1941-02-19

REPORT WITH RESPECT TO DETENTIONS FROM NOVEMBER 1, 1940 TO FEBRUARY 17, 1941

Right Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):: As required by regulation No. 21 of the Defence of Canada regulations, I desire to lay on the table of the house the number of detention orders which have been made during the period from November 1, 1940 to February 17, 1941; the number of cases in
which a report has been made by the advisory committees; the number of releases; and the number of cases in which the Minister of Justice declined to follow the committee's recommendations.



PRECIOUS METALS MARKING ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. JAMES A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 12, to amend the Precious Metals Marking Act.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: I think we should have an explanation.


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: The bill provides for two amendments dealing with the marking of the gold content in ordinary and bracelet watches, and adds a new section to the act governing the requirements for spectacle or eyeglass frames or parts. Full explanation is given in the explanatory notes in the bill.
The amendments in regard to watches have been approved by the Canadian Jewellers' Association, and those in regard to eyeglasses by eight provincial optometrical associations.
Motion agreed to and bill read 'the first time.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (for the Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 13, respecting the appointment of auditors for National Railways.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Fisheries) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 14, to amend the Meat and Canned Foods Act (fish and shellfish).
He said: The purpose of the bill is to amend the act respecting meat and canned foods in order to make the compulsory grading and marketing provisions applicable to canned lobster. As the act stands, it does not provide for the compulsory inspection of canned lobster.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
Questions

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

Mr. CHURCH:: How many free passes of all kinds were issued on the railways of Canada for the last year of record?


Mr. HOWE:: The provisions governing reduced rates and free transportation are contained in sections 345, 346 and 347 of the Railway Act. The number of passes issued by the railways of Canada for any year is not of record in the Department of Transport. Returns are made by the railways to the board of transport commissioners, which does not make any public report concerning free transportation, and has ruled that returns made by the railway companies to the board are held to be privileged and not open to public inspection. The present request was referred to the board by the department, and it has been ascertained that the board is still of like view and does not consider that information such as presently requested should be furnished.


GOVERNMENT POLICY RESPECTING MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF LIQUOR
Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	Did a deputation of representative church leaders wait on a committee of the dominion cabinet with a view to restricting the sale of liquor in Canada during the war period?
2.	What did the deputation suggest?
.	3. Has the government adopted any change
of policy in connection with the manufacture and sale of liquor under the War Measures Act?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	(1) That sale of alcoholic beverages in taverns, beer-rooms, wine shops, etc., be discontinued and that sale of such beverages be confined entirely to government-owned liquor stores.
(2)	That sale from government liquor stores be permitted only between the hours of three o'clock in the afternoon and eight o'clock in the evening and on week-days only.
(3)	That all advertising of liquor in Canada be forbidden except in the place of sale.
(4)	That when the request in item 1 is implemented an order issue from the Department of Defence closing all wet canteens in military establishments.
3.	No.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-OUTSTANDING DEBENTURES
Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	What was the total amount of outstanding debentures assumed by the Canadian National Railways in 1922?
2.	What amount of interest has been paid on the above debentures between 1922 and the end of the last fiscal year?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	First published statement for consolidated system is that for the year 1923, which shows total funded debt held by public to be $823,099,056.
2.	Annual interest charge for 1923 on said debt was $35,412,449.
Since 1923 some of these securities have been retired in full or in part, and replaced by other issues. Variation in annual interest charges could only be determined approximately, and the railway management suggest that if annual interest is assumed to be that for the year 1923, total interest during period 1923-40, both years inclusive, on debt of railway system at the time of consolidation has been $637,424,082.


EXEMPTION OF FARMERS' SONS FROM MILITARY SERVICE
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaCROIX (Quebec-Montmorency):
Does the Department of National Defence intend to pass regulations exempting from military service farmers' sons needed for agriculture ?
Mr. RALSTON:: It is assumed that the
question refers to military training. As announced by the Prime Minister, in principle there will be no exemptions, particularly in view of the limited age groups affected; but I may say that consideration is being given by the departments of National War Services and National Defence to the feasibility of postponements where necessary to meet the requirements of essential seasonal occupations.


YORKTON, SASIC., AIRPORT
Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Was the gravelling of the airport at Yorkton, Saskatchewan, done by the government or by contract?
2.	If by contract, who was the contractor, and was the said contract on the basis of cost-plus?
3.	How many men were employed, what were their names and addresses and what amounts were paid to each?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	By contract.
2.	Contract awarded to Carter-Halls-Aldinger Company, Limited, 4th floor, Royal Bank Building, Winnipeg, Manitoba, on the basis of unit prices.
3.	No information.

Questions as Orders for Returns


FIXING OF MINIMUM PRICE FOR BUTTER FOR SUMMER SEASON
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaCROIX (Quebec-Montmorency):
Is it the intention of the government to fix a minimum price for butter during the summer season?
Mr. GARDINER:: The dairy products board has been given power to set a minimum price for butter.
"air MAIL GIVES WINGS TO BUSINESS"


Mr. DESMOND:: 1.	Did the government publish a pamphlet entitled "Air Mail Gives Wings to Business"?
2.	If so, how many copies were printed?
3.	What was the cost of publishing this
pamphlet?	.
4.	What was the cost of distributing this pamphlet ?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	Yes, printed in 1939-distributed by the Post Office Department in connection with air mail publicity campaign.
2 . 50,000.
3.	Approximately $2,000.
4.	Distributed with other necessary official instructions and departmental releases at no extra cost.



TAX CREDITS TO INCREASE SUPPLY OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE

Mr. DESMOND:: 1.	How many (a) individuals, (b) partnerships, (c) corporations, have applied for assistance by way of special tax credits and/or special allowances for depreciation or depletion under the Income War Tax Act and/or the Excess Profits Tax Act?
2.	What are the names of each such individual, partnership or corporation who have so applied?
3.	What is the nature of the business carried on by each such individual, partnership or corporation?
4.	How many of such applications have been granted?
5.	What is the nature of the tax credit relief or other concession which has been granted to each such individual, partnership or corporation?
6.	What is the estimate of the amount by which Canada's supply of foreign exchange will be increased as a result of each such grant of assistance or concession?


Mr. ILSLEY:: I understand that the hon.
member is willing to have the question amended so that instead of "Income War Tax Act and/or the Excess Profits Tax Act" the words "War Exchange Conservation Act" will be substituted. If that is so, I will have the question answered accordingly. In the meantime I ask that it stand.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Question stands.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. PERLEY:: 1.	Does the British government (a) own or (b) operate airfields or other training facilities at or near the city of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan?
2.	If so, from whom were the same acquired or purchased, and what are the particulars as to price?
3.	Who had the contract (a) to prepare the ground, (b) to erect the buildings?
4.	What prices were paid to the contractors for such work?


Mr. POWER:: Return tabled.


GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS-COST-PLUS AND MANAGEMENT-FEE PLAN
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: 1.	How many cost-plus contracts have been awarded by the government since September 1, 1939?
2.	To what persons, firms or corporations were such contracts awarded?
3.	What is the estimated cost of each such contract completed?
4.	How many of such contracts have been revised?
5.	What contracts have been so revised?
6.	What is the nature of the revision in each case?
7.	How many contracts have been awarded by the government on the management-fee plan since September 1, 1939?
8.	To what persons, firms, or corporations were contracts of this type awarded?
9.	What is the estimated cost of each such contract completed?
10.	What is the fee provided for in each such contract?
11.	In what management-fee contracts, if any, has provision been made for a reduction of fee in the event of the ultimate cost exceeding the estimated cost?
12.	In what management-fee contracts, if any, has provision been made for an increase of fee in the event of the ultimate cost being less than the estimated cost?



JOHN INGLIS COMPANY

Mr. CARDIFF:: For a copy of all contracts entered into between his majesty's government in Canada and the John Inglis Company of Toronto since September 1, 1939, together with copies of all correspondence, telegrams, memoranda and/or other documents and papers relating thereto.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Since this notice was placed on the order paper the minister was good enough yesterday to table copies of contracts entered into between the government and the Inglis company. If, as I assume, they cover all the contracts, this notice might be dropped.
Motion dropped.
Pension Act



PENSION ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Pensions and National Health) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend the Pension Act to make its provisions applicable to certain members of the Canadian forces serving in the present war and in future wars and to their dependents, to extend the benefits of the act to certain persons serving in the forces of the United Kingdom and also to make further changes and adjustments in the procedure and administration of the Pension Act.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (for the Minister of Public Works) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to introduce a measure to authorize the Minister of Public Works on behalf of his majesty to enter into an agreement to pay to the corporation of the city of Ottawa the sum of $100,000 for the year ending July 1, 1941.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (for the Minister of Transport) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act, 1937, changing the period for the fixation of rates for the current year, as defined in the act, and extending the initial period during which a subsidy may be payable to Trans-Canada Air Lines.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Richard Burpee Hanson: Before the orders of the day are
proceeded with may I ask the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) to lay on the table copy of order in council No. 223 dated January 31, 1939, and copy of contract made by his department with Northern Wood Preservers Limited, of approximately the same date, respecting the purchase of posts referred to in the report of the auditor general for the year ended March 31, 1940, pages 61-2, and entered into under the provisions of the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act and amendments.


James Garfield Gardiner: I shall be pleased of course to have placed on the table a copy of both the order in council and the contract. In view of remarks made on the other side of the house and discussion in the press, I should like to call the attention of hon. members of the house to that contract. I think when it is read it will be found that the statements made in the report of the auditor general are not justified in the light of the terms of the contract.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Should
we not wait and see?


James Garfield Gardiner: Of course I am not going to criticize anyone who has made remarks based on the statement of the auditor general, but as the session goes along I expect we shall have ample opportunity of discussing the actual facts in relation to the contract itself.



&quot;TOOLS FOR TREACHERY&quot;


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Ernest Lapointe: My friend the hon. member
for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) asked me a question the other day with regard to an article published in the Canadian Spokesman of February, 1941, entitled "Tools for Treachery," by Commissioner S. T. Wood, of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Postal Service in Toronto
I have since read the article, and incidentally it has given me the opportunity of reading another article in the same publication, by my hon. friend, which is very interesting.
The article to which my hon. friend calls attention clearly represents conditions as they exist in Canada, according to the practical experience of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Of course the few words quoted by the hon. member must be read in conjunction with the context and the rest of the-article. The commissioner never intended to say anything that would reflect on the rights and duties of members of parliament, and he would be sorry indeed if such interpretation has been given to his words. Indeed he had rather in mind certain statements made by members of some provincial legislatures.
So far as my own views are concerned'-my hon. friend has asked me to state them-I fully recognize and will always uphold and defend the rights and duties of parliament to comment upon, criticize, and recommend and enact changes in the defence of Canada regulations and the carrying out of such regulations. Indeed my very difficult task in that regard has been made easier by the useful and effective work of the parliamentary committee which sat last session, and whose recommendations have been accepted and made effective.
However, I must say that when a parliamentarian states at public meetings that members of trade unions have been interned because they were trade unionists, or that freedom of religion no longer exists in Canada because certain sects carrying out subversive and disloyal activities under the guise of religious creeds have been made unlawful, this certainly does not help our work, and we have the right so to express ourselves.


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: As one of those who has from time to time criticized the regulations made, I ask the Minister of Justice if he would be good enough to name the parliamentarians to whom he refers, because I do not think we should all be under suspicion of having made statements that were not warranted.


Ernest Lapointe: I think
this will come at the right time.


Thomas Langton Church: Commissioner Wood is
doing his duty and doing it well.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. P. MULOCK (Postmaster General):: In regard to the question asked by the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) on Monday, February 17, complaining about the inadequacy of mail service in some of the residential districts in Toronto, I advised him at that time that I would have inquiry made. The facts I find are as follows:
1.	No general complaints have been received either at the department in Ottawa or by the district director of postal services at Toronto in regard to late delivery of mails.
2.	At the postal terminal in Toronto, if trains are on time the letter carriers leave every morning at 8 o'clock without fail on the first delivery. In some parts of the city five deliveries a day are given, in other parts three deliveries a day, and in residential districts two deliveries a day, one in the morning and one in the afternoon.
3.	The night train from Montreal carries the mail from the east. This is the main train in so far as early morning delivery is concerned, and it has frequently been late during the present winter. On some occasions it has been late two or three times a week.
4.	As the delivery of this mail in Toronto is very important the letter carriers at the postal stations are held until this mail arrives, unless the train is too late, but if it is not available by 8.30 a.m. they leave on their distribution.
5.	To expedite the delivery when the Montreal train is late, post office trucks meet the train at Danforth station, the mail having been already sorted into postal station areas by city sorters placed on the train for that purpose. These trucks take it direct to the respective postal stations, where the letter carriers are waiting to deliver it.
Letter carrier work is based on a forty-four hour week. In the residential districts there are two deliveries a day. Whenever the train is on time letter carriers commence their morning delivery at 8 o'clock and complete their delivery at about 11 o'clock. When the trains are late the times of delivery are correspondingly retarded.
7.	Deliveries in Toronto have been impeded this winter on account of the slippery and icy conditions of the roads and sidewalks.


Thomas Langton Church: I have received more complaints this morning on the same subject. There should be an improvement made.


William Pate Mulock: I am sorry; I did not hear what the hon. member said.

Dominion-Provincial Conference



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE STATISTICS OF PUBLIC FINANCE AND NATIONAL INCOME BROUGHT UP TO DATE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Lorimer Ilsley: On Monday last the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) requested the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) to table the statistics prepared for the dominion-provincial conference, in order to bring the statistical computations of the Sirois report, so-called, up to date.
I now wish to table these statistics, which are in the form of two documents:
1.	Comparative statistics of public finance,
1936-40, and
2.	National income, 1937-40.
In tabling these documents I wish to make two comments by way of explanation to the house of their content and character.
In the first place, later and more complete information than was available to the commission itself made it possible for the secretariat of the commission to recalculate and refine the estimates of taxable regional income, net income derived from mining, smelting and refining of ores and oils, which was the basis of the proposed mining tax rebate to the provinces, relief costs in total and for unemployables, cost of tax collections and the residual transfers known as national adjustment grants.
I want to make it clear that this material has been prepared by the secretariat on the basis of the most complete information available to them, but it was our intention to submit it to the finance committee of the conference for close examination and criticism, and until such an examination was possible the government could not consider that the national adjustment grants as set forth were final.
In the second place, in the case of those provinces where actual revenues and expenditures were not available for the year 1940 the figures used were budget estimates or forecasts made some months before the close of the fiscal year and supplied by the provinces. In some oases it was apparent that these estimates might be subject to considerable modification when the actual results were available after the close of the fiscal year. It was therefore feared that they might be misleading to the public, particularly if used to illustrate the application of plan I to individual provinces.
It w'as for these reasons that the government hesitated to give this material circula-
[Mr. Mulock.J
tion without the advantage of full discussion and examination which would have been possible in the finance committee.
I may say that copies of the reports that are being tabled to-day are being distributed to hon. members.



NATIONAL DEFENCE TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. S. WHITE (Hastings-Peterborough):: I should like to ask the Minister of National Revenue if it is true that a change has been made in the application of the national defence tax in regard to soldiers; that this tax now applies to warrant officers, non-commissioned officers and privates in the Canadian Army while serving in Canada, and that payment of this tax by these other ranks has been retroactive to July 1, 1940.


Hon. C. W. G. GIBSON (Minister of National Revenue):: There has been no change in the provisions of the national defence tax.


George Stanley White: Am I right in assuming,
then, that this tax does not apply to warrant officers, non-commissioned officers and privates in the Canadian Army while serving in Canada?


Colin William George Gibson: That is correct, as far as our active forces are concerned.



CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Langton Church: I should like to ask the government what it is going to do in this, the eighteenth month of the war, with regard to conscientious objectors. Some action should be taken in this regard. In the United States these people are interned, and surely something should be done here. Why should some serve while others do nothing?


James Garfield Gardiner: In the regulations having to do with the calling up of men provision is made for dealing with conscientious objectors, and so far as I know those regulations are being followed.


Thomas Langton Church: I suppose they can serve in the rags, bones and bottles campaign.

War Appropriation-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, February 18. cousideration of the motion of Mr. Usley that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide, inter alia,
1.	That sums not exceeding $1,300,000,000 be granted to His Majesty towards defraying any expenses or making any advances or loans that may be incurred or granted by or under the authority of the governor in council during the year ending March 31, 1942, for-
(a)	the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada;
(b)	the conduct of naval, military and air operations in or beyond Canada;
(e) promoting the continuance of trade, industry and business comunications, whether by means of insurance or indemnity against war risk or in any other manner whatsoever; and
(d) the carrying out of any measure deemed necessary or advisable by the governor in council in consequence of the existence of a state of war.
2.	That the governor in council be empowered to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, such sum or sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of $1,300,000,000 as may be required for the purpose of defraying such expenses or making such advances or loans, the principal and interest of any such loan to be a charge upon and payable out of the consolidated revenue fund.
3.	That the governor in council be empowered to reexpend, advance or loan moneys that may be received by way of refund or repayment of advances, loans or expenditures under the War Appropriations Acts of 1939 (2nd session), 1940 and 1941.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Mr. Speaker, those of the membership of this house who followed closely the address of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Usley) yesterday on his motion that you do now leave the chair in order that the house go into committee to consider the financial resolution which he read into the record, and the Canadian people, having through the medium of the press and of the radio read and heard the substance of his remarks, will, I hope, have an intelligent appreciation of what this government is asking the people of this country to do in its war effort, measured strictly in terms of dollars and cents.
I confess at once, sir, that I was prepared for astronomical figures. I had heard of expenditures of more than a thousand million dollars, and of substantial sums to be spent in repatriation operations, but I had not visualized so huge a sum as $1,700 million.
When we add $433 million for our peacetime activities, we are astonished to find that we have reached a total of $2,133 million.
But that is not the whole story. On top of this huge figure we are to be asked for, and undoubtedly will provide, $175 million to be voted before the end of the fiscal year to take care of a probable deficit under the War Appropriation Act of 1940, to which the minister alluded, which will make a total of over $2,300 million. If we add to this the additional moneys which will be required to finance and to be tied up in financing wheat operations, which for 1940 amount to $100 million of liability principally in the form of credits by the Canadian banks, I assume guaranteed by the government of this country, and which for the coming year may run to $100 million more-no one knows as yet because the policy of the government has not been announced-we have a grand total of over $2,400 million which this government will have to raise directly from the Canadian people and financial institutions, by way of either taxation or borrowing. Then on top of that if we add the probable sum of $575 million which the same people, the same set of taxpayers, will have to raise to finance the probable expenditures of provincial and municipal governments, we shall have reached the enormous figure of approximately $3,000 million to be provided by the Canadian people- a figure calculated to stagger the stoutest heart among us.
Stated in terms of per capita population- and I am stressing this because I want the people of Canada to understand and visualize as far as possible just what this obligation is to be-on the basis of a probable population of twelve million people it means a total expenditure of $250 per head for every man, woman and child in this dominion. When we realize that at least half of our population will be able to contribute little, if anything, in this superhuman effort, it will be seen at once that the per capita contribution of those able to pay will be more than doubled. The minister's statement and these figures give us food for the most anxious and constant reflection.
I have stated on many occasions that, in my view, the Canadian people will give to this government, or to any government which may be established in Canada, the money to carry on the maximum war effort of which Canada is capable. But the same people will hold this government, or any government, strictly accountable and responsible for the method and the manner in which the government expends this money, and for the character of its war effort. I repeat that declaration to-day. as I did yesterday.
832	COMMONS
War Appropriation-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
In giving consideration to this huge wartime proposal-I shall not call it a budget- it is well, I think, that we should pause and investigate how the government and the minister propose to meet the terrific cost of the programme of expenditure which he has outlined.
Briefly, there are only three methods open to him:
1.	Reduction in non-defence expenditures- and I put this in the very forefront.
2.	Increased taxation-and there is a limit in this sphere which may not be exceeded.
3.	Borrowing.
It is assumed that inflation in any form is definitely barred, notwithstanding what some people may have said recently, and to that decision I am not, at the moment at least, taking any exception. Inflation as a means of financing this enormous programme at this time would, in my opinion, be a false move. Later on, when other sources have dried up, we may have to come to a measure of inflation, but we have not yet reached that point.
It is manifest, I think, that the attack on the problem must come from all three angles; and, without question, one of the first things to be done is the paring down to the bare bone, if possible, of all non-defence or peacetime spending, all along the line.
The minister has estimated that the national income for 1940-41 will be $5,300 million. I have always been somewhat doubtful about the calculations upon which our national income has been based. In my view, any calculation of true national income must not take into account income derived directly from war expenditures, which are based on borrowing; but if I can have an authoritative assurance that the estimate of $5,300 million of national income eliminates the possibility of including any national income from our war expenditures based on borrowing, then I shall be content to accept that figure.
I am doubtful, also, if the national income will be as great as suggested because, in a country which is unable to sell its major peacetime production, namely, its wheat and other cereal crops and general farm production, there must naturally be a substantial shrinkage in the amount of new wealth that is available to be included in national income. In the case of Canada, I suggest that this cannot be far short of $500 million. However, I have no means of accurately checking the estimate the minister has given. I hope he is right. If he is, it will ease somewhat the burden.
As I said a moment ago, the attack upon the problem of financing our war effort must be approached from three different angles. One of the first things to be done must be

the strictest paring down of peace-time expenditures wherever possible. This will serve the three-fold purpose of reducing the size of the deficit to be financed by the government, diminishing the competition of government with private spending, and lessening the danger of inflation.
Turning first to peace-time spending, I am sure there will be great disappointment in this country that the estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1942, tabled on Monday last, show a very small reduction in the total of ordinary peace-time costs of government. On paper, the total reduction as compared with the expenditures for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1941, is $18,119,000. Of this figure, however, $15,000,000 is represented by the fact that no provision is required for the deficit of the Canadian National Railways.
The government should not and cannot take credit for the fact that there is unlikely to be any deficit on the operations of the Canadian National Railways during the coming fiscal year. The improved operations of the system are accounted for, for the most part, if not altogether, by the increased volume of war transportation and not by any increase in the normal volume of peace-time activities. This is well illustrated by the fact that the volume of wheat moved is really less than normal.
Mr. Speaker, it may be news to the members of this house, and perhaps it will be news to the people of Canada, as it was to me, that last year, notwithstanding the great improvement in traffic, the cash deficit of the Canadian National system is estimated at $16,965,000, or nearly $2,000,000 more than the minister anticipated when he brought down his budget. I say to him that I believe an immediate and full explanation is due to the people of Canada.
The net result of the reductions in the estimates is, therefore, a saving of only $3,381,000; and, most emphatically, I say that is not good enough. There should have been a further sum pared from the estimates. I know some of the difficulties that have to be encountered. But these must be met, if we are to raise these huge sums for war purposes. In due course they will be met. One of the dismaying features is the fact that there are new expenditures of a new kind and character, but which are recurring in their nature, such as unemployment insurance, which, in the eyes of the government at least, have prevented a further saving. But the Canadian people, notwithstanding this factor, will insist that a saving of only $3,381,000 in peace-time activities is not good enough.
To take an isolated example, why is it necessary to spend a sum in excess of

War Appropriation-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
$2,800,000 in taking the decennial census this year? I am quite aware that, under the provisions of the British North America Act, the government is required to have the census taken. But Canada is at war. The taking of the census is a purely peace-time activity. It can and must be postponed. As a matter of fact, it ought to be postponed without our having to ask for this. The cost of this elaborate counting and compilation of the population is something that is not absolutely necessary; and if we are to ask the Canadian people, as they have been asked by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Usley) and by others who have spoken to them in connection with Canada's war effort and lending programme, to tighten their belts, then every honest effort ought to be made to avoid this expenditure, and expenditures of a like character.
I pause to give just one other example of an expenditure which might be saved. After the declaration of war, there was set up by this government a bureau of public information, under the hon. gentleman who was then postmaster general, and who is now Minister of Labour (Mr. McLarty). Later it was transferred to the Ministry of National War Services. I have not been able to obtain figures covering the cost of this service to date. However, a return tabled Monday, indicates that in all departments of government there are eighty-six employees engaged in publicity work-twice the number that flock into that press gallery every day. These gentlemen draw salaries aggregating 1164,000, including salaries of $61,000 in the bureau proper. These are, of course, new expenditures, and they are likely to grow. Up to November 30, 1940, the total cost of operation of the bureau of public information alone, apart from the salaries paid by the government departments to those who are not direct employees of the bureau, amounted to $202,000.
I protest against this expenditure. It is an unnecessary waste of public funds. The newspapers of this country will get -the news, and it will not be canned news, either. The public is tremendously suspicious of these press releases. Many of them are false. Most of them are propaganda, pure and simple. All of them are unnecessary. Let us have an end of this useless expenditure.
Many of our people in their private lives, if they have not already realized it, will have to realize that they must do without many things they would like to have, or they must defer, to a more convenient season, expenditures which, in normal times, they would make without hesitation. They will save and sacrifice cheerfully if they are convinced that governing bodies are taking the same realistic view of expenditures; and I suggest to this house and to the country that the fact that our peace-time budget has been reduced by only $3,381,000 is not good enough.
Then there are the probable provincial and municipal expenditures, estimated at $575 million. I know this government is not directly responsible for those expenditures, but it has a moral obligation to the people of Canada so far as possible to use its influence to impress upon provincial and municipal governments the fact that they should set an example and cooperate with the federal government in cutting their appropriations, so that it can not be said that over 10 per cent of the national income is to be expended in war time by these administrations.
Considering the exhibition which I witnessed in this very chamber on January 15 last, I am not very hopeful that there will be much cooperation between the provincial governments, or at least some of .them, and this government. In all the years I have been in Ottawa I have never seen such an exhibition of national disunity as was shown on that occasion. I shall have something further to say about this at a later time.
This government has not helped the provincial governments very much by cutting off its contribution of 40 per cent of the cost of unemployment relief, although I am bound to say to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance that I think that that was inevitable. After the manner in which the Minister of Finance wielded the big stick at the provincial conference, it was sure .to come. I am not quarrelling with that decision.
There are few signs up to date to indicate that the provinces are seized of the seriousness of the situation. Let us consider the case of British Columbia. According to information which I have received, the last budget of the government of British Columbia called for a current expenditure of over $33 million, the highest in the history of that province.
I should like to direct particular attention to the situation in New Brunswick, with which I am most familiar. In March, 1940, the present provincial administration announced a budget appropriation of over $10 million, an all-time high. This, for a province with an estimated population of only 450,000 people, works out to $22 per head. Over 40 per cent of this sum is earmarked to pay the service on the provincial debt which, including the funded debt, treasury bills outstanding, bank loans and guaranteed obligations, the service of which the province has had to assume-


Clarence Decatur Howe: We work from the same list.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If he did not-or even if he did-has Canada drafted any set schedule on its own account? I suggest to this house and to the country that there is abundant evidence that there has not been drafted any such master plan.
Have we in any degree endeavoured to coordinate our efforts with the plan brought back by Mr. Purvis to Washington? Our Minister of Munitions and Supply makes periodical trips to Washington; but, so far as I am aware, he has no first-class executive in Washington in close touch with Mr. Purvis or Mr. Knudsen, ensuring the complete coordination of our programme with their programmes. It is true we have a legation there and a minister, but at the moment he is unfortunately indisposed through illness, as the Prime Minister told us on Monday. Who is representing Canada at this time in Washington-and especially with regard to coordination in production?


Clarence Decatur Howe: J. P. Carswell.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well, I know Mr. Carswell very well-or at least I used to know him; I have not seen him for a long time. I am glad to have the minister's statement in that regard; I had not heard it before; if Mr. Carswell is of the right calibre, then the minister has done the right thing, and I tell him so now.
It seems to me, however, that the greatest sin of omission on the part of this government is that it has neither a master plan for war nor a master schedule for war production. The Minister of Munitions and Supply is a capable man but he has no time or opportunity to think or to plan. In his anxiety to fulfil his conception of his responsibilities, in the operation of government, as we have it presently in Canada, and as the chief of war production, I am told he does not give any of his lieutenants authority over more than one isolated phase of the work at one time. It would appear to me that he is so confident of his ability that he carries on a dozen different

jobs at one time and even retains the control of the Trans-Canada Airways and other unrelated activities. Someone has described his major job as a 30-ring circus, and he insists on running several side-shows.
Recently there was set up a war-time requirements board, headed by one of the biggest industrialists in the Dominion of Canada. The board was established, if I understand the situation, to plan the most productive and direct use for war purposes of available supplies of materials, power, manufacturing plant and transportation facilities, in order to ensure that war needs, in the order of their importance, shall have priority over all other needs.
Please note the words "to plan" and "direct". Well, the air around Ottawa, and the newspapers of Canada, have been full of rumours and stories and statements and repercussions, and I think there is a good deal of evidence that the chairman of that board did some planning and tried to do some directing-but with what result? The chairman went away to his home in Vancouver recently and, I am told, left on his desk a statement in which he said, in effect, that he would be back in Ottawa if Ottawa had a job it wanted him to do.
This is a very important statement. It is apparent, I think, to those who know the story, that the minister evidently did not want the war-time requirements board to plan or direct war production operations.
I remember reading the order in council which set up that board and the authority given to the board, and I concluded that a correct interpretation of the power simply meant that it was merely an advisory board and that it had no real power; and I believe I am right in that interpretation. The chairman of the board himself, I believe, was seized of the lack of authority, but he was of opinion that when he required authority he would get it. The result would appear to be that he has been refused, and that, while he had the power to plan, he had no power to direct. Take, for instance, certain lagging phases of war production, such as Federal Aircraft. It is reported to me that when Mr. MacMillan set out to create the machinery needed to give war production the right of way, he found himself blocked. The fact is that his powers were advisory only-sweeping, it may be said, so long as he did not try to get action on his own initiative.
That is the sort of thing which is discouraging to Canadians anxious to get ahead with the total effort demanded by the country and visualized by the Prime Minister in his recent broadcasts. We have been deluged in days gone by with promises of what is to be

War Appropriation-Mr. Hanson ( Yorlc-Sunbury)
done-splendid objectives on paper, but apparently there is no way to ensure that they will be attained in practice. Take any of the more important items. Naval guns were to be made-the biggest in the British empire. I understand that the programme is now limited to barrels for naval guns.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Neither is true. If I may correct my hon. friend-I wish him to be correct-I said that we had the largest gun plant in the empire, not the largest guns.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If it is idle, that is not much to boast about.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The naval guns are complete guns.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I said I had been told. I read it in the public press. I do not know whether this high-powered board down here in the Department of National War Services slipped again. They did once with regard to this very matter. Take any of the more important items- naval guns, aircraft production, tank production. We were promised all these things, but the results have been most discouraging.
There are several things that are needed in order that we may have a total effort. Right in the very forefront I put the need of a master war plan; and to draft a master war plan we need a war cabinet, composed of the best men in the country, freed from the confining detail of departmental administration and departmental duties.
Recently in a public address I advocated that the immediate duty of the hour is to strengthen the government. I repeat that assertion. There is weakness in the high political command. It is recognized everywhere. If it is to continue on the party basis, it must be strengthened on that basis, but it should be strengthened regardless of party affiliation; and this, because of the need of greater national morale, and the gigantic task at hand.
The fact is that, until quite recently at least, the war and its responsibilities were not taken seriously enough by the government. Canada should have a war cabinet, adequate in size for war purposes, composed of the ablest administrators available, and with no partisan tinge. It seems to me that this is elementary, and nothing else should be tolerated.
There are those who believe that the war effort of the government, being of such a mushroom growth, has reached a state of, shall I say, chaos, and that the record of the past eighteen months stands at an alltime high in futility. With the possible exception of the production of motor units
and that sort of equipment, everything has gone wrong except the courage and capacity of our fighting forces, and the willingness of labour and industry to work and produce, if properly directed.
From the very beginning the present state of war production was inevitable. When war threatened, the government did nothing to prepare for war, although it knew that Canada was defenceless. When war came, the government did nothing to ensure the rapid and effective mobilization of the nation. The government embarked upon a policy of minimum, at least moderate, participation and not maximum cooperation. The measure of this country's contribution was governed by political expediency. To-day we are reaping the harvest of the government's default. The situation is so bad that the people are now aroused to it, and relentless criticism of the government is nationwide.
In peace time, it would be the right and opportunity of the opposition to take advantage of the failure of the government to serve the nation according to its needs, but in this time of war we dare not permit the government of Canada to be discredited. England is looking to Canada for help. The United States is looking to Canada to see what is the measure of our effort; and we must close our ranks. We must present a united front. We must lay friendly hands upon this government and help it forward. The interest of the nation and of the empire puts that obligation upon all good Canadians.
Therefore his majesty's loyal opposition, speaking through myself as a humble instrument, declares that its present purpose is not to indict the government for past failures but to help the government to present and future achievements. Pursuant to that purpose, I as leader of the opposition in this House of Commons recently rededieated this party to the service of the state, and I now come again to the government and say, "What can we do to help?"
I have already indicated my belief that the immediate duty of the hour is to strengthen the government, and that Canada should have a war cabinet adequate for war purposes and without any partisan tinge. No appeal to the nation for concerted action looking to victory will bring a full national response until the nation sees that the Prime Minister's solemn renunciation of partisanship in time of war-made not once only-has become a matter of deeds and not mere words. It is true that on more than one occasion he has renounced partisanship. He has said it must not be. But he does not make his followers realize that until they also renounce partisanship his renunciation is valueless. And, there-
838	COMMONS
War Appropriation-Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury)
fore, we should have an announcement from the Prime Minister of the accomplishment of such renunciation. That should be coupled with an announcement that his cabinet is to be reorganized and strengthened with men especially qualified to serve the national interest with all their hearts and with all their vigour.
I believe that the people of Canada would be delighted and greatly encouraged if the Prime Minister would say to-day: "At this time of crisis, the Liberal government renounces the principle of partisan government. Pursuant to that principle, we now intend to form a government composed of the best men Canada can supply. Party considerations shall be forgotten. We will bring these men from agriculture, from industry, from labour, from finance. This government will guarantee unity even as it will guarantee efficiency; for in it there shall be leaders of every class and section of the nation. It will be the new model for effective democratic leadership in time of war."
In the name of Canada's duty to the empire, in the name of Canada's efficient conduct of the war, I urge the Prime Minister, in this hour of the empire's need, to make this announcement to the Canadian people. In the name of the freedom of the individual and of those institutions which freedom has given us, I urge this policy upon the Prime Minister.
The War Measures Act and the National Resources Mobilization Act are now the law of Canada. Those acts, in the hands of party government, are bound to grow into instruments of dictatorship unless they are controlled by a really non-partisan government. If, with the aid of the War Measures Act and the National Resources Mobilization Act, the government should seek to build a fortress for the Liberal party, I warn them that they will in fact be building a prison house for all the rights and privileges of the Canadian people; they will be setting the stage for fascism.
Let the Prime Minister look well into the English-speaking world and tell this house the reason why he should not do as other empire governments have done. It cannot be because the Prime Minister believes himself to be endowed with greater wisdom than that of a Churchill or of a Roosevelt or of a Menzies. It cannot be because the Prime Minister thinks that his government's conduct of the war is more effective than that of the other governments to which I have referred. How do we compare with Australia? The question answers itself. It cannot be that the Prime Minister thinks that such a course will harm the prestige and power of the Liberal party.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: My hon. friend asked about a comparison wfith Australia. Will he tell us what comparison he wishes to make?


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is a
rhetorical question; the Prime Minister can answer later if he wants to. The fact is that Australia is on the field of battle, and Canada is not.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I deny that
absolutely. Canada is very much on the field of battle.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Tell that to the marines! The people of Canada know that we are not in Libya. We have a few airmen in England; we have men in training in England.


Ernest Lapointe: No
politics.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It cannot be that the Prime Minister fears that such a government might drive the war effort of Canada beyond the limit fixed by the Liberal party.
If the Prime Minister will not do this, then I prophesy that it will not be long before he will bitterly regret his rejection of an honest appeal made by me in the name, as I believe, not only of more than a million Conservative voters in Canada but of every Liberal who puts his country before his party; for Liberals know, as well as we do, that this government has failed.
Canadians are slow to anger. We are a patient people; but we are patriots as well. We realize at last that empire democracy needs all that Canada has to give, namely, maximum cooperation upon the highest level of service and of sacrifice. We realize also that Canada is not giving to the empire all she has to give.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I do not threaten the Prime Minister; I appeal to him. In this crisis of civilization Canada must play a mighty part. The hour calls for dominant statesmanship. Let the Prime Minister rise to the need of the hour, and this country will rise also and stand behind him.


Thomas Miller Bell: When the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) yesterday introduced the resolution now before us I am sure that everyone in the chamber was struck by the stupendous amount requested for his majesty at this time. For a country of between eleven and twelve million people the amount asked is indeed a staggering sum. But staggering though it may be, I am confident that the people of

War Appropriation-Mr. Coldwell
Canada will realize that in the struggle in which we are now engaged, and which has taken on more definitely than ever before the character of a struggle between the democratic way of life and the totalitarian way of life, the Canadian people are prepared to support the government in raising the amount requested.
Having regard, however, to the enormous size of this vote there are some things that I believe ought to be said by members of this house.	The appropriation asked for
covers a very wide range:
(a)	the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada;
(b)	the conduct of naval, military and air operations in or beyond Canada;
(c)	promoting the continuance of trade, industry and business communications, whether by means of insurance or indemnity against war risk or in any other manner whatsoever; and
(d)	the carrying out of any measure deemed necessary or advisable by the governor in council in consequence of the existence of a state of war.
It includes, therefore, efforts beyond those which are usually viewed as war efforts.
Last May we passed an appropriation bill providing for rather more than half the amount now requested, and so far parliament has had no opportunity of inquiring fully into the manner of its expenditure. I do not suggest that we should delay the passage of this resolution or of the bill that will follow. But I insist that it is the duty of this house to exercise more care than we are exercising as to the manner in which such grants to his majesty are disposed of.
Lately I have been looking over a very interesting and authoritative work on parliamentary grants. I have it beside me here- "Parliamentary Grants," by Durell. I wish more hon. members would read this book. At page 3 Durell states:
It is one of the old standing principles of our constitution that the House of Commons should control the finances of the country. That is the right, privilege and duty of the house. It has been achieved by means of struggles lasting through centuries. . . . Upon this fundamental principle, laid down at the very outset of English parliamentary history and secured by three hundred years of mingled conflict with the crown and peaceful growth, is grounded the whole law of finance and, consequently, the whole British constitution.
And he goes on to say:
Appropriation alone is, however, of little avail if no provision is made for securing compliance with it. The right of appropriation must be accompanied by the right of parliament to satisfy itself as to the expenditure of the money on the services for which it has been voted.
It is true that we have an annual statement of the auditor general laid before this house, but that is only an assurance that the money
has been expended for the purposes for which we intended it. We have no assurance that it has been economically expended, or expended in a manner which would serve the maximum public interest.
It will be argued, of course, that at this time to reveal how this money is being spent might give information to the enemy. If that is so the House of Commons might well follow another British precedent and discuss some of these matters in closed session-in camera. During the last war the British public accounts committee-which, as its name denotes, was a public committee-sat at Westminster in camera, in 1916, in order to consider certain of the accounts connected with the war. Our whole parliamentary system is based on that of Britain. Our rules of debate, our procedure, are modelled on British parliamentary practice and British custom and precedents. At the moment, I say, this country and this parliament alike are largely ignorant of what is going on in relation to a large part of our war effort. Rumours are rampant; criticism is rife, and these dampen the ardour of our people for the support and conduct of the war. Some things must remain confidential, but parliament is responsible to the people and the cabinet is responsible to parliament; there should be a closer bond of confidence between the cabinet and the House of Commons at the present time. It is for this house to decide, and this house alone, what financial matters ought to be kept confidential; for none other is the supreme power in deciding what, how, why and when expenditures should be made.
Except when some particular problem has arisen our public accounts committee has seldom met. I read again in Durell that the British public accounts committee exercises great influence over all the departments of government. Here it has exercised no influence, because it has seldom met. How many members of this house know how the appropriation made last May has been spent? I venture to say none except the members of the government, and someone suggests that probably they do not know either. In any event this house has no information of the sort it ought to have regarding these expenditures. Questions placed on the order paper in the early part of this session last November asking for statements with regard to government expenditures, particularly in relation to contracts, brought forth replies that can be summarized in these words: "not in the public interest". It seems to me that if we are to have a war effort that will win the imagination and the support of the vast majority of the people of Canada, and if we are to ask them

War Appropriation-Mr. Coldwell
to subscribe money to various war loans and to pay heavy taxes, we have an obligation to those people to see that the money is properly spent.
Durell, whom I am going to quote for the last time, states:
The supreme control of the Commons over public grants, as already mentioned, necessarily demands the complete right of control over the manner in which the grants are spent. This second right must be inseparable from the first if the control over the grants is to be effective, but it is a right which was not claimed nor enforced by the House of Commons until long after the right of control over supply had been established.
Then, in these words he quotes Gladstone, in the British House of Commons:
It is undoubtedly the business of the House of Commons to be responsible not only for the inception of all public expenditure, but also to follow the money raised by taxation until the last farthing is accounted for.
To achieve this end this house has two methods, the auditor general and the public accounts committee. As I said just now, in Britain the public accounts committee performs that function. In our country the public accounts committee has seldom met. I was glad to learn to-day that the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) intends to introduce a motion to appoint a special committee to follow our war expenditures through. That is a step in the right direction. A similar committee, with similar power, was appointed in Great Britain early in the war, some fourteen or fifteen months ago. It was supplementary to the public accounts committee, and has been sitting continuously since that time. We are taking the same step some fourteen or fifteen months after it should have been taken.
It seems to me that in the important particulars to which I have referred we in this house have departed from the elementary right of this house to complete control over expenditures. Let me repeat that information may be and indeed ought to be withheld publicly for military reasons, but I submit that there is no precedent anywhere for withholding from the members of this house the provisions of important government and commercial contracts. Surely that is something new, something we ought not to tolerate lest we lose the only real power we possess over the executive arm of government.
To-day we are discussing the largest appropriation ever requested from this House of Commons. How do we propose to raise that money?-evidently largely by borrowing at rates of interest. Can we allow another war to provide the means for a comparatively small number of people to obtain a per-

manent lien on the future production of our people?-for that is what the payment of interest over a long term will inevitably mean.
It is true that we are asking the small men to save and to lend. Indeed a considerable amount of compulsion is being exercised in some industries to obtain contributions from the employees. And we should remember that many of those employees have been unemployed for a very considerable period of time. To-day many of the expenditures they are foregoing are expenditures upon necessities in their homes and for their families. I am not objecting to the making of appeals for voluntary aid from all classes of our citizens. I think they should be so made at this time. People who save now are being told that they are providing for the inevitable slump that will follow the war. That, too, is something worth considering.
But let me point this out: At the close of this war those small people will have to cash in on their war bonds, just as they did following the great war in connection with the victory bonds they bought at that time. All these gilt-edged securities we are issuing in large quantities and at a fairly attractive rate of interest will tend to get into the hands of those who have accumulated wealth either prior to or during the war days.
Let me repeat: I am not saying we should not encourage the sale of war bonds to the small investor. I believe we should encourage those sales. I realize that this is important, too, from an entirely different point of view; for we have to transfer productive and skilled labour from luxury industries to war industries. This is one method of achieving that objective. It is an important phase of our war savings campaign. But are we really achieving this? Not altogether, I think. Some people are denying themselves necessities. Others invest in war bonds, but deny themselves nothing. We believe that if we are to raise such huge sums now and in the future we shall have to devise new ways and means of raising at least a large part of the money required. It may be necessary for us to say eventually that we must adopt a maximum income standard as well as a minimum standard of life, and tax in full every dollar beyond the maximum standard upon which the country decides.
Meantime however let us use the instruments at our hand-and we have some instruments we could use to a greater extent than we are using them to-day. In view of the various monetary proposals which have been made lately I want to put our position, the position of this group, clearly on record. I

War Appropriation-Mr. Coldwell
may therefore be pardoned for quoting a portion of a speech I delivered in Winnipeg last October, and which my colleagues have requested me to quote. It was made before our national convention, prior to the new monetary controversy which has recently arisen, and is in these words:
The C.C.F. has always placed in the forefront of its economic policy the public ownership and control of the financial system so that money and credit could be made instruments of national policy. Proposals to this end have been met by opposition from all other groups in parliament. There are those who talk vaguely about monetary reform and advocate the issue of "debt-free" money but who fail to recognize that neither the one nor the other can be achieved as long as banks are privately-owned institutions operated for the profit of their shareholders. The C.C.F. urges parliament to make finance the servant of the people instead of allowing it to continue to be the master. Some people fail to realize that money is only a medium of exchange and a symbol. To suppose that a multiplication of symbols will win a war or cure our domestic ailments is clearly a delusion and a snare. Monetary and financial reform must be considered and instituted as part of a general and wide programme of economic reform. It is a means, not an end in itself.
Dorothy Thompson, in an article entitled, "An Ideology That Cannot Win," put the matter well when she wrote:
"The Germans did not vote themselves four billion money units for defence. They voted- had voted for them-thirty thousand planes, so and so many guns, so and so many thousand tons of reserves of oil and raw materials. The German economy is an economy of things and men; the allied economy is an economy of symbols; money. The German economy recognizes that all wealth is in goods, particularly in capital goods, and that these are not created by money, which is only the medium of exchange, but by the application of labour to materials.
The Allies had money, but failed to produce goods. The Germans had no money, but did produce them."
Thus this doughty and bitter opponent of nazism places her finger on the strength of the German programme and upon our own weakness. Hitler has prostituted a fundamental truth of socialist philosophy for a diabolical purpose even as Satan is said to be able to quote scripture to serve his ends. To win the war, to meet the needs of the post-war period we must deliver ourselves from the delusion that money is wealth, and turn to the realistic truth, that all wealth is in goods, created by the application of labour power to material things. This is the Alpha and Omega of the C.C.F. economic philosophy; this is the truth which a new government in Britain is bringing to the attention of the English-speaking world.
I quote that because I believe it summarizes the point of view we have expressed from time to time in this chamber. To-day many people are under the delusion that money is wealth, when, as I said a moment ago, it is merely a symbol, a system of accountancy, if you like, in our economic structure.
Holding these views I wish to move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) the following amendment:
That all the words after "that" in paragraph 2 of the resolution be struck out and the following substituted therefor:
"the governor in council be empowered to raise, under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931,
1.	by way of compulsory, interest-free loans to be levied according to ability to subscribe, and
2.	by the public ownership and control and the planned use of the entire financial system, such sum or sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of $1,300,000,000, as may be required for the purpose of defraying such expenses or making such advances or loans, the principal of any such loan to be a charge upon and payable out of the consolidated revenue fund."
Surely we have a right to ask and to expect that when we call upon our men to fight, and perchance to lay down their lives, we should at the same time call upon accumulated wealth to place itself at our disposal. When the budget is before us we shall urge again the elimination of private profit from our war effort, but in the discussion on this bill we deem it our duty to urge the principle of compulsory interest-free loans and the public ownership and control of our financial institutions.
The publicly owned Bank of Canada has proven itself to be a most useful instrument in the control of foreign exchange and the relating of expanding currency to expanding production. Few realize when they talk of using large volumes of printed money that since July, 1939, the active circulating currency in Canada has been expanded by some fifty per cent.
When low price levels prevailed before the present war broke out, when there was unemployment and business stagnation, we advocated the issue of more money to provide more credit, to increase employment, to accelerate consumer demand and raise the price level. That was a measure of reflation which at that time we believed to be both justifiable and necessary. But the situation has changed. With an expanding war effort, with the distributing of new purchasing power in greater volume, with a lessened production of consumer goods, care must be exercised lest we bring about the disaster of inflation. In our opinion both deflation and inflation are evils which we should endeavour to circumscribe whenever it is possible to do so.
To-day inflation would not benefit agriculture whose wheat and other products are unsalable. Many of our agricultural people think that because during the great war



War Appropriation-Mr. Coldwell
inflationary period they were able to reap more dollars for their products, the same thing might happen now. However, the situation to-day is different from that which existed in 1919, 1920 and 1921. Then there was a scarcity of wheat and foodstuffs throughout a great part of the world which had been devastated by war; there was a demand and the scarcity enabled agricultural produce to rise in price.
But to-day we face an entirely different situation. We have in Canada hundreds of millions of bushels of wheat which are yet unsold. Many people have gone into the hog raising industry, and that industry is being threatened with a surplus. When that happens we shall have people going into the live stock industry, and the same thing will happen there. To-day an inflationary period would have an exactly opposite effect upon the agricultural producer to what occurred in the years following the great war. He would have to pay high prices for all the consumer goods which he uses and he would receive relatively lower prices, lower even than those which now prevail, for his commodity. As my hon. friend suggests, he would be cleaned right out, the last remaining shreds would be picked from his already pretty thin body.
Then rising prices would cause distress among those who must live on a fixed income, on relief, or a pension. It would immediately bring about a demand in industry for increased wages. In some industries increased wages are justified to-day by the already increased cost of living, but the increased wages would never catch up with the increased cost of living. We would have industrial unrest which would interfere seriously with our war effort. To my mind the only people who would benefit from such a condition would be the speculators, for whom some of our politicians apparently care more than they do for the welfare of the common people of their own provinces.
We submit that only a planned democratic control of our economy will meet this situation and the situation which we will have to face in the next several years. The days of drift, the old days of laissez-faire, have gone. Whether we like it or whether we dislike it, we have to face the hard fact that to-day we are dealing with a situation which requires organization, planning and new methods. To the extent that democracy is able to plan, to the extent that democracy through its democratic institutions is able to direct, to that extent democracy will live. We dare not allow democracy to fall and ourselves to pass under the heel of some form of totalitarian dictatorship.

That is why we place to-day complete public control, which we believe involves the ownership, of our financial system in the forefront of the proposals that we would make to this house. After all, the financial system is the means;, not only by which we account for our productive activities but by which we save. When we say that we save money, let us remember that we save goods. When we do not spend a dollar, we do not demand a dollars' worth of goods. Our financial system is the means whereby we save, whereby we invest and whereby we direct production into its various channels. Only a completely publicly controlled financial system will fill the bill at the present time. More and more the government will have to tell our people what production they require; more and more they will have to tell the people what things they ought to forego.
I heard the Minister of Finance over the radio, I think it was from Windsor, a short time ago, and if I heard him aright he said that within the next year we may require 300,000 new workers in industry in order to maintain our war efforts in the new industrial organizations which we are building at the present time. That, in addition to the men normally engaged in the industries which we cannot do without-transportation, electric power, and so on-will not only absorb all the employable unemployed, but will demand the changing over of large numbers of people from one type of industry to another. This being the case, we have to go in for more planning than we have ever gone in for before. I know that before the war I used to say that, when war comes, planning become inevitable, and that is being borne out more and more to-day. Now, we can either have a planning from the top down, autocratic, totalitarian planning, or we can have planning through our democratic institutions by the representatives of the people for the people and for the common good. That is the choice, it seems to me, which Ides before the democratic countries.
In time of war there is only one thing to do, and that is to direct all our energies to the one end, victory over the enemy. But in doing that we have to beware lest we make errors which will snatch from us the fruits of victory when the war is over. We of this group, in placing these suggestions before the house, are putting them forward not in any dogmatic way, but because we believe that they are worthy of consideration. At this time, no matter how widely our views on many things differ, we ought to have one common interest, and that is the preservation of our democratic institutions, so that in the days to come we and those who come after us shall be able to make ordered and orderly progress to a newer and a better day.

War Appropriation-Mr. Quelch


Georges Parent: Mr. Coldwell moves,
seconded by Mr. Maclnnis:
That all the words after "that" in paragraph 2 of the resolution be struck out and the following substituted therefor:
"the governor in council be empowered to raise, under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931,
1.	by way of compulsory, interest-free loans to be levied according to ability to subscribe, and
2.	by the public ownership and control and the planned use of the entire financial system, such sum or sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of $1,300,000,000, as may be required for the purpose of defraying such expenses or making such advances or loans, the principal of any such loan to be a charge upon and payable out of the consolidated revenue fund."
I would point out to the hon. member that the amendment is dealing with a resolution which has been recommended by His Excellency the Governor General for the consideration of the house. The motion before the house is that I do now leave the chair for the house to resolve itself into committee of the whole. Therefore this amendment is not in order.
That does not, of course, preclude the hon. member from moving his amendment if he so desires when the house is in committee of the whole; but meanwhile it is not in order.


Mr. VICTOR QUELCH (Acadia):: First
of all, I wish to make a few comments regarding the speech of the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) and also one or two observations regarding the speech made by the house leader of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (Mr. Coldwell).
I was somewhat puzzled by a statement made by the leader of the opposition to the effect that, while he would be definitely opposed to inflation at this time, he thought possibly it might be justified at a later date.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I did not say that.


Victor Quelch: Well, words to that effect.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I never
said it would be justified. I said we might have to consider it at a later date.


Victor Quelch: The hon. gentleman
thought we might have to consider it at a later date. I believe most people will admit that, in times when we have unemployment and undeveloped resources, monetary expansion is occasionally necessary. As a matter of fact, we maintain that it is necessary, and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley), in his speech in September, 1939, admitted that for the purpose of providing fuller employment and greater production, monetary expansion
would be desirable. But I cannot understand anyone suggesting that it might be more desirable at a later date after full production had been reached.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I never
said that either.


Mr. GRAYDON:: He did not say that
at all.


Victor Quelch: I think Hansard will show that is what he did say.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I did not say it was desirable; I said that we might have to consider it later on.


Victor Quelch: I still cannot understand
why we should consider it after reaching full production if we refuse to consider it before we reach full production. Surely the time to consider monetary expansion is before full production is reached. I think the Minister of Finance would agree with that statement.
The leader in this house of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation made a statement with which I do not agree, when he said that when we nationalized the Bank of Canada it served to bring about a better relationship between production and money. In view of the fact that from 1935 to 1939 we had in the neighbourhood of half a million people unemployed, I cannot see how anyone can claim that the Bank of Canada maintained a correct relationship between the amount of money and the amount of employment or production in the country. The minister himself admitted in September, 1939, that it was desirable to have monetary expansion in order to bring about fuller employment and an increase in the production of the country.
The figures quoted by the Minister of Finance must have helped to impress everyone with the magnitude of our war effort. I think it should prove, to all those who have given this matter any consideration, the undesirability, or perhaps I might say the impossibility, of obtaining such enormous sums entirely from the pockets of the Canadian people. Action of that kind would mean the lowering of the standard of living of the people to such a tremendous extent that our war effort would be greatly impaired. If production were static, such action might be necessary. But, as a matter of fact, production is steadily expanding, and is still a very long way from reaching the maximum. I say that in spite of statements which have been made by some ministers to the effect that we are rapidly approaching that point.
We still have thousands of unemployed. I believe that every hon. member is being frequently approached by men, skilled men, looking for work. If that is not true of the east,

War Appropriation-Mr. Quelch
Here is another question and answer which shows even more clearly his attitude. As a matter of fact, in the second answer he takes the stand that a large debt is a sign of progress, a small debt a sign of stagnation.
Now I want to get this question across once more. Can wre hope ever to tax the people of Canada sufficiently to retire the debts, or must we continue to go progressively into debt, although the debt charges may not increase because of lower rates of interest?
A. That debt is an asset of the Canadian people. Now let me say. I am speaking of public, private and aill kinds of debt; what would be the object of repaying it?
Q. Well that is what

A. Speaking of the thing as a whole. Now there may be and there has been an object in repaying debts so far as one individual entity is concerned; but as it is repaid to the holders of the debt one must assume that they are using that money for fresh enterprises, involving fresh debts and fresh assets; so that all I can say would be this, that in a country where the sum total of public and private debt was decreasing, you have a country which is going backward and which is becoming more poverty stricken. Generally speaking, in a country where you find that there is no public and private debt you have a country resembling darkest Africa; there is nothing else.
That, I think, shows clearly why this government are going head over heels into debt, when they have a man advising them who believes that increase of debt is a sign of progress. While it may be true that the national debt is a national asset, we should remember that it is only an asset of comparatively few of the people but it is a liability of one hundred per cent of the people. Therefore the government have to place a levy on all the people of Canada in order to pay tribute to a comparatively few. Is that a desirable condition? But that is the direct result of the government's financial policy as recommended and approved by the governor of the Bank of Canada.
I was interested to observe that the general manager of the Bank of Montreal, Mr. G. W. Spinney, takes just the opposite view. In my opinion, the stand taken by Mr. Spinney is far more sound than that of the governor of the Bank of Canada. Mr. Spinney, on January 24, 1938, said:
Canada's debt burden gradually is lowering the general standard of living, G. W. Spinney of Montreal, general manager of the Bank of Montreal, said in an address prepared for delivery to the associated boards of trade of Quebec eastern townships to-night.
He went on to say:
The primary threat to the welfare of this country lies in our indifferent attitude towards mounting debts. Federal and provincial government indebtedness is ever on the increase and some municipal bodies are shaping their courses in the same direction. Let us consider how our capacity to pay is keeping pace with the growth in our promises to pay.

Comparing the year 1937 with 1927 we find the annual national income of the country is less by something like $1,230,000,000. On the other hand the total of dominion, provincial and municipal direct and guaranteed debt had increased in the same period by some $2,620,000,000. In other words, while the wherewithal to enable us to pay our contractual obligations has shrunk in the last decade, we have in the same period substantially increased the total of our borrowings.
Something seems to be out of kilter here because we are obviously making promises which our present growth in wealth and income does not appear to justify.
So we in this group believe that we are quite justified in condemning the present policy as a debt-creating policy, a policy that is building up a tremendous debt which can never be paid but which will extract interest charges from the people as long as we continue under the present system.
Let us take a later period, 1935 to 1939, the regime of this government. During that period we had an average of a million on relief, half a million unemployed employables, industry operating at only a small percentage of full capacity, our capital assets being steadily depreciated and our defences neglected while foreign countries were rearming. This was all because the Minister of Finance of that time insisted that money was not available to develop the resources of this country. Hon. members who were here during that period will remember how time and again we of this group urged the government to adopt a policy that would make it possible to develop the resources of the nation, but all we got out of the Minister of Finance was hysterics. He conjured up the bogy of inflation; he saw the snakes of inflation creeping about the country, choking the very life out of the people. When it was even suggested that we should make old age pensions available at the age of sixty-five, the minister said it was impossible to find the money, but now we are finding millions and billions for the destruction of life.
I am satisfied that, when this war is over, people will not be content to be told by the government that money is not available to guarantee a decent standard of living in Canada, while we have half a million people unemployed and1 industries producing only to a small percentage of their capacity. I am satisfied that, when our soldiers come back, they will not be content to be told, as the soldiers of the last war were told, that no work is available for them and they will have to go on relief. Soldiers will not be content to see the widows of soldiers forced on relief because the government refuse to pay pensions, because these women are in the unfortunate position of being unable to prove that their husbands died as a result of

War Appropriation-Mr. Quelch
war service, or had a 50 per cent disability. As every hon. member knows, that is a situation which every returned man has been1 fighting for the last twenty years. Finally we had the disability reduced from 80 per cent to 50 per cent, but there are still many widows of men who died as a result of war service who have been forced to accept relief because this government would not accept its responsibility. I do not believe that, after this war, our soldiers will permit such a situation to continue. When they see the government finding millions of dollars for war purposes, they will not be content to be told that in a country like Canada, with all its resources, people must remain on relief and1 without employment simply because the Minister of Finance considers it necessary to maintain a deflationary policy.
As I have pointed out already, during the period from 1935 to 1939 we urged upon the government the need for monetary expansion We urged that a certain proportion of the unemployed be used to build up the defences of the country, to construct roads, irrigation projects and other essential services, while the balance of the unemployed should be used to expand the production of consumer goods, thereby satisfying the demand of those engaged in other services. That is to say, we stressed the need for maintaining a definite relationship at all times between the production of capital goods and the production of consumer goods, so that the money paid out in the production of capital goods would equal the deficiency of purchasing power that existed as between the total prices of consumer goods available for distribution and the effective demand against them. Provided that is done, there can be no talk of inflation, because by such action you have stabilization, not inflation. And, as I have already said, those who were in the house at that time will remember what happened; invariably the Minister of Finance displayed hysterics, or the debate was adjourned on some excuse or another.
So, Mr. Speaker, I would say that from 1935 to 1939 the Department of Finance continued to sabotage the development of our industries and the training of our man-power, while our potential enemies, unhampered by such financial restrictions, expanded their industrial output to the maximum. Therefore, upon the declaration of war, we found ourselves in this deplorable situation, with weak defences, practically no modem armies, a large volume of unskilled labour, and with our industries running in low gear. In view of the points I have recited, Mr. Speaker, is there any reason why the people of Canada to-day should have any confidence in the financial
policy of this government? I could not help feeling amused at the following statement made by the present Minister of Finance, apparently in reply to Mr. Hepburn, on January 24 of this year:
I can understand that during the depression, when there were unemployed labour and resources in Canada, it may have been difficult for a layman to grasp the rather technical principles that determine the amount of expansion of currency and credit that may safely and wisely be provided for-
I am glad the minister admits that such a policy is at least open to question; I assume he would object to the use of the word "criticism." I am satisfied that the minister will have a far harder job to justify a policy of that kind after the war than perhaps he has had in the past because, as I have stated already, there is a rapid awakening taking place, and the tremendous expenditure of money in connection with this war has opened the eyes of the people as they have never been opened before. I am hoping that the deflationary policies of the past are a thing of the past which never again will be sanctioned by the people of Canada, and that in future the Prime Minister will be compelled to live up to the policy which he laid down in 1935, and upon which he won a great election.
I think we are all agreed that Canada must make a maximum war effort at this time. We know that Canada has tremendous resources, both developed and undeveloped. We also appreciate the fact that we are a long way from the point where these resources may be developed to their capacity in order to bring about a maximum war effort. In our opinion, the main obstacle impeding our progress is the financial bottle-neck. The Prime Minister, the former Minister of Finance and the present Minister of Finance have stated in effect that anything physically possible to further our war effort will be made financially possible. I submit that to-day this policy is not being carried out. I think it is quite obvious that ever since the declaration of war the government has been thinking in terms of money instead of in terms of production. As evidence of the truth of that statement I would quote some examples.
First of all, I might refer again to agriculture, one of the key industries, which to-day is still being compelled to produce many commodities at less than cost of production. We all know that no industry can carry on efficiently under such conditions. The farmers have every right to demand that the government carry out its promise with regard to equality of service and sacrifice. I am not suggesting for one moment that we should

War Appropriation-Mr. Quelch
hold up England for higher prices. I am suggesting that the difference between cost of production and the prevailing price should be made up by means of a subsidy paid by the government, the cost of which subsidy should be borne by the whole Canadian people. I do not see why one body of people should be asked to make a greater sacrifice, so far as production is concerned, than any other body; and, as the Minister of Agriculture has admitted, agriculture is being sacrificed in this war. We do not know what will be the consequences of this policy, but we do know that the debts of the farmers are being expanded month by month, year by year, and that all the advantages brought about by debt adjustment for the farmers are being wiped out and that this work will have to be done all over again. We are only laying up more trouble for ourselves by ignoring this problem. It will have to be dealt with after the war, so why not deal with it now? The minister need not be afraid that a fair price for agricultural products would cause an increased demand for goods. The farmers have such tremendous debts to pay that any increased returns they receive will be applied on their debts, and of course when money is paid back to the banks it goes out of circulation.
I have another instance to show that the government is still thinking in terms of money rather than in terms of production. I have in my hand a letter which I received from Mr. Justice T. C. Davis, associate deputy minister of the Department of National War Services. Page three reads as follows:
Scrap iron and steel: This is an item which is particularly important and every effort should be made to salvage all of this type of scrap metail. Only experienced persons can adequately sort out scrap metal, break down and arrange the same for shipment, and experienced persons should be called into consultation in doing this work.
A thorough investigation into the problem of scrap iron and steel has disclosed the fact that in all parts of Canada, except in Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, there is a ready market for these materials. Freight rates and prices are such in Canada, exclusive of the said three provinces, that voluntary organizations very often make a good margin of profit by gathering up these materials. It is highly desirable that the supply of this type of material be substantially increased.
And it goes on to say:
In connection with the three provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, there is no place in these provinces where scrap metal can be consumed in quantity, and all such salvage must be shipped to markets outsidf these three provinces. At the moment, freight rates and prices make shipment generally impracticable.

First of all, he says that this is an item of particular importance, and that every effort should be made to salvage it, but that salvage of this commodity cannot be carried out in the three western provinces because it costs too much. Does that sound as though we are removing financial limitations when we have in three provinces large quantities of scrap iron which the government cannot use because it costs too much to move it?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Is it not probably because the moving costs are not so great in terms of money, but are great in terms of labour, coal, and the use of railway equipment? I am told it would be an uneconomic movement, without bringing money into the matter at all.


Victor Quelch: Surely at this time, when there is no great movement of grain, there should be plenty of boxcars, or cars of other types available for the movement of these materials.
I am glad the minister mentioned labour, because I intended to say something on that point. Now is the time when there is very little work to be done on the farms. Two months from now, farmers of the prairie provinces will be exceptionally busy. If any work is going to be done to salvage scrap iron on the farms, it should be done in the winter. There will be no labour available in the summer months. If the work is not done now, it will have, to a large extent, to be left until next winter.
I understand there are still many semi-idle railway employees. Certainly they will be busier when the grain moves again. Someone mentioned coal. There is plenty of coal available for the trains. We know that in Alberta many men are idle, or work only a few days a week, because they cannot get orders for coal. They are not employed in any war industry when they are not in the mines. No, I do not think the minister's explanation is very satisfactory.
Then we may discuss the production of munitions in the west. We have in western Canada factories which could be producing munitions. We are told, however, that it is cheaper to produce them in the east. If we were engaged in a modified war effort, that might sound reasonable. But when we are engaged in a total war effort, then I say that every available factory should be utilized, no matter what the financial outlay may be. We must have armaments. If we lose the war, it will not help us to say that we could have won it if we had used those factories. That would be a very poor excuse, indeed.
The financial factor is the one which is being considered. It is physically possible to utilize those factories, but they are not being

War Appropriation-Mr. Church
utilized. And might I mention that there are still thousands and thousands of unemployed. Every hon. member is being constantly approached and being asked if he cannot find a way by which some person can make an effective contribution to the war. Both skilled and unskilled men are in that position. The minister doubts it? Well, I am prepared to give him the names and addresses of many men; so that they can come here and secure work.
In closing, I would reiterate what I said about the stand we take with regard to a financial policy. We feel that as equitable a form of taxation as possible should be maintained in order to withdraw from circulation money in excess of the amount required to ensure a standard of living which would protect the health and morale of the people. All money for government expenditures in excess of that procured by taxation, should be obtained from the Bank of Canada. In other words, we are definitely opposed to any borrowing from the chartered banks or from any other source. If the programme we suggest were followed, we would have in truth a pay-as-you-go policy, with no danger of inflation. It might be necessary to introduce rationing. It certainly would be advisable to eliminate altogether certain industries which are producing unnecessary articles, and put those industries at war work. Many commodities are being produced to-day that people might deny themselves without having their standard of living seriously endangered. We are of opinion that the government is prepared to do everything possible to win the war, provided it may be done by orthodox means. It almost looks to us as though it is prepared actually to risk losing the war, rather than use unorthodox methods.


Thomas Langton Church: Mr. Speaker, the speeches of the two hon. members who have immediately preceded me show the necessity of immediate reconstruction by the government of its way of doing business at the present time, so as to bring about national government of all. It is the desire of the Conservative party to work, to cooperate to the utmost with the government, and to have from all a united effort. After all is said and done, it is a government of Canadians in Canada, and it should be the desire of the opposition-it is in fact the desire of the official opposition, with all here-to cooperate with the government to the utmost extent in the prosecution of the war.
But in the dire straits in which this empire finds itself to-day we are not going to cooperate along the lines the two parties to my left are endeavouring to put over. When
Canada may be invaded, we will not allow them to use the war as a means of putting over their policies. As I said on December 5-
... I object to the war being used by them as an opportunity to urge their plans, to put across their own cures, remedies, prescriptions, palliatives, patent medicines and gold cures for the economic ills and financial and social burdens of the country. They are using the dire straits in which Britain finds herself to-day to put over their remedies and divide this country when it should be one from coast to coast, with all its citizens ready to support the government. This is what should be done as long as the government are carrying out their duties and doing a real war job, and if they run the war in a non-partisan way, but not otherwise.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: You would rather lose the war, would you?


Thomas Langton Church: The object of these gentlemen is to take advantage of the war to propose their policies, and then in the elections take the reins of government after the war. There is no doubt about that. We have heard of the proposals of these parties in the house before.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I submit that the hon. member has no right to impute motives to any other hon. member. We have let him get away with quite a lot. But there are limits to which he can go, and I suggest he should be so advised.


Thomas Langton Church: That is not a point of order. It is just another speech by the hon. member.


Angus MacInnis: I am speaking to a point of order.


Georges Parent: The hon. member has a right to reply to a point of order. I am listening to his reply.


Mr. THORSON:: Nobody pays any attention to him, anyway.


Thomas Langton Church: The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) should know that even if it was a misstatement-which it was not-it is not out of order. If we were to call members of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation to order every time they make misstatements, they would be called to order every few minutes. Let me say to these gentlemen-


Georges Parent: The hon. member for Vancouver East has said, when raising a point of order, that motives have been imputed to him.


Thomas Langton Church: The Conservative party has always been consistent in its trade, tariff and financial protection policies for Canada. The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation and the other groups in the house are minority


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, February 20, 1941.