest. My hon. friend, I gather, fears that some of the money might be lent without an interest rate being charged and he wishes to guard against that possibility. I do not think he need be apprehensive on that score. Certainly my conception of the administration of the act is that some interest rate should be charged. In some cases it might be low and in others higher, but that will be for the governor in council to determine in the regulations.


Alan Webster Neill: The last time the bill was under consideration, the minister himself said that he might want to lend certain sums without interest. That, however, is not the point. The point I am trying to make is that, unless it is made clear, some man might be lent a large sum of money and in years to come, when asked for interest, he might reply that the act did not provide for any interest but only for the lending of money. Did the law officers say that it was thoroughly constitutional to pass a bill authorizing the lending of large sums of money and leaving to be defined in the regulations, which are more or less administrative, the fact that interest must be paid? That is the point.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I cannot say at the moment whether the law officers passed an opinion on that precise point, but I do not think there is any question whatever that the regulations can provide for rates of interest.
Section as amended agreed to.
Bill reported.

Transport Commission


Mr. SPEAKER:: When shall the bill be read a third time?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Next sitting of the house.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Can we not get rid of it now?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I think it might be well for the minister to consider that point about interest, and possibly to have the advice of the law officers in that regard.



TRANSPORT COMMISSION


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, June 3, consideration in committee of Bill No. 31, to establish a board of transport commissioners for Canada, with authority in respect of transport by railways, ships and aircraft- Mr. Howe-Mr. Sanderson in the chair.
Sections 13 and 14 agreed to.
On section 15-Application of part.
Alan Webster Neill: I wonder if the minister would explain subsection 2. What is the need for that provision?


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport):: Subsection 2 provides that the governor in council may by regulation exempt any aircraft or class of aircraft from the operation of this part. We have included that provision in each section; that is, in the shipping section and each of the others. It is simply that we are feeling our way, and we may find a situation that cannot be dealt with under the exact terms of the act. That is simply to leave a loophole while we are working out the details of the bill.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Does the minister not think, having regard to the way in which the section is drafted, that it is open to the objection that there may be a chance for discrimination? I understood that the purpose of this act was to bring all these forms of transportation under licence, but here you say any of them may be exempted.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The act provides that only aircraft travelling on regular schedules shall be brought under it, and it may be a little difficult to decide what are and what are not regular schedules. I have no particular objection to striking out that provision, but we do feel that we should not be tied up too tightly, in that we are breaking entirely new ground as far as regulation goes. I cannot imagine that it will be used, particularly as related to air transportation; but I do not
think it is of any particular importance. I should prefer to leave it in, but if anyone else would prefer to have it struck out I would not object particularly.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: If the minister, having given careful consideration to the plan and purpose of the act, thinks this regulation will serve any useful purpose and that it will not give rise to charges of discrimination, I do not think we could have much objection to it.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 16-Licencee subject to tolls.
Grote Stirling: This is giving the minister the same sort of discretion in administration, is it not? Subsection 2 provides that any tolls may be either for the whole or for any particular portion of the route of the licencee. It gives the minister a tremendous power in the application of the act, does it not?


Clarence Decatur Howe: This does not give the minister any power; it gives power to the board. This is exactly the same as section 323 of the Railway Act. I think the section is all right; it is simply a recast of a clause in the Railway Act.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 17-Licencee to file tariff with board.
Clarence Decatur Howe: This part of the act consists of relevant extracts from the Railway Act, I think in every case.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: This section does not in any way change the existing section?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No. We wanted to make this act complete in itself, and we took out the relevant sections of the Railway Act and quoted them exactly.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 18-If licencee a corporation.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: What is the effect of the change there?


Clarence Decatur Howe: A good many corporations appoint the rate-making authority by resolution rather than by by-law, and we simply added the word "resolution."


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I notice that the words "in respect of the transport of goods or passengers" have been deleted. Is it necessary to have those words out?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is covered by the definitions, and in committee it was felt that it was unnecessary to have those words in this section.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Transport Commission
[Stage Direction]
On section 19-Tolls to be as specified in tariff.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Does the part of the act concerning agreed charges apply to this?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The agreed charges section is separate from this, though both are parts of the same act.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Does it apply here?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, I think this applies only to the ordinary tariffs of the board. There are three tariffs in addition to the agreed charges; the standard tariff, the special tariff, and the special competitive tariff. I think this chapter applies particularly to those. The agreed charge is a written contract between two parties, and the provisions concerning the agreed charges are dealt with in the next part of the bill.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: On its face it just looked as though compelling them to adhere to the tariff would be in conflict with the right to make an agreed charge.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The apparent conflict is taken care of in the section dealing with agreed charges.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Notwithstanding anything anywhere.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 20 to 23 inclusive agreed to.
On section 24, subsection 1-Equal application of tolls.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Does this section appear in the same form in the existing Railway Act?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is found in the exact language in subsection 1 of section 314 of the Railway Act.


[Stage Direction]
Subsection agreed to.
Subsection 2 agreed to.
On subsection 3-No discrimination between localities.
Mr. REID:: Does that mean there will be no discrimination with respect to prices between different localities, provided the mileage is the same?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It means that taking everything into account there will be no discrimination in favour of one locality and against another.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It is not as good as it looks.


[Stage Direction]
Subsection agreed to.
Section agreed to.
Sections 25 to 27 inclusive agreed to.
[Mr. Howe.!
On section 28

Onus on licencee re discrimination.
Mrl STEWART:: I assume these clauses are identical with those already in the Railway Act.


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are all exactly the same. Every clause here is in the Railway Act.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It would have been helpful if that had been stated on the opposite page.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I made the explanation a
few moments ago.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 29 to 34 inclusive agreed to.
On section 35-Agreed charges; charges by agreement between parties.
Grote Stirling: When the bill first
appeared I believe there was a considerable volume of opposition to agreed charges. I am not in a position to gauge the extent of the objections which reached the minister, nor have I had the opportunity of following in detail the proceedings before the committee. Would the minister give a short statement with regard to the principle of agreed charges, and deal particularly with what seemed to be an indication that people who disagreed with the agreed charges were of the opinion that the charges, would be secret and that information as to details of arrangements would not be available.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The principle of agreed
charges is that the railways shall have the power, under conditions including wide publicity, to make a contract with a shipper to carry all or part of his goods at a special rate to be agreed upon. The conditions are these. If the railway and the shipper reach an agreement, such agreement is submitted for approval to the board of transport commissioners. That body in turn under the provisions of the bill must publish in the Canada Gazette a synopsis of the proposed agreement and give it as wide publicity as they would give the setting of a new rate. In other words they notify every important trade body and all important associations of shippers, boards of trade, chambers of commerce and municipalities affected by the charge. They give to the agreement what they have found by experience to be the widest possible publicity. Thirty days later a hearing is held at which any shipper or body of shippers or carrier under the act may appear before the board and make objection to the agreement, urging that it may be dis-

Transport Commission
criminatory in some way or would unduly injure the business of some shipper or carrier. When the agreement is made it must be made immediately available to any firm operating under substantially similar conditions. That is, if another firm is willing to agree to substantially the same provisions as to all or part of its freight, it is entitled to the same agreement. There is a provision that the rate shall be the same for one as for more than one carload. Other provisions, which will appear as we study the bill, stipulate that these agreements shall not be used to favour the large shipper as against the small shipper. The provisions are somewhat narrower than those of the British bill because rates must be quoted in cents per pound. The British bill permits a somewhat wider latitude in the making of agreed rates. In some cases the rate is a percentage of the gross value of shipments, but in this part the rate is restricted to a rate in cents per pound. A provision is also included that the agreed charges made by one railway are open to the other railways.


Grote Stirling: Is that obligatory?


Clarence Decatur Howe: One railway cannot make an agreed charge to exclude the other. I think these are the main features.


Grote Stirling: The minister referred to publicity in connection with the proposed agreement. Then a hearing is held thirty days later. What publicity is given to the accomplished fact?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Subsection 10 reads:
All agreed charges shall, when approved, be published in the manner provided by section three hundred and thirty-one of the Railway
Act.


Grote Stirling: Is that in the Canada Gazette?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Section 331 reads:
When any such special freight tariff reduces any toll previously authorized to be charged under this act, the company shall file such tariff with the board at least three days before its effective date, and shall, for three days previous to the date on which such tariff is intended to take effect, deposit and keep on file in a convenient place, open for the inspection of the public during office hours, a copy of such tariff, at every station or office of the company where freight is received, or to which freight is to be carried thereunder, and also post up in a prominent place, at each such office or station, a notice in large type directing public attention to the place in such office or station 'where such tariff is so kept on file: Provided that the board may by regulation or otherwise determine and prescribe any other or additional method of publication of such tariff during the period aforesaid.


Grote Stirling: After the hearing I assume that the board would give a decision, whether or not it acquiesced in the proposed schedule of rates. After that, I take it that that schedule would be published at the stations by the direction of the board?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is correct.


Grote Stirling: Every one interested
would have the opportunity of ascertaining those agreed charges?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Quite.


Grote Stirling: Does the minister anticipate any difficulty through interested parties on the Pacific coast having to come to Ottawa to make representations before the board, or is it expected that such parties will be represented by agents?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The chairman and officers
of the board explained the procedure to the committee. All that is required to start an investigation is a postcard addressed to the board. No one appears before the board in about eighty per cent of the cases. The majority of cases are started simply by a written statement. I believe the members of the board convinced the committee that there would be no difficulty in this connection.


Harry James Barber: One point which came
up in the committee was that those engaged in highway transport would not be able to appear before the board, because they do not come under this bill.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is correct. Those
engaged in highway transport have all the privileges granted to shippers under this legislation, with the additional privilege that their rates receive no publicity whatever. They are allowed to and they do make contracts every day with the greatest secrecy. As the regulated transportation companies have no right to interfere in the agreements made by the highway transport companies, it was felt that the highway transport companies should not be allowed to interfere with the regulated companies in the making of rates.


Harry James Barber: It was made quite clear
that highway transport, particularly in Ontario, was being organized at the present time and that they intended to issue a tariff in the near future, if they have not done so already. That tariff would apply throughout the country. I believe it appeared to a number of the members of the committee that it was unfair that the highway transport people should not have the opportunity of appearing before this board of transport. Evidence before the committee, with the exception of
Transport Commission

that of the railways and one steamship company, was generally opposed to part Y of the bill. The feeling was that it was unjust and discriminatory to a certain extent.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The opposition came principally from those who are not subject to the provisions of this bill. The main opposition came from the motor transport and the bulk water carrier interests. These interests are left free to act in any way they like, and my personal opinion is that it is rather impudent that they, having the freedom of action they have, should insist upon taking a part in the regulation of the regulated carriers.


Harry James Barber: I understand a number
of the smaller shipping companies on the great lakes objected to this part.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Only the bulk carriers.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Did not the Canadian
Manufacturers' Association object?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, they filed an objection.


Alan Webster Neill: The minister seems quite
clear in his mind that this legislation will work out reasonably and without undue delay. However, the procedure seems to be somewhat lengthy. The bill has been before a committee upon which was represented all the parties and we can only hope that it will work out as the minister suggests it will. There is one phase of this bill which I have not yet heard explained. Sometimes an argument can be made to better advantage when a concrete case is given rather than by theorizing. I should like to outline a situation that exists on the coast. There is competition, rather onesided I should think, between the shipping and rail companies in connection with the shipment of lumber from British Columbia. It is apparent that this competition must be very onesided, because it is much cheaper to ship lumber by water through the Panama canal than by rail. It has been suggested that the shipments by water are comparatively trivial, but I do not think that is the fact. A service of one and a half, so to speak, or two boats a month is maintained. The company do not necessarily own all these boats, but they charter the necessary boats to maintain their schedule. They have captured trade for our lumber people in British Columbia which would be utterly lost if they had to depend on the railways. Here is the picture that is presented, and if the minister can satisfy the people for whom I am speaking I shall be very glad. The railway board has authority to make cut-throat rates over a given period, and evidently that is the intention. Well, they make those cut-throat 
rates, and after they have been in force for six months or a year the shipping companies will be driven out of business, not being able to meet those rates. The net result will be that the lumber shipper in British Columbia, when the boat companies have been put out of business, will have no recourse except to use the railways, and it will be impossible to use the railways because of the necessarily high rates. We have a substantial market on the Atlantic coast, both in Canada and in the United States, which we may be in danger of losing under this legislation, and it will not benefit the railways either because once they have driven the shipping companies out of business and then have raised their own rates again, our lumber people will not be able to use the railways, and in that way we will be deprived of a very useful market, although perhaps not a very big one. If the minister will explain how that danger is to be obviated I shall be very much interested in his explanation.


Mr. COCHRANE:: How much lumber does British Columbia ship by rail?


Alan Webster Neill: Perhaps not very much unless they ship it to the prairies, which it is impossible to reach by boat. They cannot ship by rail to the east because of the high rates, and that is the danger I am pointing out.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Where are your markets for shipments by rail?


Alan Webster Neill: The only rail market available to us now is the prairies. The danger is that the railways will take this eastern business away from the shipping people by means of cut-throat rates, and then having put the shipping companies out of business, they will raise railway rates again and we will lose our Atlantic seaboard market which we have in Canada and the United States.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: By water?


Alan Webster Neill: Yes, by water, and we want to maintain that market by water. We do not want water competition put out of business by a temporary cut-throat rate from the railways.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: British Columbia products are practically all shipped by water.


Mr. HOWARD:: Not entirely.


Alan Webster Neill: Not entirely.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: British Columbia lumber is shipped to St. John by water. I know something about it. How much lumber do you sell in the maritimes that is shipped by rail?

Transport Commission


Alan Webster Neill: I should not imagine we
should ship any by rail to Saint John and we never will either. But if the railway companies are allowed by cut-throat rates to put water competition out of business, we shall be out not only rail traffic but the boat traffic which we now have and do not want to lose.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have had some experience in buying British Columbia lumber for use at eastern points, and the position is this, that if the lumber is needed for quick delivery it is forwarded by rail; if the buyer can wait two or three months for delivery, it is shipped by boat. There is a considerable difference in the rates, but I think at least fifty per cent of the lumber that goes into construction work in the east is shipped by rail. It is a matter of urgency. Ordinarily timber for heavy construction is cut to dimensions and forwarded for a certain work. I know in my own experience that in two cases out of three at least, we do not want to wait for delivery and so have shipments forwarded by rail-timber sheet piling, for instance. The rail rate is substantially higher, unquestionably, than shipment by vessel through the Panama canal.
But the position, Mr. Chairman, is this, that no one can be forced to make an agreed charge. An agreed charge is a voluntary affair, and if it is made it will be made because it is advantageous to the shipper as well as to the carrier. The lumber trade of British Columbia is very highly organized, particularly as to marketing, and I cannot believe that the lumber trade of British Columbia would make an agreed charge that would have the effect my hon. friend suggests. They would look far enough ahead to see that that might happen, and would get along without the agreed charge. However, I do not think the agreed charge is intended to operate in connection with a large commodity like lumber. I do not think any carrier would try to get all the lumber business of British Columbia by an agreed charge. I doubt if that is a case in point, and so far as the agreed charge is concerned I believe the effect on the lumber industry of British Columbia will be nil.


Mr. HOWDEN:: I was a member of
the committee which considered the bill, and if I know anything about the bill at all it gives control to the board of transport commissioners. There is also a clause in the bill which definitely provides that railway companies in making agreed charges shall have due regard to the actual cost of moving freight. If the bill means anything, it will
be the function of the board of transport commissioners to see that the railways do not make agreements at rates that will be less than the actual cost of handling freight, and if the terms of the bill are carried out in that respect there is no chance in the world of the railways veiy seriously undercutting the boat companies.


Mr. GREEN:: Our worry is that the
shipping line or lines between British Columbia and eastern Canada will be put out of business. The great danger, as I see it, is that agreed charges may be made in the east on goods shipped from the east to British Columbia, making it temporarily cheaper to ship by rail than by water through the Panama canal, with the result that the shipping line would be put out of business. I believe that at present wre bring quite a lot of merchandise to British Columbia from eastern Canada by water cheaper than it can be brought in by rail, and the fact that there is that water competition has kept down railway rates on other goods that are not brought in by the ships at all. It is to preserve that situation that we are so anxious. Can the minister give us any assurance that agreed charges cannot be used to wipe out the business which at the present time is being carried by ship from eastern Canada through the Panama canal to the Pacific coast?


Mr. VIEN:: Does my hon. friend refer to liners or tramps? Tramps will always be available.


Howard Charles Green: There are no tramps. We have one line at the present time running a regular service from Montreal to the Pacific coast and back.


Thomas Vien: Which is it?


Howard Charles Green: I forget the name, but their office is in Montreal, and they have materially helped in keeping down freight rates on commodities going from eastern Canada not only to the Pacific coast, but from there into Alberta.


Thomas Vien: My hon. friend's remarks would apply only to liners, because, except under abnormal conditions, there will always be a plentiful supply of tramps.


Howard Charles Green: There are no passenger liners between Vancouver and the east. There are freight liners.


James Samuel Taylor: This is a
freight line with definite sailings.


Thomas Vien: Yes, that is what I was referring to-freight liners as distinguished from tramps.
Transport Commission


Thomas Reid: I do not think the last speaker was correct when he said there will be plenty of tramp steamers available. My impression is that the tramp steamer will have to go to the board of transport for a licence and will have to show that that service is required; and my fear is that they will not be able to procure a licence, and it will mean that the steamship line now in operation between Montreal and Vancouver will be the only one granted a licence. Any shipper wanting to ship by tramp steamer will have to advise that line to go to the .board of transport commissioners for a licence and must prove that there is not adequate transportation service either present or future.
Regarding the remarks of the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Howden) I shall be delighted if the board of transport commissioners can find out exactly the cost of hauling freight. It is something I have been trying to get for a long time. I can tell him that the chief counsel of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company stated on oath that there is no one in the Canadian Pacific or the Canadian National or on this continent or any other who can tell exactly what it costs to haul goods by rail. How they will be able to compare the cost of hauling by rail with that of carriage by ships and by air I cannot understand.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I feel that I can speak on this subject because I was born and brought up in the shipping business. I have brought many cargoes of Douglas fir from British Columbia and I can tell hon. members that Douglas fir is being shipped from Vancouver to Saint John to-day by water at $7 per thousand feet. The railways have no chance to compete with that; they cannot meet that price. It is all a matter of competition. How much lumber is shipped to eastern Canada from British Columbia by railway? I have seen cargo after cargo of Douglas fir from British Columbia at $7 per thousand delivered in Saint John, by way of steamers carrying 5,000,000 superficial feet.


Thomas Reid: That is not what we are afraid of. Our fear is that there will be a wall placed around us so that no steamship companies can get in. That freight of which my friend speaks is business which would not be obtained by merchants in British Columbia but for the fact that the steamships are carrying it, because the railroad rate is roughly S27 per thousand feet. He is correct in saying that the railways will never be able to compete with the steamship lines, but tramp steamers and other steamers operating via the Panama canal are able at times to carry that business partly

because they have freight for United States Atlantic seaboard cities as well as Canadian cities. Having a full cargo made up in that way enables them to carry the business, but they will not be able to do so in the future if they are prevented from obtaining licences.


James Samuel Taylor: It is well to bear in mind that the carrying of lumber from British Columbia to the Atlantic is only one side of the question; the other is the obtaining of return cargoes. A freight line must be sure it is going to get a return cargo. When this service was first established between Vancouver and the Atlantic ports the draft of the vessels, and the width likewise, was governed by the depth of the Laehine canal. I do not know what governs now, but four years ago that was very definite-the draft had to be not over seventeen feet, I think.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Fourteen feet.


James Samuel Taylor: Yes, I was not sure. They carry back from lake ports furniture, canned goods and similar freight. So both sides of the question have to be considered.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Once again I may say that the railways are in no different position from the boat lines. Any agreed charges the railways can make the boat lines can make. I cannot believe that one will seriously affect the other. Neither can afford to cut rates to an unprofitable level. I look for no wild rate cutting. In England this practice has developed slowly, it is now in I think, its fourth year. In the first year there were about thirty-three agreed charges made, and now I believe there are about two thousand outstanding. Careful investigation there shows that the carriers believe it has been helpful and the shippers believe it is helpful. Here I believe the history will be much the same; the agreed charges will be entered upon very cautiously and develop slowly, there will be no great rush to make agreed charges. I think there will be only a few at the start. But I can see no serious damage to any part of the shipping industry or to the carrying industry arising from agreed charges, considering all the safeguards thrown about the making of them in this bill.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister assure us
it is not the intention to give the railways power to put this shipping line out of business by means of agreed charges?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, there are special provisions made against that sort of thing; there is a special section which deals with that. It cannot be used to put a competitor out of business.

Transport Commission


Howard Charles Green: It is not the intention that
the railways shall have these agreed charges to use as a club over the shipping lines?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The shipping lines have the
agreed charges just as have the railways. The only thing is that up to now the railways have been told to stand on a certain level, while all other carriers-motor trucks, ships-can go as much under that level as they like. The difference is that now the railways will not have to stand on that level.


Howard Charles Green: But the shipping is regulated also.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The shipping can make agreed charges also.


Alan Webster Neill: The minister says people
are not likely to cut prices below normal. But that is a common everyday thing. I will not advertise the firm by giving the name, but a firm came into a town with which I am familiar, went to the established dealer in their line, and said: We will give you so much for your business. The men demurred as to the amount. Well, he was told, we will come in and establish a branch and will put you out of business. It may cost us $2,000 or $10,000, but we will do it, because that is our established policy when we make up our minds to take possession of a certain town with our line; we do it regardless of the cost, and we do it with a certain amount of warning to other people not to be caught in the same way. The minister says that the lumber people in British Columbia who are well organized will not be so ill-advised as to patronize railway cut rates to the extent of putting the boat line out of business. That is probably true because they are closely knit and well organized. But as the hon. members for Nanaimo (Mr. Taylor) and Vancouver South (Mr. Green) have said, that line of boats cannot exist without return cargoes, and the return cargo consists of manufactured or package goods from the east.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Anything they can get.


Alan Webster Neill: Yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: In other words they pick
over all the high grade freight from eastern Canada to get one boat load every six weeks.


Alan Webster Neill: The eastern manufacturer does not know about this theory of the boat being put out of business, and would be quite indifferent to it anyway. The average person buys in the cheapest market, and if he is confronted with a lower rate on the railway he will take the lower one. He is not going to listen to this yarn, as he will call it, that if you do not deal with us we will
be put out of business. The result will be the imminent danger of that happening of which I spoke at first, that, perhaps deliberately, the price will be cut in order to put the boat out of business and then the higher railway rates will be restored. If it were only a question of people paying the higher rates, that would not matter so much perhaps from the point of view of the British Columbia producer, but it would mean to him that he would lose his market, because his market for a certain class of lumber in the Atlantic coast cities of the Unted States and Canada is dependent on his being able to ship by water at a low rate. The cargo is made up of goods partly in the United States and partly in Canada-partly one thing and partly another. It has not been satisfactorily explained to me, although I quite agree with the general principles of the bill and have supported the minister. I do see that danger, however, and the only hope that can be entertained is that it will not be effective in that regard, that is to say, that there will not be agreed charges on lumber. That is what the section is for, to allow a thing of that kind, and not to see that the board will prevent the railways from quoting a low price. But I see no provision that would prevent them from doing that; and as the hon. member for New Westminster has pointed out, what the exact cost of a certain freight is the railway companies themselves cannot say.


Clarence Decatur Howe: As regards putting the boat line out of business or preventing freight from going west, this boat line goes all the way from the maritimes up the Bt. Lawrence and the great lakes as far as Hamilton and it takes whatever goods are offered at the most profitable freight that can be got. Unless all business in Canada were covered by agreed charges, how would it be possible to stop that boat from getting a return cargo, considering all the commodities that move from one coast to the other, without time being a great factor?


Alan Webster Neill: The answer is that the elimination of the lumber traffic from British Columbia might make such a difference that they could not afford to operate profitably.


Clarence Decatur Howe: But surely the lumber traffic of British Columbia would be the one business that agreed charges could never touch. In the first place it is too voluminous a traffic to trifle with; in other words, if any carrier made an agreed charge to handle all the lumber traffic at an unprofitable rate, or a
Transport Commission

rate that would take business away from the ships, that carrier would be bankrupt within twelve months.


Harry James Barber: A representative of the
Canadian industrial traffic league appeared before the committee and made clear the reasons for objections to the regulations of the intercoastal water movement between Canadian Atlantic and Canadian Pacific ports. The reasons given were as follows:
1.	This service is different from other water services in that it is in direct competition with world-wide all water services, some of which are unregulated, and the Canadian intercoastal service would, therefore, be placed at a very great disadvantage if regulation of rate matters is insisted upon.
2.	This intercoastal service is designed to transport goods between Atlantic and Pacific ports to enable shippers to lay their merchandise down in competition with these world-wide water services.
3.	This world-wide competition means the movement of goods from the highly industrialized countries of Europe, the United Kingdom and the United States, whether produced at low wage rates due to low living costs or by means of mass production. It thus affords the keenest competition and this intercoastal service is designed to meet this situation due to its lower operating costs.
4.	This competition being very keen, decision has very often to be made and contracts entered into at one or two hours' notice, and cannot wait for the involved procedure necessary and required if the intercoastal rate matters are to be regulated. It, therefore, requires the most simple procedure within which it may operate and enable it to obtain the benefits of its inherent advantages.
Those reasons applying to that service are clear and require very serious consideration on the part of the board.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I might point out that my hon. friend is now discussing a part of the bill which was passed last Friday.


Harry James Barber: This is in regard to rates; it covers agreed rates.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Those extracts relate to part II rather than part V.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Assuming that the agreed charge is filed and approved by the board and then it is desired by the organization that has entered into the agreement to have the charge increased; what is to be done?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not quite get the question-increase what?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The charge. Suppose
one carrier comes in and files an agreed charge-


Mr.   HOAVE@: An agreed charge is a contract.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: -and comes back in six months with a request to have that charge increased?


Clarence Decatur Howe: An agreed charge is a contract between the carrier and the shipper for a certain definite period and at certain definite rates, and it is binding, like any other contract in law.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It is only a contract.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It is binding for the term of the contract and the board has no authority to terminate it or grant relief from it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It can be reviewed after one year on the application of either party.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: If the contract is for
five years, do I understand the minister to say that one of the parties may appear before the board and say, "Notwithstanding that we have a contract for five years we want it reviewed, we want a revision of it. It is true that we have not agreed upon any alteration in these charges, but we want you to review it."


Clarence Decatur Howe: I would refer the hon. member to subsection 9 of section 35, page 13:
AVhere the board has approved an agreed charge without restriction of time:
(a)	any shipper who considers that his business has been unjustly discriminated against as a result of the making ot the agreed charge,
(b)	any representative body of shippers, and
(c)	any carrier,
may, at any time after the expiration of one year from the date of the approval, apply to the board for the withdrawal of its approval of the agreed charge, and, upon any such application, the board may withdraw, or refuse to withdraw, its approval, or may continue its approval subject to such modifications being made in the charge as it thinks proper and as the carrier and the shipper to whose goods the charge is applicable are prepared to agree to:
I think that gives any party, even the party to the contract, the privilege of appearing before the board after one year to have the charge re-examined.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: That is a case where there is a charge agreed upon without limit as to the time for its operation. They just say, "We have agreed upon such a charge", and that is good for the year; and after the year it can be varied.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: That is the effect of it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If two parties make a contract for a definite period no one can interfere with it, but it is always open to an

Transport Commission
outside party to object to the agreed charge on the ground that it discriminates against his own business.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I was a member of the committee that considered this bill and unfortunately, owing to the meeting of two or three other committees at the same time, I was unable to attend its sittings regularly. I do know, however, that there was a good deal of opposition to this part of the bill, and I am going to suggest to the minister that, as the leader of the opposition desires to make some observations upon it, he allow this part to stand, or at least some section of it, in order that an opportunity may be presented of discussing the matter from the standpoint of the objections that have been raised. I am not in a position to enter into that discussion to-day. As regards the part dealing with harbour tolls, there are one or two members who have some objections to raise, but they are not here to-day. Possibly the minister would make as much progress if he would allow these parts to stand and take them up again.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I should like to pass as many clauses as possible to-day in order to get the bill over to the other chamber; at least we have been requested to get it over there as soon as possible, in order that that chamber may have the necessary time to examine it. I think the leader of the opposition knew that this bill was coming up to-day and made no objection to its being considered. Would it satisfy my hon. friend if we left one subsection open?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: As long as it is left open with that understanding. I am not sure that there will be any amendments suggested, and I have no objection to passing upon these sections, with such suggestions as we may wish to make, leaving one section open upon which a general discussion of this part may take place. That would be quite satisfactory. I should think the first subsection would be the one to leave open, because that launches the whole proposition.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Then I would ask that subsection 1 of section 35 be allowed to stand.
Subsection stands.
Subsections 2 and 3 agreed to.
On section 35, subsection 4

Board approval of agreed charge.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I notice that this is retroactive in its operation; it says:
-from which it shall be deemed to have become operative, shall be such date, not being 51952-227
earlier than the date on which application for approval was lodged, as may be fixed by the board.
Is the effect of that to make the rate retroactive to the date of the application, though it may not be approved until some considerable time later?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It appears to give the board power to make the charge retroactive, though I cannot understand the purpose of it. I am told that this is taken from the English act, but I do not think there is any particular purpose in it. That is undoubtedly what the wording says.


Grote Stirling: Is this the subsection under which the approval of the board is established as necessary? I see it says:
The board may approve an agreed charge either for such period as it thinks fit or without restriction of time-


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is only as to time. The following subsections cover the method of dealing with the application. Perhaps this subsection might be allowed to stand until I can examine the retroactive feature of it, which I think might be taken out. Frankly I had not noticed it.
Subsection stands.
Subsection 5, paragraphs (a) and (b), agreed to.
On section 35, subsection 5, paragraph (c):


Alan Webster Neill: Is there any definition of a carrier?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; it is found in the definition section:
(d)	"carrier" means any person engaged in the transport of goods or passengers for hire or reward to whom this act applies, and shall include any company which is subject to the Railway Act.


Alan Webster Neill: Would that cover truck
companies?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, a truck company is not a carrier under this act.


[Stage Direction]
Paragraph agreed to.
Subsection agreed to.
Subsections 6, 7 and 8 agreed to.
On section 35, subsection 9-Application for withdrawal of agreed charge-approval after one year.
Paragraphs (a) and (b) agreed to.
On section 35, subsection 9, paragraph (c):
Alan Webster Neill: What about a case where the board has approved an agreed charge with a time restriction? Is there any procedure for reviewing the decision of the board?

Transport Commission


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think not. I think a contract made for a fixed time must stand during that fixed time. But I take it that after one year the board will consider a protest from a third party as to the injurious effect of that agreed charge on the business of that third party, and if a third party is injuriously affected that agreed charge may be modified. But I think undoubtedly as between the two parties to the agreement, an agreed charge for a fixed period of time must stand.


Alan Webster Neill: Is there provision in the
bill for a third party to come in after the expiration of a year, where the approval of the agreed charge is restricted as to time? It appears to be only where it is without a time restriction. Is there provision somewhere for a case in which there is a restriction of time, for a third party to come in? I cannot find it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think it may be found in
subsection 6. My officers advise me that if an agreed charge is made for a fixed time, no one can interfere with it; of course anyone can get the same agreement, but it cannot be interfered with. It is a definite contract between a carrier and shipper for a fixed time.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: And third parties cannot interfere with it in that regard; they can be heard only in the beginning, and then during the lifetime of the contract third parties are bound by it in the same measure that the parties who contract for an agreed charge are bound.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Grote Stirling: But publicity was given
to it at the time, and those interested had an opportunity to appear?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Quite.


[Stage Direction]
Paragraph agreed to.
Subsection agreed to.
On section 35, subsection 10-Publication.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: What are the provisions
for publication?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I read them a short time
ago. I can read them again if it is desired.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Not if they have been
read already.


Clarence Decatur Howe: They will appear in Hansard.


[Stage Direction]
Subsection agreed to.
Subsections 11, 12 and 13 agreed to.
Section 35, stands.

On section 36-If agreed charge causes an unfair advantage.
Clarence Decatur Howe: This is a general provision put in as a protection. It includes agreed charges for a definite period, and everything else. The section gives the minister power to act if he receives a serious complaint to the effect that an agreed charge is working unfairly either by way of putting a competing carrier out of business or by bringing about serious discrimination. The minister may send the case to the board for trial, and if it sees fit the board may in such case vary or terminate an agreed charge, even though it is for a definite period. There is a similar section in the British act, and it was included in our bill as a general safeguard to take care of unusual situations.


Alan Webster Neill: The idea is an excellent one, but should we not include the phrase, "notwithstanding anything else contained in this act"? I believe otherwise it will be contradictory to section 9.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No; I think if the hon. member will read the section carefully he will find it has other provisions. Where for some reason of national importance a minister may refer an agreed charge to the board, the board may vary the terms or terminate the charge.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It would be upon complaint of a representative body of carriers?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Not by an individual, a company or an organization?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is proper, in that there must be a complaint serious enough to have the support of a representative body of carriers.


Grote Stirling: It can come from only one side of the contract?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is correct. The carrier is bound by the charge. It must be something that has some effect upon the public.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 37-Rights preserved.
Thomas Reid: I wonder if this section is properly worded, because chapter 5 of the statutes of 1897 contains the whole of the old Crowsnest pass agreement, which provides special rates, and subsidies for lines. Then we come to the Revised Statutes of 1927, and we find by subsection 5 of section 325 of chapter 170 a definite clause relating to the Crowsnest pass rates, a clause which is entirely different from chapter 5 of the statutes of 1897.

Transport Commission
I am suggesting there is something wrong, and if it is the intention under the bill to insert the provisions of the Crowsnest pass rates I suggest that subsection 5 of section 325 of chapter 170 should be inserted. The sections are entirely different; I would draw attention particularly to that portion of section 325 which states:
Provided that, notwithstanding anything in this subsection contained, rates on grain and flour shall on and from the 27th day of June, 1925, be governed by the provisions of the agreement made pursuant to chapter 5 of the statutes of Canada 1897.
And here is the addition:
But such rates shall apply to all such traffic moving from all points on all lines of railway west of Fort William to Fort William or Port Arthur over all lines now or hereafter constructed by any company subject to the jurisdiction of parliament.
I am of the opinion that that is the section which should be inserted, rather than the one now indicated in the bill.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I would suggest that the section stand, so that I might call the matter to the attention of the law officers of the crown.
Section stands.
Section 38 agreed to.
On section 39, subsection 1-Harbour tolls.


Thomas Reid: Has the minister given careful consideration to the subject of harbour tolls? In connection with the shipment of goods from the Pacific to the Atlantic, has he given consideration in this part of the bill to the Panama canal tolls?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am afraid they are outside our jurisdiction.


Thomas Reid: I suggest the section could say, "harbour or any other tolls," and be much clearer.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Probably I should make a statement with respect to harbour tolls. I know that some will say that they should be automatic. We have provided, however, that there shall be a court to assist the minister. To-day the minister is responsible for harbour tolls in all public harbours. He deals with some himself and in other cases he makes recommendations to the governor in council. It is not proposed to transfer the minister's responsibility to a board. In other words, we are not setting up a board to fix harbour tolls, nor do we propose to do so. If any one wishes to go farther than is contemplated in this section, we would have no alternative but to withdraw it. We are not proposing to turn over to the board the fixing of harbour tolls, but it is desired to give the minister 51952-227J
authority to refer a dispute to the board of transport commissioners for purposes of investigation.
We would like to have a board to consider all the facts and to make a report to the minister, for action by him. If there is any suggestion that we should go farther, then I must repeat that the only alternative is to withdraw this part of the bill. This is as far as we can go.


Thomas Reid: It was that I had in mind, and I can visualize such matters coming before the new board of transport, and the argument being advanced by shippers that there are tolls on goods going through the Panama canal. The board of transport commissioners might say that there is nothing in any act about tolls on the Panama canal, but that they are simply general tolls, and that the board could not give consideration to such a matter. Personally I think we should go farther.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think the hon. member has intermingled two suggestions. He means that when we are considering passage through the Panama canal, the Panama canal tolls should be considered.


Thomas Reid: Yes.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That would undoubtedly be the case, because in considering a rate any charges affecting the voyage would be material. The part of the bill on harbour tolls has to do with tolls in public harbours, and provides for a court of review to which the minister may submit disputes.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I do not wish to delay passage of the bill, but I believe I should point out that possibly there is no part of the dominion which would be more affected by the bill than that from which I come. Most of the people in my constituency are seafaring people who are familiar with the subject matter of the bill. I intend to support it, although possibly last year the minister may have felt I was not giving all the support I could have given. I must make it clear, however, that I am supporting the bill in its present form. After all, in my view the responsibility in this matter must fall on the government. Let us try out this measure, and if it does not prove satisfactory we may discuss it further at a later date. Certainly, in my opinion it is a move in the right direction.


[Stage Direction]
Subsection agreed to.
Subsection 2 agreed to.
Section 39 agreed to.
Sections 40 and 41 agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Unemployed Men in Vancouver
Clarence Decatur Howe: I should like to revert to section 2 to correct an omission in the printing. I shall ask my colleague to move that section 2, subsection 1, paragraph (e) be amended by inserting the words "sand, stone and gravel" at the end thereof.


Charles Avery Dunning: I move accordingly.
Amendment agreed, to.
Section 2 as amended agreed to.
Progress reported.
r - -	SUPPLY
UNEMPLOYMENT-CONCENTRATION	OF SINGLE
UNEMPLOYED MEN IN VANCOUVER-* STATEMENT OF MR. MOCINNIS
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.


Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair, I should like to say a few words in reference to a matter which has been drawn to the attention of this house on a number of occasions during the past few weeks. I refer to a situation which has existed in Vancouver since the end of April and which became acute during the latter part of May. A number of single unemployed men took possession of certain buildings in that city, including the post office and the art gallery, and after eighteen days these men are still in possession of those buildings. I have tried, along with other hon. members, to impress upon the government the fact that if this situation is not remedied serious trouble will result. We believe that something could have been done to prevent this situation from arising, and we believe that something should be done immediately to try to arrive at a settlement of the problem before trouble occurs. These men are being provided with food which indicates to me that in a large measure they have the sympathy of the people of Vancouver. Being confined in such cramped quarters, these men undoubtedly will become irritable and trouble is likely to be the result. Conditions in British Columbia and Vancouver are not as good to-day as they were even a year ago. I have before me a letter from the mayor of Vancouver under date of May 31, from which I should like to read briefly in order to show just what is the unemployment situation in that city. He said.
The employment situation in the city of Vancouver is not quite as good as it was last year at this time. We have not had the usual

spring pick-up of work. The logging camps are not working at the same capacity they were last year and the pulp and paper mills have curtailed their output very materially causing reduction in their working time, in some instances close to half time.
As you are aware we had the usual drift to the coast last fall of quite a group of men from other parts of Canada who were taken care of by the provincial and dominion governments through the forestry camps and following their usual custom they have closed them for the summer. Usually a great many of those in the camps left the province to return to the northwest for spring work while the remainder generally succeeded in getting something to do in the province on the road work which the provincial government generally inaugurated.
Unfortunately nothing has been done along that line this year as the premier seems to have been unable to make any arrangements for a loan from the dominion as in former years.
And further:
The unfortunate part to those purely British Columbia men is, pending cleaning up of the situation with the men on the sit-down strike, nothing can be done for the former which makes the situation here still more difficult for the municipal authorities. I cannot see for the life of me why the dominion government, realizing that this situation develops every spring, does not tackle it in an independent manner and establish a program of public works to take up the slack which private enterprise and industry do not seem able to absorb. Surely by this time after all of the representations w'hich have been made to them they should realize that this is more or less of a permanent problem and should be dealt with as such, in place of having this turmoil each spring and fall.
I think the mayor puts very clearly the reason why the men have at the present time the support of a great majority of the people of Vancouver. There is no opportunity of employment for these men. They are all employable unemployed under the age of fifty-five and are at the present time refused relief in that city.
I wish to say again, as I said a week ago, that if trouble develops in Vancouver the responsibility must be laid on the doorstep of this government. The circumstances are deplorable and are not at all in line with what was promised by this government in the compaign preceding the last general election. The present Prime Minister, speaking in Vancouver on July 31, 1935, promised:
Immediate abolition of the relief camps, and handling of the unemployment problem on a national basis, utilizing in adequately paid work of social value to the nation, those now unemployed.
These men now unemployed in Vancouver want that pledge of the Prime Minister carried out, and I feel satisfied that they would not be very insistent or particular as to the conditions under which they would work, but

Unemployed, Men in Vancouver
they do want some kind of employment that will give them a livelihood. At the present time they have not that employment, and there is no prospect of their getting it.
On the same date, and during the same speaking engagement, the present Prime Minister said:
You have had one experience of being deceived by promises at a general election. Are you prepared to risk another? You have seen how long a period of time five years is-what opportunity it affords a ministry, if the ministry be so inclined, altogether to ignore, and even to defy, your clearly expressed will, and your most evident wishes.
I submit that the position of the present government in the situation in Vancouver is expressed very well in the words of the present Prime Minister when speaking in Vancouver on July 31, 1935. He continued:
You have seen-


Walter Edward Foster: I am sorry I have to instruct the hon. member that it has been reported to me he is speaking on the same subject matter of a debate on a motion to go into supply when the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) raised this sam'e question of the situation in Vancouver. Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, page 95, under standing order 41, citation 293, refers to certain prohibitions contained in standing order 41, and then goes on to say that a member, while speaking, must not refer to any debate of the same session. I think that at present the hon. member is referring to the subject matter of the debate which took place for over an hour last Tuesday.


Angus MacInnis: But the grievance, Mr. Speaker, still continues. It was discussed last Monday, if my memory serves me aright, and the leader of the opposition raised another phase of the same question on Wednesday, on going into supply. If the question could be raised on Wednesday after having been discussed on Monday, and on other occasions too, there is no reason I can see why it cannot be discussed now, and particularly when the grievance still continues. There are also new aspects to the case, and surely we are entitled when going into supply to bring our grievances to the attention of the government.


Alan Webster Neill: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order I would point out that you did not read the whole sentence in citation 293. The prohibition is that a member must not:
(a) refer to any debate of the same session on any question not then under discussion.
He must not, for instance, refer to a debate connected with tariffs while speaking now
because that subject is not now under discussion, but apparently he is allowed to refer to any debate of the same session on the question now under discussion. I cannot think that the prohibition extends to the hon. member in debating a matter that has not been finally dealt with. There is a prohibition dealing with matters that have been dealt with already this session, but that means brought to a final conclusion, defeated or something of that kind. But the words on which Your Honour bases your position are that he must not:
. . . refer to any debate of the same session on any question not then-
That is, not now.
-under discussion.
I submit he is not doing that, and that therefore he is in order.


Charles Avery Dunning: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, if the interpretation now being placed upon the rule is correct, what it means is that on any occasion when the motion for supply is made on Monday, Tuesday, or, at this stage of the session, on Wednesday, it is perfectly competent for any hon. member to rise in his place in the house and repeat what he himself has or others have said with respect to any matter i lready brought up during the session. It seems to me that the main object of the rules, which is to expedite the business of the house, could be completely defeated if that were the interpretation of the rule. I have not any objection to listening to my hon. friend (Mr. Maclnnis); but if this is to be a decision of importance on the rules, I think the far-reaching effect of it might well be taken into account by Your Honour.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Standing order 41, on which Your Honour's ruling is based, does not deal with the question of going into supply at all, and is not applicable to the remarks being made by the hon. member (Mr. Maclnnis). I do not think he was intending to repeat what has been said on this question, but I believe rather he wished to make reference to certain grievances in the city of Vancouver which have arisen since the question was last raised in this house a few days ago. He would come under the clause dealing with grievances, and not under standing order 41.


Walter Edward Foster: Does any other hon. member wish to speak on the point of order?


Angus MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I do not think I was quoting from anything that was said in this house in any previous debate. As a matter of fact, I did not quote anything that

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
had taken place in a debate during this session, and I believe that is all that is referred to in the citation under standing order 41.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The point is that the same subject matter shall not be debated twice in the same session. That, I think, is the principle involved. Otherwise we should be discussing questions over and over again. If my hon. friend has in mind simply referring to some new situation that has arisen, and wishes to obtain a statement from the minister upon it, .which will help to improve the situation, I can see no objection to having the minister make the statement; but if his purpose is to provoke a discussion on a subject that has already been debated, then I think the rule which has been cited by His Honour the Speaker would apply, namely that a subject should not be debated twice in the same session.


Alan Webster Neill: I would point out that the attitude and remarks of the right hon. leader of the opposition were directed towards what he considered the duty of the government to empty the post office and the art gallery by force. That does not appear to be the intention or desire of the hon. member now speaking. He is speaking of a totally different point of view.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: On the occasion to which you have referred, Mr. Speaker, as I recall there was no amendment offered to the motion to go into supply. Therefore there was no specific subject which would otherwise appear by way of motion. I submit that this rale applies to a motion or subject which has been definitely made the subject of debate or resolution, and that the well-known and broad comprehensive rule as to the right of a member of this house on a motion to go into supply to discuss any grievance or condition which he thinks gives rise to a grievance still exists and is not impaired by the rule you have cited.


Charles Grant MacNeil: I desire to point out that the information now reaching those interested in this matter presents an entirely new grievance for which we desire to seek redress. There is no intention to abuse the privilege of a member to state a grievance on the motion to go into supply; but there is an entirely new situation, or new elements within the situation presenting themselves, making an urgent situation and one which can properly be brought up at the present time. I would regret very much if the rules of the house are interpreted in such a way as to deny us privileges which have always been accorded in the past and which we have a right to expect under the rules.


Charles Avery Dunning: Without urging you, Mr. Speaker, one way or the other, I would call attention to citation 304 of Beauchesne, which, I take it, is a quotation from May:
It is a wholesome restraint upon members to prevent them from reviving a debate already concluded; and it would be little use in preventing the same question from being offered twice in the same session if, without being offered, its merits might be discussed again and again.
Whether or not it is the same question, I am not sufficiently familiar with the debate that took place on a former occasion to say.


Angus MacInnis: "The question" refers to a motion, does it not?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There was no motion.
That is the difference.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It is important to preserve as much latitude as possible in the discussion of grievances on going into supply. If what my hon. friend, who has just spoken, says is true, namely that he is not seeking to revive a question which was discussed the other day, but is taking up something entirely new, then I would say there is no reason why he should not proceed.. But if, as I have said, he is seeking to debate over again a subject which has already been discussed, I think the rule cited by His Honour the Speaker would apply, and he. should not seek to proceed in that way. Certainly the government have no desire to prevent the fullest discussion of a situation which to its members, as to all hon. members, is occasioning much concern. Any word that would help to improve the situation will certainly be welcome.


Angus MacInnis: 
Charles Grant MacNeil: I do not intend to thresh over old straw; but in justice to the men concerned and the citizens of greater Vancouver I feel that certain facts should be stated, facts which were not disclosed in previous discussions in this house. It is not an easy matter to discuss, but it is much more unpleasant to anticipate reports of still more disagreeable occurrences in Vancouver. Some of us who have lived there have witnessed disturbances on previous
occasions, and it is with dread that I pick up the morning newspapers now, lest I read the report of some serious trouble. The results of these disturbances were fully reported on former occasions. I have seen blood flow in the streets of Vancouver; I have seen people ridden down; I have seen men beaten up; I have seen inexcusable brutality exercised to deal with situations of this sort, and I would not be doing my duty did I not state in this house that which I have learned from reports reaching me daily now. A few days ago we did not have the information that we now have. One stubborn ugly fact stares us in the face, and cannot be disregarded. The men are without food and shelter. That was not disclosed before, because from the statement of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Rogers) we gathered that the deferred pay vouchers had been distributed in such a way that the men might carry on. On the minister's admission in the house the other day, however, the last distribution of pay vouchers took place on May 15, and I understand that no individual received more than $4 at that time.
These men are in a state of utter destitution; they are without food and shelter and without the means to move around and, as we say, " rustle " for work at any other point. You cannot expect men with empty bellies to face a situation of this kind in a calm and rational way. That must be understood. They feel desperate and they are likely to resort to desperate means to bring their predicament to the attention of the public. They are not, as has been implied, in a state of revolt against constituted authority. They feel they are engaged in a spectacular demonstration of the fact that authority as constituted in this country has denied them the elementary rights of livelihood.
May I quote their own statement appearing in what is known as the Post Office "Sit-downer's" Gazette, which is published by the men themselves with the aid of friends for the purpose of raising funds. They say:
This paper is not published or paid for by the Department of Labour or the government of British Columbia.
This is the statement I wish to read:
Please do not think that we do not fully realize the gravity of the situation we are facing. We know that this is one of the most serious problems that has ever faced the people and the government of Canada. We were forced to use this unusual method of bringing our case before you, the jury, when all constitutional means had been exhausted and the government and local authorities refused to act.
We ask that you base your verdict_ upon considerations of common humanity and justice and upon the actions of the boys themselves

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
which are all in accordance with peace and democracy. We are not a mob but a body of organized men with a very definite purpose, namely, to attain the status of Canadians with a chance to live a decent, human life.
We assure you that your property is safe in our hands. We, who are the workers and builders, without whom you would not have structures such as the art gallery and the post office, would be the last to injure or destroy that which cur hands have created. We thank you for your loyal and generous support of our cause. We realize that without you our attempt to secure justice would be a complete failure. Your moral support will be the surest guarantee that all Canadian youth will enjoy a future worthy of a country which has such noble traditions of democracy and which is rich in all that should make life a thing of enduring happiness and prosperity.
That indicates the attitude of the men, and if they resort to desperate tactics there are provocative conditions leading up to such action. We should look behind the existing disorder, as some might term it, and consider the conditions that led up to the action of the men. They did exhaust every lawful means of presenting their serious plight to the authorities and were denied redress, and they have merely taken a spectacular way of bringing their problem to the attention of the people of Canada.
The second ugly fact is this, that not all of these men in Vancouver are non-resident transients nor should be so described. I am advised, on the statement of a responsible member of the Vancouver council, that approximately fifty per cent of them under existing regulations may claim domicile in British Columbia. That means that there is going on behind the scenes the usual passing the buck between provincial and federal authorities. I have been through it and I know exactly what it means-the provincial authorities trying to capitalize the situation in order to secure greater aid from the federal authorities, and the federal authorities disclaiming all responsibility and publicly announcing that they are relying upon provincial government advice. I have been through such negotiations in the past and I know just what they mean. The men have fallen between two stools and the citizens of Vancouver are now facing the grief. The civic authorities of Vancouver and district are playing their part. They now accept full responsibility for relief of the unemployables. Under a recent classification they have the full burden of the unemployables. But in addition to that they are extending relief to single employable men over fifty-five. They are extending relief to veterans over fifty years of age. As regards the mining and forestry training schemes for young men, they are receiving applications only from those between the ages
[Mr. MacNeil.l
of eighteen and twenty-five, so that no administration of relief is being carried on by the provincial government for single unemployed between the ages of -twenty-five and fifty-five as formerly.


Mr. ROGERS:: Would it be a correct inference from what the hon. gentleman has said that -the only expectation of work which these men have is work provided by governments?	,


Charles Grant MacNeil: No; that is not their only expectation; but I will come to that point in a moment. They are not presented with any opportunities for employment in any quarter, and I intend to deal with that. The city has met the situation as well as it possibly can with the resources at its command and is carrying a heavy burden in this regard.
The third point is that raised by the minister. These men have not been presented with opportunities to secure employment, and in their present mood you cannot stave them off with vague generalities about employment in the distant future. They need employment immediately in order to obtain meals to-morrow and the next day. A man who has not a postage stamp or street ear fare cannot be put off with promises of something in the future. Before these men moved into the post office and art gallery they took pains to secure information as to employment opportunities across the prairies, and they received word from all the municipal bodies with whom they communicated that there were already local unemployed whose needs could not be met.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Charles Grant MacNeil: Before the dinner recess I was attempting to explain wherein we were dealing with grievances distinctly different from those which were discussed on a former occasion. I refer to the fact that since the situation concerning the single unemployed in Vancouver was last discussed, approximately two hundred men have been arrested on a technical charge of obstructing the police in the performance of their duties. A number of them have been sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment ranging up to three months. Some have been released on their own recognizance under suspended sentence, and the cases of others have been adjourned because social service agencies have assured the court that in some manner they will be given food and shelter temporarily. Further, the men are

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
attempting to solicit alms on the street corners, holding out tin cans to passers-by as has been their custom on former occasions. Not all of these men are being arrested, but in every instance the funds contributed by the public of Vancouver are being confiscated and are not being made available for the benefit of the men, and thereby their situation is being rendered more desperate.
A new feature in the situation is this, that there is some evidence of lawlessness which was not apparent before, lawlessness which has been dealt with very fimly by the men themselves. On one or two occasions men in the art gallery have suggested that they should slash or cut valuable works of art in that building, and these men have been forcibly and promptly ejected by the other men. Another grievance, and one that affects the citizens at large, is that since of necessity the police reserves are concentrated in the centre of the city where the unemployed are congregated, outlying districts complain of a minor crime wave, and lawlessness is evident there with which the police are unable to cope.
This, I submit, Mr. Speaker, presents a situation entirely different from that which was discussed previously. I attempted to show that we must understand the psychology of these men in order to deal adequately with the situation. Hungry men are very much like cornered animals. After all, they are not made of very different stuff from the rest of us: the instinct of self-preservation is still alive, and I think it is to their credit that they have shown enough spirit to organize. While we may not find it possible to condone the means they have employed, at least, as I have said, they have shown sufficient spirit to bring their case to the attention of the public in a spectacular way. This must be said of the situation, that previously they did make representations in a lawful and orderly way to the civic authorities and to representatives of the provincial government, explaining their plight. Had they not taken this action, absolutely no attention would have been paid to their need, and they would have been required to suffer in silence.
I further pointed out that the situation is obscured by the fact that some of these men, under existing regulations, may claim domicile in British Columbia. Some fifteen hundred of the three thousand men involved have a right to claim domicile in British Columbia. I endeavoured to show that the city had made provision for some; but while the provincial minister of labour, Hon. Mr. Pearson, has stated that British Columbia will care for her own, that statement does not square with the facts. It is simply a red herring across
the trail. There is a large number of men who can turn to no other authority than the province of British Columbia; and, as I say, the province is unable, or has made no effort up to this time, to meet the necessities of those who are without work and without shelter, and who have no opportunity of getting work.
Before the recess the minister asked me if the men were relying on the expectation of work being provided by the provincial or the federal government. I do not think they are making a point in that regard. They are looking for work, anywhere, any kind of work. I know' these men, and I speak of the situation feelingly. It is exactly similar to the situation which arose on previous occasions. The last time we had trouble in Vancouver I was requested by the men to appear on their behalf in the police court, which I was permitted to do by courtesy of the court. Each evening I interviewed the men individually in the cells of the Vancouver police station, and I took particular pains to find out their circumstances. Let me suggest to the minister that when a man is under arrest, in the police station, facing a serious charge in court, he is perhaps more likely to tell the truth than on any other occasion. Just before I came down to the chamber this evening I glanced at the notes I took in regard to some two hundred individual cases on that occasion, so I know some of the circumstances which go to make up the problem of these men described as single and homeless, a description which is stamped on their relief cards. I say we must understand the circumstances which led up to the situation in which the men find themselves to undertsand the action which they have taken to make known their needs.
The point has been made several times that their situation is due very largely to their own shiftlessness; that if they had displayed the initiative which many of us were expected to show in our earlier days, the problem would be much easier of solution. Not four blocks away from the Vancouver post office is the office of the Employment Service of Canada, a well equipped office with an adequate staff, not only possessing information with regard to employment needs in that city but with a bulletin service indicating employment needs or any labour shortage at all important points in British Columbia or, as a matter of fact, at any point touched by that service. In the ordinary course of events, when these men were released from the camps they would naturally apply for work and register with the employment service. Not only that; they have tramped

Unemployed, Men in Vancouver
down the "skid road," as we call it in Vancouver, where they might learn of work in logging camps; they have looked for work on the waterfront; they have written letters to friends at different points outside Vancouver, and after all this they have found no prospect of employment anywhere. As I stated, before they moved into the post office, the art gallery and the Georgia hotel, acting under the advice of his worship the mayor of Vancouver they took pains to telegraph to the principal municipalities across western Canada asking if work was available at any point. In response to every inquiry they received notice that in each municipality there was already a surplus of labour, and that the community could not absorb any additional single unemployed. They were made to realize in a very emphatic manner-


Norman McLeod Rogers: Were these telegrams
sent before or after their refusal to accept the proposal of the provincial minister of labour?


Charles Grant MacNeil: I understand the telegrams were sent by the men after they had been offered transportation to any destination in the western provinces.
May I add this: There are various organized bodies of responsible citizens in Vancouver interested in securing employment for these men. There is one such committee to which I should refer; that is, the committee of representative business men, associated with the various churches and the social service agencies, which takes a special interest in the problems of homeless men. These men know whereof they speak; they have gone through this experience on former occasions, and at the present moment these men are trying with all the energy they possess to find employment for those men in whom they are particularly interested, the men whom they think are of worth while calibre, worth salvaging from their present dilemma. But they cannot find work for them. Under normal conditions or even those of last spring, the constituency which I represent might be expected to absorb a number of these single unemployed in various seasonal industries. At the present time, as reports indicate, these industries are unable to take on any additional number of these men. The small logging operators, who are carrying on their operations with tractors, logging out small limits, pockets of timber that have been overlooked by the big operators, report that their bunkhouses are full or that for various reasons they have been forced to cease operations for the present, possibly on account of the fire hazard. At every point fishing boats 
are tied up. The pulp and paper industry has been working on a five day week for months, and is now working only half time. And so it goes. These are the reports from the various districts in the constituency which I represent, and which normally each spring would absorb quite a number of these men. The conditions are not, as stated by the minister, such as would enable the men to disperse and readily find employment at these various points.
Some reference has been made to the leadership which these men have accepted; that has been discussed in somewhat derogatory terms. There may be some truth in what the minister says in that respect; but may I point out whatever leadership is offered, these men would not accept it for twenty-four hours if they had opportunities for employment. They are not of that type. I know them. I have been present at their meetings, when they determined that leadership from among their own number, in a democratic way; where their own policies were determined in a democratic way; where they discussed ways and means of bettering their position in a proper and orderly manner. So I think it is idle to argue at this time that they have blindly submitted to leadership of a subversive nature. . Within a few hours of any definite assurance that they could get employment at any point, there would not longer be any serious situation in Vancouver. It requires simply that we face the facts and apply common sense.
I would urge the minister to accept responsibility in his own department for direct negotiations with representatives of the men. It is hardly good enough to stand on the dignity of governmental departments. We should take a little of the starch and red tape out of negotiations now being conducted. On a former occasion when we had serious trouble in Vancouver a delegation largely representative of the Vancouver churches went to Victoria to interview the Minister of Labour. It happened that among the group was one representative of the men, and that man was denied admittance to the minister's office. The minister said he would receive only citizens, the implication being that these men were not to be regarded as citizens.
On other occasions the unemployed single men turned out to assist in connection with serious slides which interrupted railway and telegraphic communication. Some were killed because of their inexperience with railway signals. But officials grumbled because they were required to attend inquests; they said,

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
"The sooner these men are killed off, the better." The men are made to feel that they are no longer being treated like human beings. They have a hunted feeling. Under the conditions which have existed, they have been kicked about from pillar to post.
The minister does not recognize the difficulty in connection with the offer of transportation. I was brought face to face with this aspect of their problem when I interviewed one man after another. When I informed a man in the cells that his worship would in the morning probably advise him that he would be offered transportation to some destination named by him-his home, or wherever he claimed domicile-the man would probably answer, "I cannot go back; my people are in terrible circumstances now. If I go home I am not eligible for relief, and I cannot - get work. They have told me there is no work, and I am not going back home to be a burden on my folks." Other men would refer to the situation in the drought area, and show how impossible it wras for them to return to certain sections. Other men were without homes, and had been informed definitely in communities in which they had registered that, having forfeited domicile, there would be no relief and no work for them. If they go back they know they are going back to the same experience they have endured before, simply to be faced with an order from the police of that town to move to the next. They spend one night in the local hoosegow under orders to leave town in the morning. That has been in recent years the experience of thousands of young men across Canada. They have been moved from town to town on order of the police.
It is not a question of bad leadership at this time. By reason of circumstances preceding this situation they have reached a state of mind which is sad .to contemplate, one in which they would rather go to gaol than endure that which they were required to endure previously. They have had the experience of living in box cars and in jungle camps, and of being hounded from town to town. They have told me of that. They have said, "We would rather take it here at the end of a policeman's baton; we would rather be knocked insensible on the streets of Vancouver, than to go back to the hopelessness of drifting about and searching for work about which they tell us, but which we can never find."


Mr. GOLDING:: What advice did you give them?


Charles Grant MacNeil: It was not my business on that occasion to give them advice. I was acting on their behalf, through the courtesy of the magistrate, to state the circumstances
to the magistrate. And let it be said to the honour of the magistrate and the chief of police that they stated quite frankly in open court that it was not a criminal but rather an unemployment problem. The same scenes are again being enacted every morning in the Vancouver police court. Each morning they call long lists of men, and rows of men are formed three deep across the court room, while the police magistrate attempts to deal with the situation. It makes a burlesque of court procedure. Of course the men plead not guilty, and the police officers are called to the box to outline the circumstances. The men take the box, after pleading not guilty, and then admit that the circumstances as stated by the police officer are substantially correct. The magistrate in a friendly and informed manner discusses their circumstances and makes inquiries as to what may be done about them. He must resort to various devices, and try to deal with the situation in the light of extenuating circumstances revealed.
At the present time the gaol capacity is being taxed, and serious consideration is being given to moving the men by force to Pier's island, formerly a concentration camp for the Doukhobors. Over three hundred men were arrested and sentenced .before. Two hundred have now been arrested and are awaiting sentence. It is not a question of improper leadership. The situation challenges the leadership of the Minister of Labour. If he could walk into the post office in Vancouver at this time, and persuade the men to leave that building and walk four blocks to the office of the Employment Service of Canada, what would happen? If each man registered and said he wanted work, what would he be told? The answer would be, " There is nothing for you to do; come back to-morrow." If they go to industrial firms anywhere around Vancouver, they receive the same answer, "No work; come back next week." That is the answer they have been getting, and that is the answer they will now get if they go to the very agency the administration of which is under the control of the minister. I say that the Employment Service of Canada is in touch with labour requirements in all parts of Canada, and has nothing to offer these men. I have known business men in the city of Vancouver spend hours on the telephone in communication with employers not only in and around the city of Vancouver, but in the company towns along the coast, to see if the executives in those concerns could take on at least a few of the men. But all that work has been in vain.
If with the facilities at their command they failed to secure employment for these men,

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
how can we point the finger of blame at the unemployed man who, without the price of a postage stamp, finds it impossible to get work? The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) has shown that public opinion to some extent is behind these men. They are subsisting to-day on charitable contributions from the people of Vancouver. Those contributions are made simply because the people know that there is cause for the situation, that the men have a legitimate grievance and that there is no work available for them. Those people know that the unemployed are willing to work, if they are given opportunities to work. They know, too, that many of the men are without proper clothes to engage in heavy manual work. They know, too, that if they are sent to Swift Current or Moose Jaw or Battleford, or any points in the prairie provinces, they will not get work immediately. They will not have the opportunity to make immediate contacts for employment, and being out of funds, immediately will be picked up as vagrants, and dealt with by the police.
The Vancouver dailies are not prone to overlook or to defend any action suggesting lawlessness. But the editorial writers in those dailies are aware that there is a cause for the present situation. In editorial after editorial -they have asked that some plan be initiated by the federal government. The following is a brief quotation from the Vancouver Sun of May 25, 1938:
Human memories, on the average, are unfortunately short. The people of Vancouver however have good cause to remember that these young men, or others like them, have been put to this miserable expedient time and again in these last few years.
On Saturday they had ample opportunity to observe that these men, most of them young but a few of them grey headed, were decent looking young fellows, capable and well set up. And, if they were given to thinking at all, they must have been appalled with the tragedy displayed before their eyes, of a generation going to waste. They should be serving their country. No doubt one and all would be willing to do so, given a pick and shovel or whatever tools they are capable of using.
The federal Micawber government has dillydallied long enough with this problem, a problem affecting every citizen, a problem of wasting resources of man power-more valuable than any natural resources we have in our forests, hills and fields.
That editorial appeared in a paper which has given support to this government. The Daily Province of May 30 contained the following:
Two front page headlines of the Daily Province last Saturday made strange juxtaposition. One said, speaking of Vancouver: "Army of Women Plan to 'Tin Can' for 'Sit-Downers'."

The other, speaking of parliament at Ottawa, said: 'TOO Millions for New Works." What sense could you make of those two statements, taken together?
You could make no sense of them. Nobody can make any sense of the condition which they describe. One of them meant that a thousand men had seized and occupied two public buildings of this city, in protest against the fact that they had no work and no other means of support. The other meant that the parliament of Canada was about to vote one hundred millions for "work, wages and business."
For ten days now Vancouver has been subjected to the humiliation and the ill advertisement of this crazy situation. For ten days the government at Ottawa has played discreditable politics about it, making stupid incantations to the effect that it supported the "policy of the provincial government."
For ten days the government at Victoria has stood upon its stubbornness, refusing to do anything for these men unless they will accept a scheme which would dump them off the railway at some prairie station where they may not be wanted and where there may not be anything for them to do.
A hundred millions at Ottawa for work and wages, and no word for Vancouver, where a thousand jobless men hold out in the post office and the art gallery making a mockery of all ordered government in Canada. No word except the word of folly and ineptitude, to match the stupidity and the impotence of the government at Victoria.
They are going to wear the sit-downers out. They are going to break the deadlock by a nopolicy or forcible-feeble. They are going to twiddle their thumbs and pretend that if they pretend that Vancouver is not there then everything will be all right.
I have an item taken from a prairie paper which is relevant to the situation, reading as follows:
Scores of transients passing through town daily looking for work. Westbound freight trains are the most popular means of transportation. Very few of the men looking for work during the summer season are able to get located as there is little farm work available here. Most of these men are forced to continue their westward trek trudging from town to town.
I suggest to the minister that it should be easily possible to establish direct negotiations with the men in such fashion as to break down this problem into what he described formerly as its component parts. Certain of these men belong to British Columbia, and some scheme should be devised to present them with whatever opportunities there may be for available work. If the minister insists that work is available, it should be possible to present some plan to introduce these men to that work. Most of the evidence before the men is to the effect that no work is available. The evidence is that work

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
is not available for those men who belong in British Columbia and who must look for their employment opportunities in that province.
It should be possible to determine those men who should look for their employment opportunities elsewhere. If there are so many men who should go to Alberta; if there are so many men who should go to Saskatchewan, to Manitoba or to Ontario, it should be possible not only to offer them transportation but to say to them, "We have inquired of the Employment Service of Canada as to opportunities that exist in other provinces; we will see that you get a decent meal when you arrive at these points; if there is work available, you will be advised of it." They should be assured that they will be given every opportunity to work if they are willing to work. If no work is available, they must be assured of some form of food and shelter.
Our experiences in Vancouver have shown us that the alternative to this course is bound to be still more costly. It will be much more costly to send these young men to gaol. Why put them in direct association with hardened criminals of the underworld, with drug addicts, with thieves, with hold-up artists and gangsters? Many young men have told me that after spending two or three months in Oakalla they have been offered propositions by leaders in the underworld. This is a situation that cannot be ignored, and we must reckon with this cost if these men are rushed to gaol or concentration camps.
I was extremely perturbed when I heard the suggestion that force should be used. The acting Postmaster General (Mr. Euler) stated that this situation could not continue indefinitely, that some means should be taken to protect crown property. I know it is important to protect crown property, but it is of greater importance to remember that these men are subjects of the crown and that their welfare should be protected first. If force is used there will be broken heads, there will be blood shed and there will be the danger of lives being lost. That has happened before and it may happen again.
If you attempt to eject 700 men from the Vancouver post office, the resultant property damage will be beyond calculation. Throw in a few tear-gas bombs among 700 men, and the very attempt of such a large mob to escape will result in serious damage. I saw the damage in Hamilton Hall when the police attempted to eject men from that building. We know of the damage that was done to the museum when the police ejected men from that building on a former occasion. The damage will be much greater in the art gallery. If an attempt is made to use force in that
building, within a few minutes valuable works of art may be destroyed. These have been gathered together through the years by endowments from generous citizens. The damage will be absolutely beyond repair.
The alternative is to use some common sense. An effort should be .made to arrive at direct negotiations with these men. The minister will remember that after these men were refused a hearing by the provincial minister of labour, Mr. Pearson, he very courteously received a delegation of five or six of the unemployed. He heard with interest the story as told by the men themselves, and I may tell him that when they returned to the meeting place on Hastings street they told their comrades that the minister had been very decent and they felt they would get a square deal. Just the suggestion that there will be an effort to deal with the situation with some humane understanding means a great deal. I suggest direct negotiations in an understanding and friendly spirit. I suggest a registration of some sort that will determine the various elements and responsibilities in the situation. I suggest a simple plan which, in addition to the offer of transportation, will give these men the assurance that they will be brought closer to whatever work may be available. I can assure the minister that all they are asking is a chance to work, and in the meantime a chance to eat.
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of Labour):	Mr. Speaker, I promise the
house that I shall deal briefly with this matter because it has been before us on at least two previous occasions. I have followed carefully what has been said by the hon. members from the city of Vancouver, but they have not set out a situation which differs materially from that which existed when this question was under discussion before. They have directed attention to the fact that thus far these men have maintained themselves in an orderly manner. Short of the fact that they have occupied public buildings, I believe that is substantially true. The hon. member who has just spoken referred in high terms to the character of the majority of the young men who have been involved in this situation. I take no exception to that but, on the other hand, I did take exception before and I do now to the type of leadership which has induced these men to adopt a course of action which I cannot but believe is opposed to their own interests.
I think the house should understand fully that this situation was anticipated to a degree. Before six o'clock my hon. friend referred to the fact that these men are well organized and disciplined. It would not be

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
going too far to say that these men were organized for the purpose of the present demonstration while they were in the forestry conservation camps during the past winter months. That, I think, is a fact which my hon. friend will acknowledge. That is to say, the intention behind the present demonstration in Vancouver was to organize in this way in order to bring about the continuance of the forestry conservation camps during the summer months or to bring about special works projects for the employment of those who had previously been in these camps. That was very clearly the objective of the relief project workers' imion. As a matter of fact, there was published in the Vancouver Sun some days ago an interview in which Mr. Campbell, one of the leaders, admitted this without any hesitation whatsoever.
The original proposal made by the minister of labour of British Columbia was to this effect, that those men who had previously been in the forestry conservation camps and had come to British Columbia from other provinces, should be given transportation back to their homes or places of origin. The minister of labour of British Columbia expressed the view at the same time that it would be possible to absorb the remainder of the single unemployed men in the industries of British Columbia or in such governmental work as might be in operation during the summer months. He referred in particular to the forestry training camp, which will be open in the summer months, and to the placer mining camp, both of these being under the youth training plans which are carried on in cooperation with the dominion government.


Charles Grant MacNeil: What were the age limits?


Norman McLeod Rogers: From eighteen to twentyfive, but exceptions may be made up to the age of thirty years. As my hon. friend is aware, the projects under these youth training plans are agreed upon mutually by the dominion and provincial governments, and there is provision in the agreements whereby admission may be given to those above the age of twenty-five, but generally speaking the age group is from eighteen to twenty-five.
The number of non-residents who are affected at the present time in British Columbia is probably not more than 750. According to my figures the total number of non-resident transients who were in the camps in British Columbia during the winter months was 1,560. We had information to the effect that the deferred pay vouchers which were given to these men on leaving the forestry conservation camps were cashed outside the 
province to the number of 850, which carries with it the implication that some 800 of the 1,560 had gone to other provinces after the forestry camps were closed or after their term of employment in these camps had ceased. That leaves a remainder of about 700 non-resident single unemployed who are now in Vancouver. This brings me to the point where I agree with my hon. friend in his statement before six o'clock that certainly more than fifty per cent of those now involved in this situation are residents of British Columbia. From the beginning the provincial government of British Columbia has taken the position that it should deal with this matter as a question of relief administration within the control of the province, and it has been dealt with in that way. As I have explained to the house before, this government has proceeded upon the basis of consultation and cooperation with the provincial government. In doing that, we are following the course which has been followed in other years.
I should like also to add this with respect to the prospect of employment which lies before these men at the present time. We have it on the basis of our experience last year that some 2,500 of the men who were in the camps previously have not returned to the camps this year. A very careful registration is taken of those who passed through these camps, so when that statement is made we may accept it as being accurate. When one realizes that this was the experience last year, namely that 2,500 men either found employment elsewhere or at any rate did not find it necessary to return to the forestry conservation camps in the winter months, surely we need not assume that there is no opportunity whatever in British Columbia or in the adjoining provinces for absorbing these men.
Then, too, my hon. friend should recognize that the situation to-day is somewhat different from that which he described as existing at the time I was in British Columbia two years ago. On that occasion the transient problem was one which touched rather the opening of these camps during the winter months. The difficulty occurred in the month of November, as he will recall; but the present situation has arisen after these men have had winter employment for varying periods extending from October to the end of April, and certainly in many parts of this country there are men whose employment does not normally extend very much beyond the work that is afforded during the winter months.
My hon. friend suggests that the way to deal with the situation is to provide, through a simple plan, that employment shall be offered to these men in British Columbia. I

Unemployed Men in Vancouver
wish it were as simple as that. I can assure my hon. friend that from one point of view that would be an easy way to deal with the situation. But I would put this question to him: If employment were provided for these men in British Columbia, would that help the solution of the transient problem in that province? His answer would be no. It could not be otherwise. If you create preferred conditions for this particular group of unemployed in one province, certainly you tend to attract to the province others of the transient group in the adjoining province. That has been the experience-


Mr. LANDERYOU:: Why not do it in the other provinces as well?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am coming to that. Clearly, if one were to provide employment for this group in British Columbia, it would be necessary to provide similar employment for this same group in the other provinces. There is no reason why one province should be preferred above another in that respect.
That carries us still further, and I am quite sure that my hon. friend who has just spoken would not overlook this further implication. Is there not an injustice in providing public works for these single unemployed in any province without at the same time finding employment for married men, the heads of families on relief, for war veterans on relief, and for dependents on relief above the age of sixteen years? Surely when one applies reason to this situation, it is evident that you cannot reach a satisfactory solution by conceding to these men, who have adopted this novel and spectacular means of bringing their situation to the attention of this country, opportunities which cannot at the same time be given to other groups of unemployed right across the country.
I should like, in furtherance of what I have just said, to give the house the substance of a telegram which I addressed to the head of the unemployed single men's committee in Vancouver on Friday last. This telegram was in response to a telegram from the single unemployed committee signed by Mr. John Matts, which was as follows:
Two weeks the jobless have been in desperate circumstances. Vain efforts made to seek aid from all authorities. Your representatives turn deaf ear. All we ask is that public works program be started to employ us, that emergency relief be granted. Delay embitters public. Plight unbearable to men. Wire reply.
And this was the reply I sent to that telegram:
Your telegram received this morning. As stated in my previous message the dominion government does not propose to take any action contrary to policy announced by minister of
labour of province of British Columbia. Nonresident single unemployed previously in forestry camps should be advised to accept offer of transportation to homes. Resistance to this proposal chiefly responsible for situation referred to in your telegram. Such men returning to own province will be on same footing as others now unemployed for admission to youth training plans or for such other employment as is available on public works within federal jurisdiction. No works projects will be established exclusively for single unemployed by dominion government in any province but employment on public works will be apportioned as fairly as possible among unemployed married men, returned soldiers and single unemployed as in previous years.
I would submit to my hon. friend who has just spoken that if he were meeting this situation to-day with a full sense of responsibility, I doubt very much whether he would be prepared to go beyond the offer contained in that telegram. In other words, these men will be on the same footing as others who are now unemployed with respect to eligibility for youth training plans or other employment on public works projects. Surely you cannot justify placing them upon any other footing. Undoubtedly they have claims upon our sympathy; no one questions that. There is no member of this house who would not wish that employment might be made readily available for all who are now unemployed in this country. But I do suggest that these men now in Vancouver, who are non-residents of Bhitish Columbia, would be well advised to accept the offer of that province; and certainly every effort will be made to see that they with others who are now unemployed will be given full opportunity for such work as is available on public works projects. My own hope would be that many of those who are now taking part in this demonstration in Vancouver would find that when they really tried to secure employment apart from government projects they would succeed beyond their present expectations.


Charles Grant MacNeil: Is such work available
through the employment service?
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
Departmental administration, $190,670.
Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This item covers administration, and relates more particularly to the office of the minister, the deputy minister, the secretary, the purchasing agent and the chief architect. When the item was under consideration some time ago, my hon. friend the former Minister of Public Works (Mr. Stewart) inquired about the
Supply-Public Works

appointment of a clerk of tenders. The clerk of tenders who has been appointed is Mr. Rivard, whom he knows. He has been in the service since 1909 and was acting in the capacity of head clerk looking after the correspondence coming to the secretary's office and dealing with the tenders after they had been opened. The civil service commission was asked to reclassify Mr. Rivard as chief clerk, but after consultation the commission decided that the appointment should be made as clerk of tenders. It does not interfere in any way with the rule which has prevailed for many years as to the opening of tenders. Tenders are still opened by the secretary of the department; Mr. Rivard, the clerk of tenders, looks after the correspondence and the tenders before they are opened, and after they are opened he checks up the securities proposed by the tenderers. The appointment and classification have been made by the civil service commission.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: This item shows a slight increase from $177,000 to $190,000. The salary deductions which have been restored account for a little over $7,000, so that the increase is not very substantial when that is taken into consideration. However, I should like a little more information in connection with the appointment of this clerk of tenders, particularly as to his duties. As I recall it, before this change, and possibly since, when tenders are invited the tenders were sent to the secretary of the department and were in his custody and control until opened in the manner indicated by the minister. For a considerable number of years there was a vacancy in the office of assistant deputy minister. That vacancy has been filled, and the former secretary who had charge of receiving the tenders is now assistant deputy minister. Are the tenders received by the secretary as formerly? What are the duties of this clerk of tenders? Tenders for work are received over only a part of the year; the estimates go through, and tenders are invited up to the end of the working season; they are dealt with, and the contracts awarded, and then the department is through with tenders so far as dealing with them as tenders is concerned. From that time everything connected with the work comes under the chief architect or his branch, or the engineer's branch, or the accounting branch or some other branch of the department. Why, then, was it necessary to assign a clerk to the duty of looking after tenders? I notice there is an increase from seventy-nine to eighty-one in the number of the staff, which is not material. There appears to have been a change in the number of clerks. Of clerks 
grade 4 there were ten, and now eleven; clerks grade 3, there were eight, and now ten. There is also a decrease in the number of clerks grade 2 from six to five. Perhaps the minister would give us a little more detailed information in connection with the particular appointment to which reference has been made.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: There has been practically no change in the duties of Mr. Rivard. He was in the office of the secretary of the department prior to his appointment as clerk of tenders. He had reached the maximum, and his case was submitted to the civil sendee commission in view of the work he had to do and the satisfactory services he had been rendering over a long period of time. The commission inquired into his duties but refused to appoint him as chief clerk, which would have given him a higher salary than that of head clerk; but they said that in view of the duties which he had been performing they felt he should be appointed as clerk of tenders. I do not hesitate to say that this gives him a little higher salary, but his duties are not changed. The practice in dealing with tenders in the department remains unchanged; for the secretary still deals with tenders in the same way as when my hon. friend was in office and, indeed, prior to that time. I repeat, there has been no change except in the designation of the position, giving him a little higher salary on account of the satisfactory services he has rendered. He has been in the service since 1908 or 1909, and the commission were of the opinion that there was justification for the reclassification.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The only way in which the increase could be given him was by reclassifying his office, giving it a baptism and a new name.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is really what it is.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Chief architect's branch-branch administration, $224,460.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: I notice what appears to be reorganization of this branch and a substantial increase in the expenditure. For 193738 the amount was $203,000 odd, and this year it is $224,000 odd. There is a new appointment, apparently an additional senior supervising architect, at $4,740. Then there are three supervising engineers of heating, electricity or steel construction: one at $3,960; one at $3,780 and one at $3,600. This makes a total new item of $11,340. I notice that instead of two senior construction architects we now have three. We have one senior mechanical engineer, heating and ventilation,

Supply-Public Works
apparently dispensed with. We come to another item that is inclined to arrest attention for the moment, namely seven senior assistant architects, two at 83,120 and five at $3,000, making a total of $21,240 in connection with this particular item. A little further down we find that the number of assistant architects has been reduced from twelve to eight, making a decrease of four; and immediately following we find a mechanical engineer, heating and ventilation, which is a new appointment, at $2,940. Further down we had last year one architectural specification writer and one assistant architectural specification writer whose services have been dispensed with. Then we have one mechanical draftsman, a new appointment, at $1,560, making an increase in the total of the staff from seventy-eight to eighty-three. Apparently there is some sort of reorganization of the department, and I should be pleased if the minister would outline the scheme of this reorganization and the reasons underlying it.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The increase in the estimates for this year is $20,892, which is made up as follows: The restoration of the five per cent deduction in salaries accounts for $9,000; there are five new positions; there are increases due to promotions, reclassifications and transfers; and there are statutory increases. These give a total of $22,692; but owing to the filling of vacancies at lower rates, there is a decrease amounting to $1,800, giving a net increase of $20,892. The five new positions are: one assistant mechanical engineer, $2,340; three stenographers, grade one; one office boy. These account for $5,340. The other cases my hon. friend has mentioned are reclassifications and transfers. The only new positions are the five I have just indicated.


Grote Stirling: Were the three supervising engineers of heating, electricity and steel construction promotions? Were they already in the service?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes; they are promotions.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The minister might give a little more information with regard to the seven senior assistant architects. Has the policy of the department changed in any way in connection with the architectural services? We have a chief architect, an assistant chief architect, and a new senior supervising architect, and now we have these additional senior assistant architects. Two of these might consist of the architectural specification writer and assistant architectural specification writer, who may have been put in there. That would account for two, if that were so.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that these seven senior assistant architects appear as result of promotions and transfers. There are no new appointees with the exception of those I have mentioned.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I should think there must be five additional appointees in that total.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: The item under consideration has to do with branch administration, and the ex-Minister of Public Works seems very much interested. I wonder if he could tell me something about the Amherst post office which was built in my constituency in 1935, as to why the contract was not awarded to the lowest tenderer.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Well, Mr. Chairman, I have not the book before me-


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I have.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: -and have not a recollection of every contract that was awarded; but I fancy that if he will ask the minister he will find that it was done on the recommendation of those who were responsible for the action which was taken, and that there was very good reason for it. I do not recall just what it was, but I think he will find the record clean and straight in that connection.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I have had the record
in my possession.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The case to which my hon. friend just referred, and in regard to which he asked a question of the former Minister of Public Works, was covered by the Public Works Construction Act, and under the provisions of that act and the practice developed under it very often preference was given to a local contractor, but at the price of the lowest tender offered to the department. There was a cha.nge of name but not of amount.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I wonder if my hon.
friend would object to that. I thought that explanation was pretty good; that the idea was to give the contract to a local contractor in the town where the work was being performed, at the price of the lowest tender. The public interest was protected; the local interest was served, and the object of the act, which was to give employment in the municipality in which the work was being done, was accomplished.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I wonder if the exMinister of Public Works is familiar with the construction of public buildings. I have gone over and studied the records, and I should like to know just how much the interests of the town of Amherst were served by giving

Supply-Public Works

the contract to a local firm when it was necessary for that firm to bring their key men from outside, and also necessary to import men from other parts of Nova Scotia to do the work. I think I am quite safe in saying that in the construction of that building not more than fifteen or twenty men from the town of Amherst obtained employment. I know something about the construction of buildings, because I was born and brought up in that business. This Public Works Construction Act permitted some strange things. Under this government the contractor who submits the lowest tender gets the job; nobody else gets it. The former government put the Public Works Construction Act into effect, and a friendly firm got the contract. We know that. We might as well talk facts. Everybody in the constituency, whether or not he is in politics, knew what was going on. I know what went on in my constituency, and later on I shall have something more to say about it. These are honest facts I am presenting to-night. The Quebec firm, which was the lowest tenderer on that building, was ignored entirely, and the job was given to a local firm because they were friendly to the government; there was no other reason. Under this Public Works Construction Act it meant nothing but pure politics. We all know that; the people in my constituency know it.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Well, Mr. Chairman, all I have to say to my hon. friend, who seems inclined to inject politics into this discussion at this stage-


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I did not inject politics; you did.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I have not injected any politics into anything.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: In 1935.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: No, not in 1935 or any year from 1930 to 1935.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Who did?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I do not know that anybody did; and I will say this, that if my hon. friend will speak with knowledge-


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I do.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: *-and accuracy, fairness and justice, he will find that the administration of the Department of Public Works between 1930 and 1935, was as free from politics as it ever was. That is all I have to say in that connection, except that in nearly every case there was pressure-and I think reasonable pressure-to award the con-

tract to a local company. I know there was great objection to contractors coming from the outside, from Quebec or New Brunswick or any other place, into Nova Scotia and doing work there. It was to meet that objection, which appeared reasonable under all the circumstances, that contracts were awarded to local contractors. That was the object. The public interest did not suffer; there was no overexpenditure, and the question of politics did not enter into the matter.
To get back to the item under consideration, has the policy of the department as to the employment of the services of local architects been abandoned, or has the staff been increased or reorganized in order that a larger amount of the work may be done within the department than was formerly the case?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The policy of the department as to acquiring the services of outside architects has not been changed, and the service has not been increased. There has been no change.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I want to reply to the former Minister of Public Works. I can assure him that if it had been a firm that was not friendly to his party, they would not have received much consideration. There is no use in talking about not bringing politics into the matter.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I want to say to my hon. friend at once that I did not know the political complexion of the firm, and do not know it yet.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: But those who made
the representation to the hon. member knew it.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There were no representations made along political lines.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: The file speaks for
itself; the letters are there to prove what actually took place. I am only interested in knowing why these things happened. They do not happen under this government, so far as I have been able to see in the three years I have been here, whereas under the previous government these things went on not only in Amherst but in other places I could name where this so-called Public Works Construction Act w'as put into force. If that is the way in -which the hon. member handled the money of the taxpayers, I think we should have some explanation of it.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There is one question
I desire to ask, and perhaps it is just as well to ask it under this item as under any other. The minister may not be able to give all the information to-night, but it will be equally

Supply-Public Works
satisfactory if he gives it at some other time. I should like to have the total of the estimates of 1935-36, including the main supplementary estimates and the items under the Public Works Construction Act that were under the control of the public works department. I should also like the total of the estimates for 1936-37 and 1937-38 under the same headings, and for this year as well. Also would the minister state what amount has been expended up to the end of the fiscal year 1938 by the Department of Public Works, and give figures as to the main, supplementary and special items?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The information I have
before me shows that in the main estimates of 1935-36 there was an amount of $14,530,320. in the supplementary estimates, an amount of $2,906,150, and in the further supplementary estimates, a sum of $2,000, making a total appropriation of $17,438,470. Under the Public Works Construction Act there was a sum of $7,892,243, making a grand total of about $24,000,000.
In the main estimates for 1936-37 there was a sum of $13,411,570; in the supplementary estimates, $2,835,700. and in the further supplementary estimates, $12,800, making a total appropriation of $16,260,070. In the special supplementary estimates following the Public Works Construction Act there was a vote of $14,956,585.
In the main estimates of 1937-38 there was a sum of $12,504,420; in the supplementary estimates, a sum of $574,500, making a total of $13,078,920. Then in the special estimates there was a further sum of $12,550,000.
In 1938-39 there is a sum of $12,997,625 in the main estimates, and $13,731,548.57 in the supplementary estimates.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Ottawa, maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., $2,540,700.
Abraham Albert Heaps: What progress is being made
in Ottawa in connection with improvements undertaken by the government in Confederation square and in connection with the new post office for the city?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The works now contemplated are the supreme court building, the new post office, the widening of the plaza over the tracks near the central station, and the erection of the national memorial. So far as dealing with the city of Ottawa is concerned, there have been no special conversations in regard to the development or beautification of that section. I believe the old Knox church is being taken down.
51952-228J


Abraham Albert Heaps: When are the improvements in Confederation square likely to be completed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed they will not be completed before next year.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Does the minister refer to the erection of the post office, the erection of the monument, or both?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Both.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Will it take as long as that?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that the
monument itself will be erected this year, but the terrace to be built around it cannot be completed before next year.


Abraham Albert Heaps: When will the widening of the plaza, or the construction of the bridge, be completed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The work will be started this year. Plans are almost at the point where tenders may be asked.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Is the minister receiving the whole-hearted cooperation and support of the city of Ottawa with respect to the changes taking place in this city, and particularly in the central portion?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that they are cooperating with the government and the department.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Are you receiving the cooperation that would tend to a beautification of the city?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Alan Webster Neill: Is there any hope or prospect of doing something to fire-proof the East block? Every time I have occasion to go there I breathe a sigh of relief when I come out. It is a fire-trap of the worst description, the interior being built entirely of wood. One time when I was on the third floor I got someone to open a trap door I saw there, and I found a passageway possibly four feet by two feet, running the whole length of the corridor. There was a pipe running through this passage; but whether it was for heat or air, I do not know. It was quite obvious that this passageway would act like a chimney in case of fire. If a fire were to start down in the basement, it would be a matter of seconds only before the whole third floor would be a mass of flames.
At one time apparently it was felt advisable to put in so-called fire-doors, which supposedly would be shut in case of fire. This would be all right if the people in the building were all out, but there is one feature of these doors to which I should like to call
Supply-Public Works

attention. They do not open against the wall; they stand open at right angles to the passageway. If there ever were a rush of frightened women, it would be only a matter of seconds before some of them would be shoved behind the door; the door would be closed, the people would pile up against it, and a holocaust would result. It is a reflection upon us here that a building so dangerous should be so close to us.
I realize that these people are generally away at night and there would be little danger in that regard, but I can visualize a fire starting down below and it being only a matter of seconds before it would spread throughout the whole building and many people not be able to get out safely. The officials must be aware of the conditions that exist, and I should like to know if there is any prospect of anything being done?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I agree entirely with the remarks of the hon. member for Comox-Albemi (Mr. Neill). Some time ago a study was made of this building with a view to making it fire-proof. However, the estimate of the cost was so high that it was not thought advisable to proceed with the work. My information is that it would cost $400,000 to make that old building entirely fire-proof. In view of the fact that the government had in mind erecting another building in the vicinity of the Justice building, it was not thought advisable to spend that large amount of money on the East block. I am informed that fire extinguishers have been distributed throughout the building. I am inclined to think, however, that the situation will have to be remedied pretty soon. When the new buildings are completed in a year or two, it is quite likely that many of the departments now in this old building will be removed.


Mr. DEACHMAN:: There are three minor repairs which I should like to suggest to the Minister of Public Works. I should like to see an improvement made in the drinking fountains. I should like to see taps installed which would permit a man to take a drink without getting a bath at the same time. This need must be apparent to any hon. member who has occasionally had need of a drink of water in any of these wash-rooms. The other point to which I would direct attention is the air in the basement of this building. That air is positively the worst in the city of Ottawa. I do not know that I have sampled all the air; but I have certainly sampled quite a lot of it in the last ten years, and I do not know of any place where it is worse than in the basement of this building. I always feel

sorry for those who have to work down there, especially in the summer time. The third matter which I should like to bring to the attention of the minister is the grass in front of this building. We used to have a beautiful sward of grass out there, but to-day it is largely a mass of plantain. I wonder if anything could be done to have grass on that lawm so that the passing wayfarer could look at it and not think this government was going to seed.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I can assure my hon. friend that I shall see the proper officers and have the drinking fountains improved so that there will be no danger of people having to take baths against their will. I shall try at the same time to meet my hon. friend in regard to the condition of the air. In connection with the plantain, as he calls it, may I say that the condition of the grass in certain sections of the grounds may be attributed to the fact that military corps are given the privilege of drilling on the grounds. However, my hon. friend must remember that plantain is very useful for the cure of certain wounds. I learned that in my early days. It may pay us to cultivate and sell it.


Thomas Reid: While the minister is dealing with minor affairs, perhaps he could give me some information about a matter which may have a certain significance to some of us. I refer to the flag that flies on the parliament buildings. I have noticed that it is flown only five dajrs a week; that it does not appear on the flagstaff on Saturdays and Sundays unless there has been a death in the membership of this house or of the Senate. This building is located opposite the United States legation building which has a flag flying every day in the week. If the flag flying on this building means that the house is in session, perhaps a smaller flag could be used on the other days. Surely a flag should fly seven days of the week on the parliament building of Canada.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: My information is that we follow the practice which prevails in England.


Thomas Reid: Perhaps we can improve on Great Britain.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: In connection with the maintenance of the grounds I was under the impression that this duty had been undertaken by the federal district commission.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes; that is right.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: So my hon. friend would be no longer responsible for the plantain?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No; I am not.

Supply-Public Works


Mr. McIVOR:: The best piece of grass to be found in the city of Ottawa is west of the West block. The reason for that is that we were given the privilege of using that for an occasional game of baseball. If they would allow us to play down in the front, it would improve the grass immensely.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and operation of other dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., $3,399,515.
Abraham Albert Heaps: A few minutes ago I asked some questions with regard to the construction work that was going on at the present time in Ottawa. I also asked if the minister was receiving full cooperation from the civic officials in that respect. I was tempted to ask those questions because on several occasions both in this chamber and outside we have heard statements made to the effect that the government is not doing sufficient for the city of Ottawa. Some few weeks ago the minister was good enough to give me certain figures which I shall read to the committee presently.
Personally I do not think the city of Ottawa itself is giving that cooperation which it ought to give the government in its endeavours to make Ottawa a capital worthy of the Dominion of Canada. I think the city itself in the past has been extremely tardy in recognizing Ottawa as being a capital city. It would be exceedingly hard for anyone looking around the city at the present time to discover any civic enterprise that goes to the credit of the city; for anything worth while that is being done is a federal undertaking. Any beautification that has been done has been done at federal expense. Yet whenever I meet people who live here, they always seem to complain that the government is not doing sufficient for the people of the city.
A few weeks ago the minister was good enough to give me a few figures which show what the government has done for Ottawa, and I will put these figures on record. In the past five fiscal years the government have let construction work in this city to the amount of $3,942,632; in the same period it has paid for improvements and repairs, $1,182,416; and for sundry maintenance, $676,679. During the same five years there has been paid out by the government for rents in Ottawa, to property owners within this city, $3,566,678. I shall not give the amount paid in salaries in Ottawa by the government, because I do not think that is necessary. But there is another item of $59,414 which the government paid out in Ottawa in the same period of five years for roads and bridges.
There is another item which I shall give in detail. It shows the expenditures by the federal district commission on improvements in Ottawa in the same five-year period, a total of $1,598,939, made up as follows:
Federal
district
Fiscal year	commission
1932-	33	$271,9651933-	34	
231,3771934-	35	
317,4371935-	36	
351,7711936-	37	
426,389
In addition, the government also pays to the city of Ottawa annually the sum of $100,000. It also pays to the city of Ottawa a considerable sum each year in lieu of taxes on the foreign legations that are located in the city, a total, in those same five years, of SS0.557. If the people of Ottawa were to undertake to carry on and maintain all these works and improvements themselves, and look after them as they should be looked after, I would be quite prepared to have the government pay taxes on all the government buildings in this city.
I would go a little further than that. When the government erects valuable buildings in Ottawa they are something more than fine buildings. They are in many respects a monument to the arts and culture of this dominion -expensive buildings like the parliament buildings, for example. We are told that we have exempted government buildings from taxation to the amount of $16,000,000, but it is erroneous to refer to it as it is often referred to in this city. I do not object to the government doing everything possible to make Ottawa worthy of the capital of Canada, but I do feel that in the past the government has not had the whole-hearted cooperation that it should have had from the people of this city. The government are spending vast sums of money in Ottawa, and I do hope that the people of this city will appreciate the money that is being spent here and will give to the government the cooperation that they have a right to expect.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There is a substantial
increase in this item over last year. Last year the amount was $3,295,000, and this year it is $3,399,000 in round figures. Some of the increase is no doubt due to restoration of salary deductions, but I notice there has been an increase in rents from $701,760 last year to $748,860 this year. One would have almost thought that with the new buildings which have been erected we might look forward to a decrease rather than an increase in rents. Perhaps the minister would explain to the
Supply-Public Works

committee this increase in rents, wheth r there has been any additional space taken, and, if so, by what departments.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The increase of $47,100 in rents is due to the following: forty-three new leases; seven increases in existing leases; forty-nine decreases in existing leases; increase in allotment for probable requirements, from $15,000 to $20,000; increase in allotment for probable requirements for National Defence, from $50,000 to $73,000. There is a net increase of $19,127 as regards the forty-three new leases, and there is an allotment of $23,000 for probable requirements for National Defence.
I can give the total amounts by provinces, of new leases and the amount of the decreases, if my hon. friend would like that information. The figures, in round numbers,
are as follows:	New	
Province	Leases	DecreaseNova Scotia	.. $ 1,300	$ 1,000JNew Brunswick.. ..	.. 2,400	1,600Quebec	.. 13,000	10,700Ontario	23,500Manitoba	.. 420	540Saskatchewan.. ..	.. 1,700	1,300Alberta	.. 552	9,000British Columbia . .	.. 8,000	1,850
I have a list of all the new leases.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: No; I would not ask for those details. It seems a little strange that each year we are putting up new public buildings throughout the dominion to accommodate the services, and moving them in; yet at the same time our rents are increasing. It is the same old problem.


Grote Stirling: I noticed the other day the deputy minister made a dignified protest to the city with regard to the possible erection of a gas station on the corner of Lyon and Wellington street. I do not think the dominion government owns any of the land on the south side of Wellington street, but I wonder whether there exists any design accepted by the city, perhaps approved by the government, which will govern the erection of the buildings which will gradually be built along the south side of Wellington street opposite what will be a magnificent facade of dominion government buildings on the north side.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We have no understanding with the city of Ottawa as to the south side of Wellington street, but the letter of the deputy minister has been very well and favourably received by the board of trade. At the present time there are no plans supplying any detail as to the future development of the south side of Wellington street.


Grote Stirling: The dominion owns
none of it?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No, none of it.


Grote Stirling: And the supreme court building will be next to the roadway just beyond the justice building?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Grote Stirling: Will the chimney of the heating plant be in the way?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I expect the architects have been considering doing away with the chimney somehow in order that it shall not interfere with the fine view that will be presented when the supreme court is there.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Telephone service at Ottawa, $96,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Is the increase due to
an additional number of telephones?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I understand it is due to a new charge of sixty cents per quarter mile per month on each local except those located in the centre block.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-Nova Scotia-Berwick-public building, $4,500.
Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is a revote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Ontario-
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs, $125,000.
Fort Erie-public building, $4,000.
Kenora public building-installation of fittings and alterations, $6,000.
Kitchener-public building, $175,000.
Ottawa-Rideau Hall-improvements, $14,000.
Powassan-public building, $3,500.
Toronto - dominion building - improvements and repairs, $10,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: What is the nature of
the improvements to Rideau Hall?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: To provide for the replacement of two greenhouses, and alterations to Rideau Lodge at the entrance of the front driveway, requested by Colonel Mackenzie of government house.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: What is the nature of the improvements and repairs to the dominion building in Toronto?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Painting of the exterior of the building, and the interior decorating of the five floors of the west wing, basement and warehouse portion.

Supply-Public Works


Hugh Alexander Stewart: That is not the old post office building, is it?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is the customs house.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The new customs building.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Manitoba-
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs, $40,000.
Steinbach-public building, $3,000.
Kenneth Judson Cochrane: In connection with the new public buildings to be constructed in Ottawa-I speak particularly about the new post office and the supreme court building- what type of stone is mentioned in the specifications for these buildings?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The specifications are not completed yet, but for the supreme court building it will be stone to match the Justice and Confederation buildings. For the post office it is granite or limestone, but the specifications have not yet been drawn up.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: My information is that in the contract or plan being prepared for the post office building Canadian limestone or Canadian granite is specified, alternate tenders. That applies only to two provinces where they can quarry that kind of stone; it does not apply to my province, which supplied the Wallace sandstone in this building, the Confederation building and several other buildings in Ottawa. My information further is that the reason Wallace sandstone has not been included in the specifications is the fact that they can deliver it here cheaper than any other stone. I should like to have some information on that point.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The government has been consulting a town-planning architect of great reputation, Mr. Greber, and I am informed he suggests that the post office should be built of granite or limestone to match the monument, the base of which will be of granite. The Chateau Laurier and the station are also of light-coloured stone.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: If my information is correct, this and other governments have followed the policy of having all these buildings as nearly uniform in appearance as possible. I think we have rather gone astray in connection with the Bank of Canada, which was built of granite. Wallace sandstone is produced in the constituency which I have the honour to represent; but as a matter of fact very little labour is spent upon it in that constituency, because most of the stone is shipped to Quebec where it is turned out in its finished state.
I know that the company in my constituency does not expect all the business; but I submit that at least it should be recognized when the specifications are being prepared, and I know that we have not been recognized in the post office specifications. In connection with the specifications for the construction of the Supreme Court building, I think the constituency I represent should be given some consideration, and I should like to have a definite statement from the minister in that regard.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: My information is that up to the present Wallace sandstone has been used extensively in the city of Ottawa.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: In the past, yes.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Well, my hon. friend should not despair.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I wish to be fair in this matter; but I would ask the minister, Why is it that Wallace sandstone was used in the past? It was a matter of price; that is all. Now, the taxpayers are paying for all these buildings, and if the department is going to discriminate against a particular company because it can supply stone cheaper than it can be procured elsewhere, that is not just and fair to all the producers in Canada. All I ask is that we be given a chance to bid. If, after the tenders are in, there is an objection to using sandstone, then I have nothing further to say; but as the representative of the constituency of Cumberland I feel I ought to bring this matter to the attention of the minister. I should like to have a definite statement as to what is to be used in the Supreme Court building. I understand that the designs are being prepared by a Montreal architect, and I would point out that seventy-five per cent of the labour spent on Wallace sandstone is spent in Quebec because the stone is shipped to that province in the rough state. After all, Ottawa is in one province, and I submit that we should have some consideration in connection with all these millions that are being expended here. I do not think I am unfair in making this request.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: What sandstone was used in the trimmings of the Confederation and the Justice buildings?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Wallace sandstone. That was used also in the parliament building and the national research building.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I think my hon. friend will find that other dealers in stone complain that Wallace sandstone has been getting too much of a show in Ottawa. That has been the complaint in the past.
Supply-Public Works


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: On account of the price; that is the only reason.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Not on account of the price. As I recall it, the sound practice of the Public Works department is not to specify any particular kind of stone, brick, hardware or other material.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: You are wrong; read the specifications.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Perhaps I do not know as much about it as my hon. friend does, but the reason for that practice is that if you specify a particular kind of stone or granite you give a preference.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I do not ask that.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I am not concerned with what the hon. gentleman is asking. I say that the reason for not specifying a particular kind of stone is as I have indicated, and it is a sound one, because if they specified granite my hon. friend would be complaining that they should specify Wallace sandstone. For that reason, therefore, the specifications are left open.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: They are not left open.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: They are.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Well, read them.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: They are left open to a large extent


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Oh, no.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: -in order that the
manufacturers of different classes of material will all have a chance to tender.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: My hon. friend is
wrong.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I will ask the minister if that is not the settled policy of the department. I do not know whether the hon. gentleman is trying to qualify for Minister of Public Works, but he seems to display a remarkable amount of inaccuracy in his information.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I am not an old man; but I think I have almost as good a knowledge of this matter as some of those who have been in the office of the Minister of Public Works, and I do not care whether it is in connection with civil engineering, or anything else. If an engineer can design a building, I can build one, and that is more than some engineers can do. I am not saying anything against the hon. member, but he is wrong. He has not read the specifications for the new post

office, and I can tell him what is contained in them. They provide for Canadian limestone or granite.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Canadian limestone leaves it open to any province that has limestone.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: And how many provinces have limestone?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Quebec, Ontario and
Manitoba.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I respect the Ontario
members, but I want to read an article that appeared in the Engineering and Contract Record. It is headed:
Request Use of Ontario Stone in Ottawa Buildings.
Ontario cut stone contractors have circularized Ontario federal members seeking their support for Ontario Queenston or Rama limestone in the construction of dominion government buildings at Ottawa. There is no cut stone from an Ontario quarry in any of the major federal buildings in Ottawa, the brief states. The buildings have all been built with cut stone from the sandstone quarries of the maritime provinces or with granite from Quebec, with the exception of the Hunter building which is of brick trimmed with Tyndall limestone from Manitoba. The brief is signed by Robert Sharp, Hamilton, and George W. Ritchie, Toronto, on behalf of ten different cut stone contractors, including two firms in Ottawa, two in Hamilton, one in London and five in Toronto.
All that I ask is that the company in my constituency be given an opportunity to tender. They are not being given that opportunity in the specifications prepared for the post office, and I am making this plea on their behalf. As regards Canadian limestone, so far as Manitoba is concerned, we might as well forget it.


Frederick George Sanderson: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. member, but his remarks all have reference to buildings in the city of Ottawa. We have passed that item and are now discussing buildings in Manitoba.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: This is the first time I have spoken in the House of Commons although I have been here three sessions. I do not appreciate being ruled out of order. I am talking about dominion public buildings, no matter in what province they are situated. The particular buildings to which I am now referring are in the city of Ottawa. I do not appreciate the fact that I am called out of order-
Mr. STEWAfRT: Mr. Chairman, is this hon. member to defy the authority of the chair?


Frederick George Sanderson: I did not call the hon. member out of order; I pointed out to him- will he please resume his seat?

Supply-Public Works


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: I was bora in the country, Mr. Chairman-


Frederick George Sanderson: Will the hon. member please resume his seat?


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: -so you will have to pardon me.


Frederick George Sanderson: I am trying to be fair to the hon. member, but he has been talking about certain stone used in certain federal buildings in the city of Ottawa. I pointed out to him that those items had passed, and that the committee were now considering buildings in the province of Manitoba.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Well, Mr. Chairman, I shall have to submit to your ruling. I did not know that it made any difference, when we were talking about dominion public buildings, whether they were in Manitoba or in any other part of the country, because after all we are speaking about Canada, and if my memory serves me aright all these provinces are in Canada. I am not trying to be unfair; I want to be reasonable, but I do feel that this company should be given an opportunity to tender on the post office building, and they have not been given that chance. I think I should have some explanation. I am told they have been eliminated on account of the fact that they can deliver the stone here more cheaply than any other firm. That is the whole story. Who are paying for these buildings? They are paid for by the taxpayers of the country. Are we going to put up buildings regardless of cost just because certain members make representations that certain stone should be used? I do not think we should.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: My hon. friend is not fair when he says certain members have been making representations. In regard to the post office building that is to be put up here, the quality of the stone has been indicated by the town-planning architect who was consulted by the government. It is on his advice alone that it has been stated that the stone for the post office should be rather granite or limestone. There has been no other representation made in that regard.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Is that in keeping with the policy which was laid down for these improvements in Ottawa? I do not think it is.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is in keeping with the program for the beautification of Ottawa.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: My understanding was that the buildings should be uniform in appearance.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: In that section, at least.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Why should an architect have any authority to say what stone is going to be used? It is not the quality of the stone that is in question, because we can see it here in this building. I do not see why an architect should take away any authority from the government.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: He is not taking any
authority away from the government. The government consulted him, and it is on his advice that this kind of stone has been chosen for the post office, because it is a light-coloured stone. That was the suggestion of the architect whom we consulted, and that is the only reason for this decision. There was no intention in the world to exclude the quarries of the province which my hon. friend represents in this house.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: Well, as I said before, I do not want to be unfair; but the fact that the stone is of a light colour does not seem to me to be a very strong argument as to why it should be used. The quality of Wallace sandstone is shown in all these buildings here in Ottawa, and that stone has been used because of the price at which it can be delivered here. We built the Bank of Canada building of granite; but that will not contribute to the improvement of Wellington street, because there we shall have a building that will stand by itself and will not correspond with any other building. All I ask is that the Wallace quarries be given a chance to tender. Then, if the government does not want their stone, all right; but they have been given no opportunity to tender. They have been entirely eliminated. All I am asking, is that they be given an opportunity, and I think any company doing business in Canada to-day should be given an opportunity to tender. Then, if the government or the architect in charge does not consider that the stone is of the right quality or the right colour, that is all there is to it. We have many buildings here of the same colour, the Confederation building, the East and West blocks and this parliament building, and I have never heard anyone say anything against the colour. Surely we must consider the quality before the colour.


Frederick George Sanderson: Shall the item carry?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Kenneth Judson Cochrane: It is not carried with my consent.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
Alberta-
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs, $40,000.
Peace River-public building, $36,000.
Mr. KENNEDY:: What is the $36,000 for in Peace River? Is that a new building; and, if so, where is it to be constructed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is a new building. This amount has been appearing in the estimates for a couple of years, but we have experienced some difficulty as to the site where that public building is to be erected.


Orvis A. Kennedy: Then as yet it has not been decided where the building is to be erected?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


Orvis A. Kennedy: What is to be the nature of the building?	.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is for a post office.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
British Columbia-
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs, $50,000.
Kelowna-public building, $10,000.
Powell River-public building, $58,000.
Prince Rupert-public building, $170,000.
Alan Webster Neill: I notice this vote is described as having to do with public buildings, but of course it means post offices. Of these there are three: one at Kelowna, where the cost apparently is about $60,000; one at Powell River, costing $58,000-and I know that is lcng overdue-and another at Prince Rupert, costing $170,000. That also is overdue. I wonder, however, what has become of the vote for the post office in the city of Alberni, which, so far as age goes, antedates these others by a good many years. It was a settlement some ten or twelve years before confederation, while these others are comparatively of mushroom growth. During the years of the depression, while we were fully aware of the need for a proper building there, we put forward no claim, knowing the need for economy on the part of the government; but as things got better, last year and the year before, we thought we would put forward our modest claim. It happened to be opportune to have one of the head men of the Post Office Department visit Alberni. He walked into the post office and remarked that the accommodation was entirely inadequate for the business done.
Some reference was made to-night with regard to a revote for a public building because the department were not able to get a site. As the minister is aware, the city of Alberni voted the government one of the best lots in the city, free of all charge, for the construction of this post office. The cost was very moderate; if I remember aright we asked that the government spend only some $17,000. That was the estimated cost, without paying anything for a site. The total cost of these other three buildings to which I have referred is $288,000, and an additional $17,000 would not have been a very great addition to that amount. There is no question that this post office building is needed, with the increase in the population of the city, and the business done there would fully justify it; so would the post office revenue. Would the minister indicate first what has become of the item that was put in for this vote, and also whether or not he can hold out any prospect of its being included in further supplementaries ?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am afraid this year it will be impossible to meet the request of the hon. member. The Minister of Finance has intimated to all ministers that he does not propose to introduce further supplementary estimates. The only thing I can say to the hon. member is that his project has taken the same route as one I proposed for my own constituency. I refer to a site which for a number of years has existed in one of the small towns in my riding. Until this time, however, it has been impossible to erect a public builidng on it. This year I tried to use all my power with the Minister of Finance, but I could not succeed. I am afraid my case is similar to that of the hon. member. May I point out to him, however, that he has my word that I shall keep the two matters in mind. The site at St. Ours was bought more than fifteen years ago, but the building has not yet been erected. I shall keep the two matters together, and when I feel that my power and influence is strong enough to have the building erected at St. Ours, I shall remember the claim of the hon. member.


Alan Webster Neill: I thank the minister. But if it would meet the situation, I would not object if he were to cut out the vote for Kelowna for this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Public Works
Generally-Dominion immigration buildings- repairs, improvements, etc., $35,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: The amount seems to be exactly the same as last year. Was last year's vote expended, or is this a re vote?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is a maintenance vote for repairs and renewals.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: How much was spent
last year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Practically the whole of
it, I am informed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National monument on Connaught place, $150,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Would the minister give some information as to the total cost of the work, whether contracts have been awarded, when they are likely to be completed and so on?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The contract for the base of the monument has been awarded to the Cape construction company of Montreal. They are ready to start work as soon as we have disposed of the old post office. The granite is being cut and prepared, and they are ready to begin work on the foundation.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: What is the amount of the contract?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: 
Grote Stirling: Where will the centre
of the monument be? Will it be on the centre line of Sparks and Elgin streets?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is a little west of the site of the post office which is being demolished.


Grote Stirling: I suppose there is cellarage under the old post office?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Grote Stirling: And considerable foundation work will have to be done where the cellarage existed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No; it is west of that point.


Grote Stirling: It will miss the post office?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Chief engineer's branch-Branch administration, $210,880.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: The details indicate that there is some reorganization or rearrangement. I note particularly that there are three
additional superintending engineers at $4,980 each, and an increase in the number of clerks, the total number being increased from sixty-three to seventy-three. The total expenditure, including the restoration of salary deductions, amounts to $210,880, as against $172,541 for the last fiscal year. What is involved in the reorganization? Where are the three superintending engineers located? Are there any new divisions, and what necessitated the appointment of the additional engineers?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The increase shown is due, first, to the restoration of the five per cent deduction. That factor accounts for $6,969. There are ten new positions, and there are increases due to promotions and statutory increases. The new positions relate to the appointment of three superintending engineers, involving an amount of $14,940. These engineers have been promoted to Ottawa. Mr. Goodspeed was formerly in Winnipeg and Mr. Sabourin was in Quebec city. It was thought advisable to bring to the Ottawa office men who had experience in the various engineering districts of the country, so that they would be more familiar with the districts of which they are in charge. It is because of that fact they have been called to Ottawa to form a sort of board to advise the chief engineer as to what would be necessary, useful or practical in the various districts of Canada. There is one in Ottawa charged particularly with supervising recommendations coming from Ontario. One was brought from Winnipeg to advise us as to the needs of the western provinces, and the third was brought from Quebec to advise as to the requirements of that province as a whole. No new appointments have been made, the men being brought to Ottawa from the outside offices. The other cases are all promotions. The salaries of these different engineers total $27,420.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Will the bringing in of
these engineers involve the appointment of other engineers at a later date to do their work?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is only a question of
promotion from junior rank to a senior position. The junior positions were filled by the civil service commission.


Grote Stirling: The district engineer
who was at Winnipeg has been promoted to superintending engineer and brought to Ottawa. Is the work of the Winnipeg district now being done by the man who was his assistant?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that in the reorganization the engineer at Charlottetown
Supply-Public Works

was promoted to the position in Winnipeg. The only new appointments that have been made by the civil service commission are those at the bottom of the list, the junior positions.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Did I understand the
minister to say that these engineers will now be located at Ottawa and will form a board to advise the chief engineer?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: That is a new feature.
As I recall it, these engineers came in from the outside perhaps once or twice a year and consulted with the chief engineer. Now they are to be located permanently at Ottawa. In addition to the chief engineer and assistant chief engineer there will be three superintending engineers.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that these
positions have not been created. The engineers who previously made up this board have been retired. I am informed that there was a board in Ottawa which dealt with the same problem with which these supervising engineers will have to deal.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering, including salaries of engineers, clerks, etc., $515,245.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Will the minister explain the increase?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: There is a gross increase
of $25,000, made up as follows:
Return of five per cent deduction, $17,000.
Two new positions, $3,480.
Statutory increases, $4,200.
There is a decrease of $13,920 due to filling vacancies at lower rates and the abolition of the position of district engineer, grade 1. This leaves a net balance of about $11,000. The new positions are an assistant engineer for the Fort William and Port Arthur district, which is to be filled by promotion, and one stenographer at Charlottetown. The position at Three Rivers has been abolished, the work of that district being divided between Montreal and Quebec.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There is only one additional engineer being appointed at Port Arthur and Fort William?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Just one.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-Maritime provinces, $375,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Would the minister explain the substantial increase?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This amount of $375,000 is required to carry out dredging operations in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island by departmental plant, and to provide for the repair and maintenance of this plant during the fiscal year.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I do not suppose the minister has laid out a program for this work.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: A tentative program only.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The principal increase seems to be in the work program, from $22,000 to $45,815. There is also an increase in new plant. What new plant is contemplated?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that some pontoons are required for dredge No. 12 and also a scow for dredge No. 13.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-Ontario and Quebec, $326,700.
John Ritchie MacNicol: What is the work to be carried on in Ontario under this item?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This amount is made up
as follows:
Permanent staff	$ 7,620
Wages	 70,482
Maintenance and operation	 91,458
New Plant	 10,005
Contract and day labour works, inspection and contingencies and to supplement above	allotments. 147,135

The officers intimate that it is impossible to tell definitely what repairs will be required during the year, and the amount of wages to be paid depends on the length of the operating season, which is governed by weather conditions. No list has been prepared of the works to be undertaken.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: What are the particulars of the new plant?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: There are two new 40 cubic yard dump scows for dredge No. 126 at $6,670, and one new 40 cubic yard dump scow for dredge No. 127, at $3,335, or a total of $10,005.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, $110,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: This and the previous
item link together several provinces. Item No 302 covers Ontario and Quebec; and item No. 303, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Apparently the minister is not prepared to treat each province separately. I have no objection to the item, but I think it would be better if we had each province separate.

Supply-Public Works


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The suggestion of my hon. friend no doubt has some merit, but the vote has been carried in this way for a number of years and has worked out satisfactorily. Each province is considered on its merits, and the amounts spent in each province are practically equal. Probably the reason for having the provinces coupled together was that there would be fewer items of a similar kind in the estimates.


Orvis A. Kennedy: I notice there is an increase for total salaries and wages in every province except the three prairie provinces, where there is a reduction in that item. Is this on account of a reduction in salaries and wages or a reduction in staff?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that there is no reduction at all in salaries and wages.


Orvis A. Kennedy: Then the reduction of 82,382 must be due to a reduction in staff?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that it is due to not so many dredges being in commission.


Orvis A. Kennedy: Where is the $46,000 new plant in the prairie provinces to be located?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is for a new tug on lake Winnipeg, the old one having been condemned.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and operation of graving docks, locks and dams, etc.-Champlain graving dock, $69,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask if graving docks are for the use of Public Works boats, or does the item also concern the Department of Transport?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The graving dock can be
used by any vessel.


John Ritchie MacNicol: As well as by Public Works vessels?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Grote Stirling: Is there any revenue from the public use of the dock?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: There is a regular schedule of tolls, regulated by order in council.


Grote Stirling: Does the public use the dock to any extent? Is there a considerable revenue?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Why is the dock at Saint John, New Brunswick, not in this list also?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Saint John dock is a subsidized dry dock.


Grote Stirling: What does the revenue amount to?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The revenue for 1936-37 was $27,344, and the total revenue since 1921-22 has been $601,863.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Esquimalt graving dock, $83,000.
Grote Stirling: What is the revenue at Esquimalt?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: In 1936-37 fifty-three vessels were docked there, and the revenue was $36,156. The total revenue since 1926-27 amounts to $318,223.36.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lome graving dock, $40,000.
Grote Stirling: Where is this dock?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is at Lauzon, opposite Quebec.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and operation of locks and dams, $62,800.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Has this item to do with the Rideau canal?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No; that is under the Department of Transport. This appropriation is to provide for the operation and maintenance of various locks and dams formerly charged to several general appropriations. The names of the dams are as follows: Riviere du Lievre lock and dam; French river dam; Latchford dam on Montreal river; St. Andrews lock and dam; Cowan dam; Okanagan dam at Penticton, storage dams on the Ottawa river, Quinze and Timiskaming.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and operation of snagboats, $41,000.
Alan Webster Neill: This may not be the appropriate item, but I do not know any other. Would the minister deal with Ripple rock under this item? I noticed in the paper that there was to be a sum put in the supplementary estimates to survey it, but my impression was that it was thoroughly surveyed some years ago and the method for getting rid of it settled.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It is a big job, likely to cost some $400,000.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I understand the department is informed as to the cost of disposing of that obstacle to navigation, and that it would be a costly proposition. We have not provided for that work this year. As far as
Supply-Public Works

investigation is concerned, I am informed by the officers of the department that they have practically all the information they require.


Alan Webster Neill: That is obtained by some officials appointed by the government?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Alan Webster Neill: My impression is, speaking from a rather treacherous memory, that the cost would not be very great, I think about $125,000.


Grote Stirling: Nearer half a million.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is vague in my mind, but I remember having seen some such report as my hon. friend speaks of, but it did not emanate from the department; it came from some other source.


Alan Webster Neill: There was a notice in the Vancouver paper that information had been given out from Ottawa that a sum of $5,000 was going to be voted for a survey, and my information is that Mr. Forde, the district engineer, or someone under him, carried out a survey some years ago, and decided that the only practical way to do the work was to run a tunnel from the side under the bed of the Narrows-they had to go some ninety feet deep-and then go up under the rock and blow it up. The cost was estimated at somewhere around $125,000. There seems to be a difference between what is reported in the paper and the minister's statement. The minister says they have all the information they need.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that a board of engineers was appointed and they had a public hearing some years ago. I am informed also that a request was made to the department to provide a further sum to make a survey, but we did not comply with that request because we felt we had all the information required. It was only a case of deciding whether or not we would do the work.


Alan Webster Neill: And it has been decided not to do it this year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Not this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and operation of roads and bridges-Burlington channel bridge, $16,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Why are six additional bridge men necessary?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that the staff has not been increased, but that some temporary employees have been made permanent.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The list on page 185 of the estimates shows six more men for 1938-39 than for 1937-38.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: As temporary employees their names do not appear in the estimates.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Surely it does not take eleven men to operate the Burlington bridge.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I notice that last year the temporary assistance was $4,320, and this year it is $500. Is the explanation that those temporary assistants have been appointed permanently?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: These employees were paid as temporary, and now they are being made permanent. The number of men is the same; there has been no increase.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Are they appointed by the civil service commission?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does that mean that eleven men are employed to operate the Burlington bridge?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Kingston, La Salle causeway, $10,500.
Mr. TUSTIN:: I notice there is $2,274 for temporary assistance. The men on the Burlington bridge are made permanent. Why should these men at Kingtson be temporary?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that these men are not particularly looking after the bridge but rather are looking after the piece of land there.


John Ritchie MacNicol: There is no land around the La Salle bridge.


George James Tustin: I should like to know the duties of these men. Surely the government does not keep two men to look after that land on La Salle causeway. There is no land there to speak of.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Is there a wharf, or some part of the causeway used for landing of boats? I have noticed them tied up there.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I think that would be part of the duties of these temporary men.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I was not sure whether that was operated by the Public Works department or the Department of Marine.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We look after the maintenance, repairs and operation of the combined roadway, wharves and bridges over the

Supply-Public Works
Cataraqui river at Kingston. I regret very much that I am not in a position to give a satisfactory answer to my hon. friend. I will undertake to supply that information on some other occasion when dealing with the estimates. There is still a good deal to* be disposed of and I will supply that information, if the hon. member does not object to passing this item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Ottawa, bridges and approaches, $26,200.
John Ritchie MacNicol: To what bridges around Ottawa does this refer?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Chaudiere, the Laurier avenue and the union bridges.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There seems to be a substantial increase in the amount to be expended this year. Where is it proposed to make this increased expenditure?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is to pave the union bridge.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Nova Scotia-
Essential undertakings-Little Anse-breakwater reconstruction, $43,400.
Malagash-wharf improvements, $19,000.
New Harbour-breakwater repairs, $8,200.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, $250,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Why is this amount of $43,400 required in connection with Little Anse breakwater reconstruction?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is required to provide for the reconstruction of the cribwork reinforcing block, 210 feet by 20 feet located on the harbour side of the breakwater. Attention is directed to the necessity of this work by district engineer Cox, who reports that the section of work to be rebuilt is badly damaged by action of the teredo, and in its present weakened condition is liable to be washed away at any time.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Will the minister explain the item of $19,000 for Malagash.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is required to provide for encasing the outer end of the public wharf with steel sheet piling, placing filling between the existing cribwork and proposed piling and laying a reinforced concrete deck four inches thick. Attention is directed to the necessity of the proposed work by the district engineer, who reports that this structure is in a bad condition owing to the ravages of sea worms. He reports also that pile
work will not be as suitable as sheet steel piling, which will withstand to. a greater degree the ice shoves at this place and will also better support the Malagash salt company's conveyer and the structure they intend to erect to house machinery of considerable weight.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: The principal traffic over the wharf is salt?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Prince Edward Island-
Under contract-Summerside-improvements to wharf, $3,100.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, $75,000.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Is this a revote or an extension?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is to complete payments on a contract.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: What is the total amount of the contract?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The amount is $22,829.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: There was voted $25,000 last year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Was that all expended?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: And this is in addition to the vote last year?
. Mr. CARDIN: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned,
without question put, pursuant to. standing order.
Tuesday, June 7, 1938