1943-02-08

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I think it was understood that questions and motions for papers would be taken up before proceeding to-day with the debate on the address. If the 'house is agreeable to that, I need not put a motion.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	By whose authority were soldiers in the Canadian army ordered to assist the Ottawa Electric Railway Company, Limited, in snow clearance, on or about December 31, 1942?
2.	How many soldiers were allotted to the task?
3.	What amount, if any, was paid by this private company to the Department of National Defence for the services thus rendered?
4.	Was this amount, if any, arrived at on an hourly rate? If so, what was the rate?
5.	Did the soldiers receive additional remuneration?


Mr. POWER:: 1.	The Adjutant-General.
2.	307.
3.	None.
4.	See answer to Question 3.
5.	No.
radio BROADCASTING-DOCTOR WATSON THOMSON


Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Is Watson Thomson engaged in radio work for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation?
2.	If so, what are his fees, allowances and other emoluments, who recommended his appointment and for what purpose?
3.	Has the attention of the government been called to some of his utterances reflecting on the mother country and were his addresses submitted to the government before delivery?
4.	Is this man still in the employ of the corporation?
5.	If so, in what capacity?
6.	Is he a returned soldier and has he any military record?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I consulted with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in respect to question No. 7 and was given the following information and they stated they had no objection to its being brought down. The answers are as follows:
1.	Mr. Watson Thomson gives occasional broadcasts on invitation by the supervisor of talks of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
2.	The regular fee paid for such broadcasts,
i.e. $25 per occasion; he was first engaged by Mr. Donald Buchanan in June, 1939, and later by Mr. Hugh Morrison, who succeeded Mr. Buchanan; he is one of a panel of three engaged to talk alternately on the series "Week-End Review".
3.	No.
4.	He gave his final talk in the present series on February 7, 1943.
5.	See answer to No. 2.
6.	The information obtained from Mr. Thomson shows that he was a signaller attached to the Royal Field Artillery between March, 1917, and October, 1919, and saw active service in France between April, 1918, and the armistice.


Mr. GRAYDON:: May I ask the minister if in his answer to question No. 4 he means that Doctor Thomson has given the last of his talks in the series but that there will be another series, or is he now out of the employ of the corporation?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I can answer that, Mr. Speaker. He was engaged for a series, one of a panel of three gentlemen who did speak. He has given his final talk on that series and there is no other engagement standing at the present.


Mr. COLDWELL:: May I just ask the minister a question on one remark that he made. He said that the corporation had no objection to this information being brought down. What was the significance of that remark, if any?
Mr. LaFLECHE: I was stating a fact.


Major James William Coldwell: I rise to a point of order. I think there is an important principle involved in that particular reply, as to whether it is merely at the discretion of the corporation that the question is answered. That is the point.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Question No. 7 must be considered as having been answered and no discussion can take place thereon.


MINISTERS PLENIPOTENTIARY AND ENVOYS EXTRAORDINARY
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	How many ministers plenipotentiary and envoys extraordinary have been appointed since the house adjourned on August 1, 1942, to where and at what cost to Canada?
2.	Where are they located?
3.	Who compose their staff and what are their respective salaries, travelling expenses, living allowances and all other emoluments?
4.	What previous experience had they before their present appointment as diplomats?

Questions

5.	Was the government of Great Britain eon-suited or advised as to their selection or appointment in view of the war and the need of joint action with British embassies?
6.	Are their speeches, on and off the record, first submitted to the government before being published, and does the government accept responsibility for their utterances?
7.	What expenses have been incurred by each of these diplomats since appointment?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Four ministerial appointments to diplomatic posts abroad have been made since the house adjourned on August 1, 1942. Canadian ministers will shortly be going forward to the following countries: China, the U.S.S.R., Chile. In addition it has been decided to accredit a Canadian minister to a number of allied governments now temporarily established in London. Until these missions are actually established and final arrangements are completed, it is impossible to determine what the final financial arrangements will be.
2.	When the four ministers arrive at their posts they will be located at Chungking, Kuibyshev, Santiago and London.
3.	Canadian Legation, U.S.S.R. Minister- L. D. Wilgress, Brigadier H. Lefebvre, R. M. Maedonnell, Major G. J. Okulitch, A. C. Smith, J. A. McCordick.
Canadian Legation, China.	Minister-
Major-General V. W. Odium, G. S. Patterson, R. E. Collins, Major H. Wooster.
Canadian Legation, Chile.	Minister-W.
F. Chipman, M. J. Vechsler, Jules Leger.
Canadian Legation, Allied Governments in London.	Minister-Major General G. P.
Vanier, Pierre Dupuy.
Since financial arrangements cannot be completed until the various missions abroad are actually established, it is not possible to provide this information at the present time.
4.	The experience and abilities of each of the ministers appointed to these posts is a matter of public record.
5.	Canadian ministers are appointed by His Majesty the King on the recommendation of the Government of Canada. In accordance with usual constitutional practice, the United Kingdom government has been fully informed in each case before the opening of new diplomatic missions.
6.	For obvious reasons it would be impracticable to arrange for the submission of such speeches in advance in all cases. In general, however, it may be said that the government accepts responsibility for statements made abroad by its representatives when acting in their official capacities.
7.	See answer to question 3.


VICHY REPRESENTATIVE IN OTTAWA
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Does the government still recognize the Vichy French government and their representative in Canada?
2.	Has Vichy still an embassy in Ottawa and ivho compose the staff?
3.	Have they representatives elsewhere in Canada? If so, where, and who are the members of the staff at each location?
4.	Is there any inspection of this embassy or of its mail, cables or other communications?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	No.
2.	No.
3.	No.
4.	Answered by 1, 2 and 3.


WAR PENSIONS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Have any pension tribunals yet been set up to deal with casualties in the present war?
2.	If so, where?
3.	What policy has been laid down and what rules and regulations have been issued in this
respect?
4.	How many applications have been received for pensions so far in this war and what action has been taken in the matter?
5.	What is the total sum paid to the end of 1942 for pensions and other direct aid to dependents of casualties in this war?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 1.	Yes. Provision has been made whereby the Canadian pension commission and appeal boards of the commission adjudicate upon applications for pension in respect of disability or death suffered by members or former members of the Naval, Military and Air Forces of Canada during the present war.
2.	The Pension Act provides for initial consideration of all applications at the head office of the Canadian pension commission. When an application is not wholly granted the applicant may, if he so desires, have a hearing before an appeal board of the commission sitting in his district without expense to him and with a minimum of inconvenience.
3.	Early in 1941 a special parliamentary committee gave exhaustive consideration to pension and other related matters arising out of the present war. As a result of its recommendations, the Pension Act was amended so as to make its provisions, rules and regulations with appropriate modifications applicable to the present war.
As a result of these modifications, in respect of military service rendered during the war with the German reich, pensions are awarded

Questions
in accordance with the rates set out in Schedule A of the Pension Act for disabilities and in accordance with the rates set out in Schedule B of the Pension Act for death. In respect of service, any part of which has been rendered outside Canada, pension may be awarded for disability or death incurred during or attributable to service.
In respect of military service during the war with the German reich which has been wholly rendered in Canada on and after the 21st day of May, 1940, and no part of which has been rendered in a theatre of actual war, pensions are awarded to or in respect of members of the forces who suffer disability in accordance with the rates set out in Schedule A of the Pension Act and in respect of members of the forces who die, in accordance with the rates set out in Schedule B of the Pension Act, when the disability or death in respect of which the application for pension was made arose out of and was directly connected with such military service.
In cases in .the present war in which pension cannot be awarded as above, but where the applicant is seriously disabled, or dies, as a result of a disability incurred during service, and he or his dependents are in necessitous circumstances, the commission may, in its discretion, award such pension not exceeding the rates payable under Schedule A or B to this act as it may from time to time deem to be adequate in the circumstances.
4.	Formal or personal application for pension has been made in a very limited number of cases and, of these, no statistical record is kept. Such formal application, however, is not awaited by the Canadian pension commission, but every member of the forces who is discharged as medically unfit is considered by the commission to be an applicant for pension. Since the outbreak of the present war, the commission has considered 38,370 such cases. In 6,601 cases, entitlement has been granted.
5.	SI,536,082.


RADIO BROADCASTING-SPEECHES OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What members of the houses of parliament have been given free time on the radio by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation from January 1, 1935, to the end of January, 1943, for what purposes and. by whose authority, or under what rules or regulations of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation?
2.	Was there any censorship of such addresses?
72537-13*
3.	What free time was allowed by the corporation for reports of their speeches delivered in Canada before community clubs or other civilian or military meetings?
4.	What number of such speeches were printed and distributed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and at what cost?
Mr. LaFLEOHE: Mr. Speaker, I have taken this question up with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and am informed that it will take about one month to prepare a reply, and that is, of course, apart from any question of privileged documents, into which I do not now go. I should like to make the suggestion for the consideration of the hon. gentleman who asks this question that the question be brought before the committee the creation of which was announced in this house a few days ago by the Prime Minister.
Question stands.


POSTAL SERVICE-DISTRIBUTION OF &quot;LONDON ECHO&quot;
Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: 1.	What postage rate is charged by the Post Office Department for delivery through the mails to London householders of the London Echo?
2.	Is this paper classed as a newspaper?
3.	If so, by whom was such classification authorized ?
4.	Who are the registered owners and directors of this paper?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	1 cent per 4 ounces.
2.	Yes.
3.	Post Office Department in 1879.
4.	No information.



NATIONAL HOUSING ACT

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What is the total amount of the advances under the National Housing Act which have been made out of the amount appropriated under item 452 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1942?
2.	How many dwellings have been constructed as a result of such advances?
3.	Have any changes been made by order in council in the National Housing Act?
4.	If so, what is the nature and purpose of such change?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1 & 2. Loans totalling $443,653 to finance 605 dwellings have been approved.
3.	Yes.
4.	Order in Council P.C. 4020 dated December 5, 1939, restricts loans to single-family houses and to amounts not in excess of $4,000.
Questions

Order in Council PC. 11047 dated December 8, 1942, provided for a sliding scale of loans for the purpose of making higher percentage loans on lower cost houses thus increasing the limit under which 90 per cent loans could be made from $2,500 up to $3,200 as per the following schedule:
Ninety per cent when the lending value does not exceed $3,200, or
Eighty-nine per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,200 but does not exceed $3,300, or Eighty-eight per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,300 but does not exceed $3,400, or Eighty-seven per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,400 but does not exceed $3,500, or Eighty-six per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,500 but does not exceed $3,600, or Eighty-five per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,600 but does not exceed $3,700, or Eighty-four per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,700 but does not exceed $3,800, or Eighty-two per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,800 but does not exceed $3,900, or Eighty per cent when the lending value exceeds $3,900 but does not exceed $4,000.



MOBILIZATION ACT-MEN OF CALL-UP AGE IN RESERVE ARMY

Mr. STOKES:: 1.	Are men of call-up age who are serving in the reserve army not required to report for training, service and duty, pursuant to the National Resources Mobilization Act?
2.	If so, what are the reasons for not requiring them to report for service and duty?
3.	Are any conditions attached to their postponement of service and duty?
4.	If so, what are such conditions?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	Those of the rank of corporal, or lower, are called in the ordinary course. Those above the rank of corporal are not sent "Order- Medical Examination" without the consent of the representative of the Department of National Defence.
2.	Section 10(15) was put in the regulations at the request of the Department of National Defence. As the men are being called for that department, it was felt that they were best able to decide how the men could be most usefully employed.
3.	Yes.
4.	Only that they are in the reserve army with the rank senior to that of corporal and the Department of National Defence has not requested that they be called up.



WAR RISK INSURANCE

Mr. MacKINNON (Kootenay East):: 1.	Upon what date did the war risk insurance scheme come into operation?
2.	How many policies have been written to date?
3.	What is the total value of the property insured by provinces?
4.	What have been the total premium receipts to date?
5.	What has been the total expenditure incurred in the administration of the act to date?
6.	Of this amount how much was expended for (a) salaries, allowances and honoraria, (b) advertising ?
7.	Have any changes been made in the act by order in council?
8.	If so, on what dates and what is the nature, purpose and effect of such changes?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	September 15, 1942.
2.	24,417 to December 31, 1942.
3. British Columbia	$ 534,681,690
Alberta	 49,114,494
Saskatchewan	 14,766,139
Manitoba	 24,555,053
Ontario	 445,024,246
Quebec	 479,211,937
New Brunswick	 63,224,805
Nova Scotia	 161,775,640
Prince Edward Island	 6,876,778

4.	$4,211,785 to December 31, 1942.
5.	$56,544.84 to January 31, 1943.
6.	(a) Salaries (3 employees) ...$ 1.184 43
. Travelling expenses	 3,057	77
Expenses Regional Advisory
Committee	
1,018	79(b) Advertising	
31,908	137.	Yes.8.	P.C. 11038 of December 3, 1942, provided for a refund of a portion of the net premium contribution of the insured in the event of there being a net surplus in the war damage insurance special account at the end of the war.
P.C. 11038 was tabled in the House of Commons on January 27th, 1943.
Note: The answers to Questions Nos. 2, 3 and 4 do not include insurance of grain or Dominion government property.



CANADIAN FORCES-ENLISTMENT OF ENEMY ALIENS

Mr. SHAW:: 1.	How many enemy aliens domiciled in Canada have applied for enlistment in the Canadian army, navy and air force since the outbreak of the present war?

Questions
2.	Have any enemy aliens been enlisted in the said forces since the outbreak of war? If so, how many?
3.	Have any enemy alien members of the Canadian armed forces been sent out of Canada since their enlistment? If so, how many and to where?
4.	How many of such persons have been discharged from the armed forces since the outbreak of the present war?
5.	Of those discharged, how many were discharged because of the fact that they were enemy aliens, and how many for other reasons?
6.	What was the date of enlistment and date of discharge of each enemy alien who was enlisted and subsequently discharged?


Mr. SHAW:: 1.	Did Hans Ludwig Backs, an enemy alien, apply for enlistment in the Canadian army at Calgary, between January and April, 1942?
2.	If so, who was the officer at Calgary who took Mr. Back's application?
3.	Was this application sent to Ottawa for consideration?
4.	Was it approved? If so, what is the name of the official who approved same?
5.	Upon what date was Mr. Backs enlisted in the Canadian active army?
6.	Where did he take his basic training?
7.	Was he trained at the Trade Training School, London, Ontario? If so, for what period of time?
8.	Has this man been discharged from the army?
9.	If so, upon what date and for what reason? Mr. SHAW:
1.	Was Bernard Schaght, an enemy alien, enlisted in the Canadian army in Calgary in 1940 or 1941?
2.	If so, who approved of his application for enlistment?
3.	What period of training was he given in Canada?
4.	Was he sent out of Canada? If so, where was he sent and when?
5.	Has he been discharged from the army?
6.	If so, when and for what reason?


Mr. POWER:: Mr. Speaker, with respect to these three questions, I might make the following reply, first with regard to the security difficulties which might arise, and secondly with regard to the physical difficulties in preparing the answers. First with regard to the security difficulties, this answer comes to me from the director of military intelligence, as follows:
Answers to these questions would inform the enemy the number of men in the army, both here and overseas, who probably have relatives in enemy countries. This creates a situation where such relatives might be made the object of enemy vengeance. This is unfair to the men themselves.
If such men are taken prisoners, they are liable to be shot forthwith, as traitors to their country of origin.
The misinterpretation which could be placed on this information by other members of the
army could lead to mistrust and suspicion of men possessing Germanic names, with consequent impairment of efficiency.
It is considered that for security reasons the information requested should not be disclosed.
Secondly, with regard to physical difficulties, the information is as follows:
1.	Number who have applied for enlistment unknown as recruiting officers do not record or report particulars of personnel turned away or rejected.
2.	Yes. Number unknown-see footnote.
3.	No known enemy aliens have been sent out of Canada-but see footnote.
4.	Numbers unknown but all are included in group of approximately 1,800 persons who have been discharged because their services were no longer required. Exact figures can only be obtained by examining all files of this group. Names of individuals cannot be disclosed in interests of security.
5.	Answered by 4.
6.	Answered by 4.
Footnote
Policy is not to enlist or call up enemy aliens but some nationals of countries now at war against the allied nations were enlisted or called owing to
(i)	failure to disclose correct nationality;
(ii)	enlistment or call up prior to the entry of their country into the war.
No known enemy aliens have been sent out of Canada.


Mr. SHAW:: Mr. Speaker, might I point out in connection with the first of these three questions that I have made only reference to numbers. As to the statement now made by the minister, one answer is not correct inasmuch as certain enemy aliens have been sent out of the country, Germans who enlisted after their country became involved in war. I should like to have that corrected if possible.


Charles Gavan Power: I was not following my hon. friend and did not understand what he said, but I gathered he said that one answer was not correct. I should be glad to discuss that with him. These were the replies which came to me from the department, and I have every reason to believe they are accurate.


Gordon Graydon: He did not ask for names, only numbers.


Thomas Vien: Is the question answered?


Charles Gavan Power: I think the question should be considered as answered, but I should be glad to discuss it with the hon. member, and if he wishes, another question can be put on the order paper.
Questions

"the GOSPEL WITNESS AND PROTESTANT ADVOCATE"


Mr. ROY:: What was the weekly circulation of the publication The Gospel Witness and Protestant Advocate for the year 1942?


Mr. McLARTY:: There is no department of the government which has the information here requested. I suggest that the question might well be dropped.



DUTIES ON LEAD AND ZINC CONCENTRATES

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	Has the government entered into an agreement with the United States, or is it negotiating with the United States, concerning the reduction or abolition of United States duties on lead or zinc concentrates?
2.	If so, what are the terms of the proposed reduction?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by the answer to No. 1.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	What is the total sum received from the employers and employees throughout Canada for unemployment insurance contributions from July 1, 1941, when the act became operative to December 31, 1942?
2.	What was the government's contribution during this period, July 1, 1941, to December 31, 1942?
3.	What was the total contribution from employers and what was the total contribution from employees?
4.	Are contributions in separate funds or do they become part of the consolidated revenue fund?
_ 5. How much was paid out in unemployment insurance benefits during the calendar year 1942?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	A total sum of $78,683,891.65 was received from the employers and employees throughout Canada for unemployment insurance contributions from July 1, 1941, when the act became operative, to December 31, 1942.
2.	The amount of $15,736,778.33 was the government's contribution during this period, July 1, 1941, to December 31, 1942.
3.	The total contributions for employers amount to $37,768,267.99 and the total contributions for employees amount to $40,915,623.66.
4.	The Unemployment Insurance Act provides that contributions shall be credited to a
special account in consolidated revenue fund called the unemployment insurance fund.
5.	The amount of $349,655.94 was paid out in unemployment insurance benefits during the calendar year 1942.
TMr. Power.]



JAPANESE NATIONALS AND NATURALIZED JAPANESE -REPATRIATION

Mr. ESLING:: Has the government taken any steps in negotiating for the repatriation of the Japanese nationals or naturalized Japanese?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Negotiations with Japan through the protecting power for the exchange of Canadian nationals in Japan and Japanese subjects in Canada have been under way for some months. It will be recalled that at the time of the exchange of diplomatic officials a small number of Canadians were brought back from Japan and some Japanese subjects were returned to Japan from Canada. The present negotiations for the second and further exchanges have been protracted, but it is hoped that before long a further party of Canadians will be able to leave Japan for Canada and at the same time a party of Japanese subjects will leave Canada for Japan.
veterans' land settlement act


Mr. ESLING:: 1.	Have any parcels of land been purchased under the Veterans' Land Settlement Act of 1942?
2.	If so, how many and in what localities and at what price per acre?


Mr. CRERAR:: No parcels of land have been purchased up to the present time under the Veterans' Land Settlement Act.



SOLDIER SETTLEMENT BOARD

Mr. ESLING:: 
Thomas Alexander Crerar: I suggest that this question stand. A considerable body of information is asked for which it will take a little time to prepare.
Question stands.



SHIPMENTS OP COAL INTO SLOCAN, B.C. DISTRICT FOR USE OF JAPANESE

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	How many carloads of coal were shipped into the Slocan district during the year 1942, for the use of Japanese?
2.	What is the aggregate tonnage?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 33 carloads aggregating 1,370 tons.



ALMONTE RAILWAY ACCIDENT

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	Has the Department of Transport or the board of transport commissioners conducted any investigation into the train wreck at the town of Almonte?
2.	If so, by whom was such investigation conducted ?
3.	Has a report been made?


Mr. MICHAUD:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada.
3.	No.



BILLION DOLLAR GIFT TO BRITAIN

Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Has the whole amount of one billion dollars, voted by this parliament to assist in financing United Kingdom war requirements in Canada, been expended?
2.	If so, on what date -was that amount exhausted ?
3.	What arrangements have been made since that date to assist the United Kingdom in financing its war requirements in this country?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	December 22, 1942.
3.	In the speech from the throne reference was made to the establishment of a Canadian war supplies allocation board in order to provide for the financing and for the allocation to the united nations of Canadian war production. The government will give full details of this plan shortly.



DOMINION ARCHITECT IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

Mr. REID:: 1.	Who is the district resident architect for the dominion in the province of British Columbia?
2.	Where is the district architect's office located?
3.	How many are employed on the staff?
4.	How long has the district architect been employed in this position?
5.	What was his previous occupation before
being appointed?	_
6.	Is the present incumbent a fully qualified architect?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: 1.	Mr. Charles Frederick Dawson.
2.	Victoria, B.C.
3.	Seven, including Mr. Dawson.
4.	Since September 1, 1931.
5.	Superintendent of buildings with the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment from May 8, 1917, to May 12, 1925. Appointed Assistant Architect with the Department of Public Works at Victoria, B.C., May 12, 1925.
6.	Not a registered architect, but is thoroughly familiar with plans, specifications and building supervision. Studied architectural drawing at the Birmingham School of Art for about six years. Has had good experience as a builder and contractor.



WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-CHAIRMAN

Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	What is the name of the chairman of the wartime prices and trade board?
2.	By whom was he recommended to this position?
3.	What experience did he have in the production of food or other commodities?
4.	What experience did he have in the distribution of food or other commodities?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Donald Gordon.
2.	Appointed by the governor in council on the recommendation of the Minister. of Finance.
3 and 4. None. The chairmanship of the wartime prices and trade board does not involve the production and distribution of food or other commodities but rather broad executive and administrative experience.



ALBERTA DEBT ADJUSTMENT LEGISLATION

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What has been the total cost to the federal government of referring the Alberta debt legislation to the courts?
2.	What legal counsel represented the federal government before the judicial committee of the privy council, when this legislation was under consideration.
3.	What remuneration was paid to each of the legal counsel so engaged?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: The only part of this question which can be answered at this time is the second paragraph. The answer to this part of the question is as follows: The legal counsel were Mr. D. N. Pritt, K.C., and Mr. Frank Gahan, both of London, England.
Questions

Questions 1 and 3 have to do with the total cost of the reference to the federal government. The accounts have not yet been received. I should like that part of the question to be passed as an order for return. The return will be brought down as soon as the accounts have been received and the amounts thereof determined.


Thomas Vien: Passed as an order for a return so far as questions 1 and 3 are concerned.



SUPPLY OF SEED OATS TO NORTHERN SASKATCHEWAN AND ALBERTA

["1.\tThe initiative for establishing day nurseries rests with the provinces. Under the direction of Mrs. Rex Eaton, Assistant Director of Women and Welfare Division, Miss Margaret Grier has been appointed to have charge of the administration of the Dominion-Provincial agreement for the day care of children.\n2.\tAgreement with Ontario was signed July 29, 1942, and with Quebec on August 3, 1942. Seven day nurseries have been approved. Four are in operation.\n3.\tToronto, Brantford, St. Catharines, Oshawa.\n4 and 5. While day nurseries have not been operating long enough to give detailed statements, approximate figures are 125 mothers and 154 children who have made use of the services.\n6.\t256.\n7.\tFull time paid director who has been adequately trained in nursery education. A full time paid assistant also adequately trained. Women volunteers who have been given special short courses in nursery education.\nS.\tDiet lists are approved by the provincial nutrition committee.\t[DOT]\n9.\tNo.\n10.\tNo.\n11.\t7 a.m. to 6.30 p.m. or later.\n12.\t(a) Accounts are to be rendered through the provinces and 'have not yet been received Federal commitments for day nurseries approved amount to S27,404.68. (b) Provincial costs will be 827,404.68, plus any additional expenses which are not shareable under the agreement, (c) Cities and towns do not contribute, (d) Mothers contribute 35 cents for first child and 15 cents for each additional child. If both parents working, the charge is 50 cents per child, (e) Industries do not contribute."]
Mrs. NIELSEN :: Have any arrangements been made, and facilities arranged, for the supply of seed oats to northern areas of Saskatchewan and Alberta, where oats were frozen last fall, in readiness for seeding operations this spring?


Mr. GARDINER:: This is a matter concerning the provincial government, and I understand it is receiving their consideration.



Mr. SENN:: 1.	Has a food requirements committee been appointed?
2.	If so, when?
3.	Who are the members of such committee and who are the chairman and secretary thereof?
4.	What is the ordinary occupation of each such member?
5.	What are the duties of this committee?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Yes.
2.	October 22, 1942.
3.	The order in council P.C. 9692 directs that the committee should consist of representatives of the following departments and bodies: Department of Agriculture; Department of External Affiairs; Department of Finance; Department of Fisheries; Department of Trade and Commerce; Wartime Prices and Trade Board; to which has since been added the Department of Pensions and National Health,
The present membership is as follows:
Dr. G. S. H. Barton-Deputy Minister of Agriculture,
Mr. Hume Wrong-Assistant Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs,
Dr. W. A. Mackintosh-Special Assistant to the Deputy Minister of Finance,

Mr. H. F. Angus-Special Assistant to the Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs,
Dr. D. B. Finn-Deputy Minister of Fisheries,
Mr. Oliver Master-Acting Deputy Minister of Trade and Commerce,
Mr. K. W. Taylor-Secretary of Wartime Prices and Trade Board,
Dr. L. B. Pett-Director of Nutrition Services, Department of Pensions and National Health.
The committee has chosen as chairman Mr. H. F. Angus, and has appointed as secretary Dr. C. F. Wilson.
4.	Answered in number 3.
5.	The duties of this committee are to:
'	(a) supervise the preparation of information
on Canada's food position which the committee may desire to furnish to the Combined Food Board or other bodies;
(b)	consider matters affecting food supply referred to it by the governor in council, by cabinet war committee, or by any of the departments and agencies of government;
(c)	make reports to the proper authorities on questions of policy arising out of the need for coordination of Canada's undertakings to export foods to the United' Kingdom and other united nations with the price ceiling, the essential requirements of foods for domestic consumption and other factors which must be taken into account to ensure a balanced war effort;
(d)	submit recommendations to the proper authorities with respect to all matters of policy concerning embargoes or other restrictions on exports or imports of foodstuffs and concerning all proposed agreements concerning external trade in food.


PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE EXPENDITURES BY PROVINCES
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	How much has been spent in each province for each of the crop years 1936 to 1942 inclusive on account of (a) prairie farms administration drought bonuses, (b) prairie farms income bonuses, (c) wheat acreage reduction bonuses?
2.	How much of these amounts has been paid in each of the provinces, (a) to farmers or other applicants, (b) for administration?
3.	Out of what fund or account is this money spent?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1. (a) Prairie Farm Assistance-
			 *		

1936-38	1939	1940	1941	1942	Pay- ments	Adminis- tration	Pay- ments	Adminis- tration	Pay- ments	Adminis- tration	Pay- ments	Adminis- tration	Pay- ments	Adminis- trationNil	Nil	$ cts. 868,942 11	S cts. 23,490 84	$ cts. 611,393 20	$ cts. 31,208 83	$ cts. 36,617 67	8 cts. 10,801 27	Nil	(To Dec. 31/42) S cts. 1,772 54Nil	Nil	7,434,424 27	169,725 16	5,598,002 93	287,814 86	11,990,471 26	234,291 38	Nil	49,057 61Alberta	Nil	Nil	1,600,934 39	38,404 60	502,805 27	27,741 20	3,392,498 73	68,098 75	Nil	16,964 19
(b) Prairie Farm Income-
1936-40	1941	1942	Payments	Administration	Payments	Administration	Payments	AdministrationNil	Nil	8 cts. 2,986,709 37	Included in Prairie Farm	Nil	NilNil	Nil	10,286,095 73	Assistance	Nil	NilNil	Nil	5,625,468 75	Administration	Nil	Nil
(c) Wheat Acreage Reduction-
1936-1940	1941	1942	Payments	A d m inis tration	Payments	Administration	Payments	Administration(Jan.25/43)	(To Dec. 31/42)S cts.	S cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.Nil	Nil	4,386,138 94	114,206 66	2,417,232 00	128,285 14Nil	Nil	19,815,065 21	336,642 96	7,259,952 04	418,649 60Alberta	Nil	Nil	10,305,903 61	182,871 25	4,129,505 31	205,511 48
"Payments" represent total amount paid in respect to the programme for each crop year, whether paid during the crop year or subsequently. "Administration" represents expenditure on administration during each fiscal year.
oee auuvc.	. .
3.	Prairie Farm Assistance payments are made from the Prairie Farm Emergency Fund as established under the Prairie harm Assistance Act. Prairie Farm Income payments were made from the War Appropriation.
Wheat Acreage Reduction bonuses are paid out of^money voted by Parliament for the purpose.

e

Co
o'


MOBILIZATION ACT-RECRUITMENT QUOTAS BY MILITARY DISTRICTS
Mr. PURDY:: On what basis are the quotas of recruits asked for from each military district under provisions of the National Resources Mobilization Act arrived at?


Humphrey Mitchell: The Department of
Labour receive from the Department of National Defence (Army) requests to have men report to district depots and training centres in quotas based on training facilities. These are approximately in proportion to population. The mobilization section request the mobilization division in which the training centre or depot is situated to procure the men in question. However, the policy is to require all designated age groups in all divisions to be dealt with before designating and dealing with further age groups, and, if necessary, men mobilized in one division may be sent to other areas for training.


COMBINED FOOD BOARD
Mr. SENN:: 1.	When was the combined food board first established?
2.	What nations are represented on this board?
3.	Who are the Canadian representatives on the board?
4.	When were they appointed?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	June 9, 1942.
2.	The United Kingdom and the United
States of America. Other countries are
represented on the sub-committees of the
board when their interests are concerned.
0 _
3.	Canada is not represented on- the combined food board.
4.	Answered by the answer to question 3.


INVESTIGATION OF WAR INDUSTRIES BY MOUNTED POLICE
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Since the beginning of the war, has the government issued any orders to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to investigate the activities of certain war industries or those performing sub-contracts for same?
2.	If so, (a) when, (b) what industries or private individuals, (c) with what results?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	The Department of Munitions and Supply has not the power to issue any orders to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. When circumstances warrant such action being taken as is suggested in the question, the department requests the Commissioner of the Royal

Canadian Mounted Police to institute investigations of such a character as are warranted by the circumstances.
2.	It is not in the public interest to disclose this information,


WAR EXPENDITURE AND PUBLIC DEBT
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What has been the total expenditure of the dominion government for war purposes during each fiscal year since the outbreak of war?
2.	What is the total amount which it is now estimated will be expended for war purposes during the present fiscal year?
3.	What was the total expenditure for ordinary governmental purposes during each fiscal year since the outbreak of war?
4.	What is the total amount which it is now estimated will be expended for ordinary governmental purposes during the present fiscal year?
5.	What have been the total revenues of the government during each fiscal year since the outbreak of war?
6.	What is the total amount of revenue which it is now estimated will be collected during the present fiscal year?
7.	What has been the total increase in the net debt of Canada during each fiscal year since the outbreak.of war?
8.	What is it now estimated will be the total increase in the net debt of Canada at the end of the present fiscal year?
9.	What was the total net debt of Canada on the following dates: March 31, 1914; March 31, 1919; March 31. 1930; March 31, 1939; March 31, 1940; March 31, 1941; March 31, 1942?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Direct War Expenditures (not including financial assistance to the United Kingdom by way of redemption of debt or by loan), shown on page 64 of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1942:
Fiscal Year ended Mar. 31 1940 $ 118,291,021.64
"	"	"	"	1941	752,045,326.06"	"	"	"	1942	1,339,674,152.422.	Latest published estimate of Direct War Expenditure for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1943, including $1,000,000,000 gift to the United Kingdom, nearly $3,900,000,000.3.	All Government expenditure, excluding Direct War Expenditures but including Ordinary Expenditures, Capital Expenditures, Special Expenditures, Government Owned Enterprises and Other Charges, detailed on pages 64 and 65 of the Public Accounts of Canada for the Fiscal year ended March 31, 1942:Fiscal Year ended Mar. 31 1940	$562,502,770.66"	"	"	"	1941	497,556,120.38"	"	"	"	1942	545,391,902.79
Questions
4.	Latest published estimate of Government expenditure, excluding Direct War Expenditure but including Ordinary Expenditures, Capital Expenditures, Special Expenditures, Government Owned Enterprises and Other Charges, for the fiscal year ending March 31. 1943, about $600,000,000.
5.	Total revenues as detailed on page 68 .of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1942:
Fiscal Year ended Mar. 31 1940 $ 562,093,459.44 "	1941	872,169,645.22"	"	"	"	1942	1,488,536,342.976.	Latest published estimate of total revenues for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1943, about $2,250,000,000."7.	Increase in Net Debt of Canada as shown on, page 69 of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1942:Fiscal Year ended Mar. 31 1940	$118,700,332.86"	"	"	"	1941	377,431,801.22"	"	"	"	1942	396,529,712.248.	An estimate of the increase in the Net Debt will be made in the Budget.9.	Net Debt of Canada as shown on page 69 of the Public Accounts for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1942:
March 31, 1914-$ 335,996,850.14
1919- 1,574,531,032.44
1930- 2,177,763,958.71
1939-	3,152,559,314.48
1940-	3,271,259,647.34
1941-	3,648,691,448.56
1942-	4,045,221,160.80


APPOINTMENTS TO DIPLOMATIC SEEVICE
Mr. STOKES:: 1.	What are the names of all persons who have been appointed to the diplomatic service since January 1, 1942?
2.	To what position was each such person appointed?
3.	What salary and living allowance does each such person receive?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: 1 and 2.
Washington
Lt.-Col. C. M. Drury-Military Attache.
Lt.-Col. Basil Wedd-Military Attache (replacing Lt.-Col. Drury).
Commander H. G. Nares-Naval Attache.
Commander E. Sherwoodi-Naval Attache (replacing Commander Nares).
Wing Commander F. Homer Smith-Air Attache.
M. II. Wershof-Second Secretary.
72537-14}
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
L. D. Wilgress-Minister.
Brig. H. Lefebvre-Military Attache.
Maj. G. Okulitch-Asst. Military Attache.
A. C. Smith'-Third Secretary.
J. A. McCordick-Third Secretary.
China
Maj .-Gen. V. W. Odium-Minister.
Geo. C. Patterson-Counsellor.
Maj. Hiram WTooster-Asst. Military Attache.
R. E. Collins-Third Secretary.
Chile
Warwick F. Chipman-Minister.
Jules Leger-Third Secretary.
Allied Governments in London
Maj .-Gen. G. P. Vanier-Minister.
3.	Scale of salary payments for these positions in External Affairs service is as follows:
1.	Minister, $8,000 to $10,000.
2.	Counsellor, $5,760 to $7,200.
3.	Second Secretary, $3,300 to $4,260.
4.	Third Secretary, $2,520 to $3,000.
Living allowances are not payable until
officers reach their posts and financial arrangements cannot fee completed! until missions are actually established.


LOANS RAISED OUTSIDE OP CANADA
Mr. AYLESWORTH:: 1.	Have any loans been raised outside of Canada during the present fiscal year?
2.	If so, where were such loans floated and what was the total amount and terms of each such loan?
3.	For what purpose was each such loan raised?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	A Dominion of Canada loan was issued in New York in January, 1943, on the following terms:
$30,000,000 five year 2^ per cent bonds dated January 15, 1943, due January 15, 1948, sold to the underwriters at 991 per cent;
$30,000,000 ten year 3 per cent bonds dated January 15, 1943, due January 15, 1953, sold to the underwriters at 99J per cent;
$30,000,000 fifteen year 3 per cent bonds dated January 15, 1943, due January 15, 1958, sold to the underwriters at 96$ per cent.
3.	The proceeds of the sale of the bonds, together with cash from the treasury, are to be applied to the redemption of $100,000,000 Dominion of Canada thirty year 5 per cent bonds dated May 1, 1922, due May 1, 1952, called for prior redemption on March 15, 1943.
Questions


ALBERTA DEBT ADJUSTMENT LEGISLATION
Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: In view of the recent decision handed down by the courts declaring the debt adjustment legislation of Alberta to be ultra vires, and in view of the consequent effect upon the debt adjustment legislation of the other prairie provinces, will the government take steps to protect the farm debtors who are now faced with possible foreclosure and eviction?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Requests from the governments of the three prairie provinces for further legislation by the dominion parliament dealing with debt adjustments, had been under consideration by the government for some time past, but no decision was arrived at pending the disposal of the Alberta case before the privy council.
The judgment of the privy council was announced in the newspapers on the 1st instant but the Department of Justice received only on the 2nd of February a brief cablegram from its agents in London about it, which was as follows:
"Alberta debts reference appeal dismissed on ground act relates to insolvency stop Further ground act seriously interferes with existing bankruptcy act stop Board recognize debts may be statute barred because act has been applied but hardship only removable by province.
Russell"
The law officers of the department wish to see the text of the opinion before preparing recommendation to council on the subject. I cannot, of course, anticipate the decision as to policy which the government may then have to make.


JAPANESE NATIONALS IN ALBERTA AND SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. NEILL:: 1.	Were any of the Japanese removed from the defence areas in the province of British Columbia located in the province of Alberta or Saskatchewan?
2.	If so, what numbers in each province?
3.	In the case of either or both of these provinces was an agreement entered into by the security commission providing for the removal of the Japanese when requested by the government of either province?


Humphrey Mitchell: 1 and 2. To Alberta, 2,588; to Saskatchewan, nil.
3.	An agreement for the placement of Japanese was entered into with the province of Alberta which includes provision for the removal from the province of Japanese temporarily placed therein upon the termination of the state of war with Japan upon request by the province.


EMPLOYMENT IN THE GOLD MINING INDUSTRY
Mr. QUELCH:: How many persons were employed in Canada by the gold mining industry in each year from 1935 to 1943?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: Employees in the Gold Mining Industry, 1935-1942
Number of employees
1935-	Monthly average...	19,8341936-	Monthly average...	25,0971937-	Monthly average...	29,1401938-	Monthly average...	29,6471939-	Monthly average...	30,6221940-	Monthly average...	31,4051941-	January	
32,503February	
32,496March	
32,514April	
32,364May	
32,600June	
32,538July	
33,041August	
32,889September	
33,336October	
33,601November	
32,298December	
30,297Average	
32,5511942-January	
27,140February	
27,618March	
27,737April	
27,277May	
27,111June	
26,673July	
25,939August	
24,204September	
23,000October	
21,894November	
21,271


DAY NURSERIES
Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	Who in the Department of Labour is in charge of arrangements for day nurseries?
2.	How many day nurseries have been established in each of the past three years?
3.	In what locations?
4.	What is the average number of mothers who have made use of the facilities of day nurseries during each month of the 12-month period ending January 31, 1943?
5.	What is the average number of children who have been eared for during each month in the 12-month period ending January 31, 1943?
6.	What is the total capacity of the day nurseries ?

Questions as Orders jor Returns
7.	What are the qualifications of members of day nursery staffs, (a) of those in charge of day nurseries, (b) of those employed directly in the care of the children?
8.	What arrangements have been made in the day nurseries for nutrition?
9.	Have any day nurseries been established within or in connection with war plants?
10.	If so, where and with what average attendance?
11.	For what hours do the day nurseries provide services?
12.	What has been the cost of day nurseries to (a) the federal government, (b) the provincial governments, (c) the cities and towns, (d) the parents, (e) the industries concerned?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	The initiative for establishing day nurseries rests with the provinces. Under the direction of Mrs. Rex Eaton, Assistant Director of Women and Welfare Division, Miss Margaret Grier has been appointed to have charge of the administration of the Dominion-Provincial agreement for the day care of children.
2.	Agreement with Ontario was signed July 29, 1942, and with Quebec on August 3, 1942. Seven day nurseries have been approved. Four are in operation.
3.	Toronto, Brantford, St. Catharines, Oshawa.
4 and 5. While day nurseries have not been operating long enough to give detailed statements, approximate figures are 125 mothers and 154 children who have made use of the services.
6.	256.
7.	Full time paid director who has been adequately trained in nursery education. A full time paid assistant also adequately trained. Women volunteers who have been given special short courses in nursery education.
S.	Diet lists are approved by the provincial nutrition committee.	[DOT]
9.	No.
10.	No.
11.	7 a.m. to 6.30 p.m. or later.
12.	(a) Accounts are to be rendered through the provinces and 'have not yet been received Federal commitments for day nurseries approved amount to S27,404.68. (b) Provincial costs will be 827,404.68, plus any additional expenses which are not shareable under the agreement, (c) Cities and towns do not contribute, (d) Mothers contribute 35 cents for first child and 15 cents for each additional child. If both parents working, the charge is 50 cents per child, (e) Industries do not contribute.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	How frequently does the government settle its accounts with General Motors of Canada or its subsidiaries?
2.	What rate of interest does General Motors charge on government accounts payable?
3.	What was the average monthly balance due to General Motors during the year 1942?
4.	At what rate of interest does the General Motors receive financial accommodation from the Dominion Bank of Canada or other chartered bank?
5.	What was the average rate of interest paid by the government on its short term loans or treasury bills in 1942?


MCMURRAY OIL SANDS-ABASAND OILS LIMITED
Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Has the government entered into any arrangement under which the Abasand Oils Limited is working in the development of McMurray oil sands?
2.	If so, what arrangements have been made with this company or any other in connection with the development of the said oil sands?


NUTRITION PROGRAMME
Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	What is the government's war-time nutrition programme?
2.	What is the ration of beef, bacon, eggs, milk, butter and cheese per man in the armed forces stationed in Canada?
3.	Have plans been made for a constant supply of these food products for civilians as well as the armed forces?
4.	If so, what are such plans?
5.	Is there a price ceiling on imported fresh vegetables?
6.	If not, has any precaution been taken by the government to prevent excessive charges to the consumer?


THIRD VICTORY LOAN
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What was the total cost of the last victory loan, 1942?
2.	What sum was spent on advertising, canvassers, paid workers, radio, decorating, commissions, hotel expenses, rent, travelling expenses, entertainment, dinners, and all other expenses?
3.	Will the minister give a breakdown of the cost of this loan?


Mr. STOKES:: 1.	What was the total amount raised in the last victory loan?
2.	Of this, how much was subscribed, (a) by individuals, (b) by corporations?
3.	What was the total cost of the last victory loan campaign?
4.	Of this, how much was expended for, (a) commissions, (b) advertising, (c) radio pro-

Questions as Orders for Returns
grammes, (d) salaries, living allowances, and travelling expenses, (e) rental of premises, (f) public meetings or other public functions held in support of the loan?


HOUSING
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What action was taken in the recent recess of parliament to remedy the housing situation in Canada?
2.	How many war-time houses have been erected by Wartime Housing Corporation, where, and what is the total expenditure to date?
3.	Will the government give consideration to the appointment of a select committee of the house on building, reconstruction and housing?
4.	What action has been taken for urban, suburban and rural housing for returned soldiers?


PRESS AGENTS AND LIAISON OFFICERS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	How many press agents or liaison officers are there in the employ of the government or oi any commission or other authority connected therewith under each separate ministry?
2.	Where are they located, what are their duties, who instructs them, what rank do they hold and who recommended their appointment?
3.	What are their respective salaries, living allowances, travelling and other expenses?
4.	What was their previous employment or military service and where did they serve?
5.	Do they wear uniforms and what allowances are made them for same?
6.	Could not their duties be transacted by the women's army or other civilians not eligible for active service?


WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Who is the minister of the crown responsible for the various public utterances of Donald Gordon and all his staif and controls, subcontrols and other officials in Canada, and are these speeches first submitted to each separate ministry?
2.	What has been the cost of the Wartime Prices and Trade Board since its inception, by years?
3.	What are the salaries, living allowances, travelling expenses and other allowances of each headquarters officer or official of the said board since appointment, and what was the previous occupation of each?
4.	Who instructs them as to their duties?
5.	What is the number of officers under each control and the total payrolls for the last year of record of the board and its officials?


FORT WILLIAM TERMINAL ELEVATORS
Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	What was the total cost to the government for additions made to the Port William terminal elevators in the years 1941 and 1942?
2.	What was the cost of said additions for each terminal elevator?
3.	What was the total cost of the machinery installed in the said elevators for the same periods?
fMr. Stokes.]
4.	What was the cost of the machinery installed for each elevator?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Return tabled.


BOARDS, COMMISSIONS OR CORPORATIONS-REPRESENTATION OF LABOUR AND AGRICULTURE
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What are the names of all boards, commissions, or government-owned corporations which have been constituted since the outbreak of war?
2.	What are the names of all members or directors of such boards, commissions or corporations?
3.	Of these persons, who, in the case of each board, commission or corporation, is the representative (a) of labour; (b) of agriculture?


EMERGENCY COAL PRODUCTION BOARD
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	Has an emergency coal production board been appointed?
2.	If so, who are the members of the said board?
3.	What are the functions and duties of the said board?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Return tabled.


HOUSING COORDINATION COMMITTEE
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	Has a housing coordination committee been established?
2.	If so, who are the members of the said committee?
3.	What are the functions and duties of the said committee?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Return tabled.


PRICE CEILING SUBSIDIES
Mr. MacKINNON (Kootenay East):: 1.	What is the total amount which has been paid by the wartime prices and trade board and/or the commodity prices stabilization corporation by way of subsidy?
2.	Upon what commodities was subsidy paid and what was the total amount of subsidy paid in respect of each such commodity?


JAPANESE NATIONALS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA- RADIOS
Mr. REID:: 1.	Were the radios in possession of the Japanese in British Columbia taken away from them following Japan's dastardly attack at Pearl Harbour?
2.	Since then, have the radios been returned to the Japanese in British Columbia?
3.	If so, on whose advice, and how many radios have been so returned?



JAPANESE NATIONALS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA- REMOVAL FROM COASTAL DISTRICTS

William Kemble Esling: As at December 31, 1942, what was the total sum involved in the removal of the Japanese from the coast districts?

Questions as Orders for Returns



GOVERNMENT COMMISSIONS IN CONNECTION WITH DEPARTMENTS

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	Since the war commenced, how many commissions have been appointed and are now functioning in connection with the departments of (a) munitions and supply, (b) trade and commerce, (c) agriculture, (d) finance, (e) pensions and national health, (f) labour, (g) national war services?
2.	How many employees have been appointed in each of the nine provinces under each commission?



WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-MALE EMPLOYEES OF MILITARY AGE

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	How many male persons between the ages of 18 and 45 have been assigned to positions with the wartime prices and trade board?
2.	How many of such persons (a) produced evidence of their ineligibility for service in the forces, (b) were appointed under a certificate that their appointment was necessary in the public interests?
3.	What is the name, age, salary and duty of each person included in question 2 (b) ?
4.	Have any male persons between the ages of 18 and 45 been appointed to positions with the wartime prices and trade board who are not included in either question 2 (a) or 2 (b) ?
5.	If so, what is the name, age, salary and duties of each such person?



TOTAL NUMBER OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	How many new employees have been employed by the government since the return tabled August 1, 1942?
2.	What is the total number of employees now in the employment of the government? Hoy many men and how many women?
3.	How many employees in each department?
4.	How many employees in the wartime prices and trade board?



ASSISTANCE TO WAR INDUSTRIES

Mr. COLD WELL:: What are the total capital investments, loans, amounts involved in tax rebates or other financial assistance in Canadian war industries, whether government-owned or private corporations, made or agreed upon between January 1, 1938, and January 31, 1943, by (a) Canada, (h) United Kingdom, (c) United States, (d) other governments?


Mr. CASSELMAN:: 1.	What is the total amount which has been expended by the government or which the government has been committed to expend by way of capital assistance to private corporations?
2.	What is the name of each corporation to which capital assistance has been granted by the government?
3.	What is the total amount granted to each such corporation?
4.	What was the purpose for w'hich each such grant was made?
5.	Upon what terms and conditions was each such grant made?
6.	Is the government committed to make grants by way of capital assistance in the future to any such corporation?
7.	If so, what is the additional amount of such commitment in each ease and what is the purpose of the additional grant?
8.	Have any payments other than grants by way of capital assistance been made by the government to any private corporation for the purpose of expanding the production of such corporation or for any other purpose?
9.	If so, what are the names of the corporations to which such payments have been made?
10.	What was	the	amount	of	each	such
payment?
11.	What was	the	purpose	of	each	such
payment?



GOVERNMENT-OWNED WAR CORPORATIONS

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What are the names of all wholly-owned government corporations which have been incorporated since the outbreak of war, to carry on any government programme in connection with the war effort?
2.	What, in detail, are the functions of each such corporation?
3.	What are the names of the directors and officers of each such corporation and what salary, honorarium, allowance or other emolument does each such person receive?
4.	What are the names of all employees of each such corporation who receive salaries, honoraria, allowances or other emoluments in excess of $5,000 and what is the amount of their salary in each case?



ERECTION OF GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS IN OTTAWA

Mr. AYLESWORTH:: 1.	What buildings have been erected by the government in the city of Ottawa since January 1, 1941?
2.	What was the total cost of each such building?
3.	What was the original estimate of the cost of erecting each such building?
4.	What was the name of the contractor who erected each such building?
5.	Were tenders called before the contract was let for the erection of each such building?
6.	If so, who were the unsuccessful tenderers in each case and what was the amount of their tender?



ROYALTIES AND PATENT FEES ON WAR MATERIALS

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What is the total amount of royalties, patent fees, etc., paid by the dominion government from September 1, 1939, to December 31. 1942, on war materials manufactured in Canada?
2.	What are the names and addresses of the firms receiving these payments and what amount has been paid to each?

Questions as Orders for Returns
3.	What is the total amount paid to individuals and corporations outside of Canada?
4.	What disposition is made of royalties and patent fees, etc., payable to individuals and firms resident in enemy or in enemy-occupied countries?
5.	What is the total amount payable to individuals or corporations resident in enemy or enemy-occupied countries ?



MILITARY SERVICE-CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: 1.	How many in each military district have applied for exemption on the ground that they were conscientious objectors?
2.	How many in each military district have been granted status as conscientious objectors?
3.	How many of those who were granted this status, in each military district, are now doing alternative service ?
4.	How many, in each military district, have claimed exemption as conscientious objectors, but who were denied this status, have failed to report, and how many of these have been taken into custody by the authorities?
5.	How many camps have been established in Canada for conscientious objectors doing alternative service and where are these camps located?
6.	What was the total personnel in these camps at December 31, 1942, and what is the nature of work being done in each of these camps ?



WARTIME INFORMATION BOARD

Mr. CASSELMAN:: 1.	What are the names of the members of the wartime information board?
2.	What is the usual occupation of each member of the board and what proportion of his time, approximately, does each member devote to the work of the board?
3.	What experience has each member of the board had in journalism, radio, advertising or other publicity medium?
4.	How many meetings of the board have been held since its appointment?
5.	How many meetings has each member of the board attended?
6.	What salary, honorarium, living or other allowance has been paid to each member of the board since his appointment?
7.	What amount has been paid by way of travelling expenses to each member of the board since his appointment?
8.	What are the names of all persons employed in the work of the board?
9.	What was the previous occupation of each such person and what experience has each such person had in journalism, radio, advertising or other publicity medium?
10.	What salary, honorarium, living or other allowance is paid to each such person? Where payment is made in other than Canadian funds, please indicate the amount in Canadian funds.
11.	What amount has been paid by way of travelling expenses to each such person since his appointment?

12.	What are the duties which each such person is expected to perform?
13.	Have any persons who were appointed to official positions with the board resigned such positions?
14.	If so, what are their names, what positions did they occupy, and what salary, honoraria or living allowances did they receive?
15.	What reasons did each such person give for his resignation?
16.	What has been the total expenditure of the wartime information board since its establishment, for, (a) salaries, honoraria and living allowances, (b) travelling expenses, (e) printing, (d) advertising, (e) radio programmes, (f) rent of office or other space, (g) all other expenditures?
17.	What offices does the board maintain outside of Canada?
18.	Where are they located?
19.	What has been the total expenditure of each such office since its establishment?
20.	Does the board distribute copies of speeches made by the Prime Minister and members of the government?
21.	If so, what speeches have been so distributed and how many copies of each?



COMMODITY PRICES STABILIZATION CORPORATION-

[Stage Direction]
HARRISON & CROSFIELD (CANADA) LIMITED
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Do Harrison and Crosfield (Canada) Ltd. act as brokers for Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation?
2.	Is this company employed by the corporation in any other capacity?
3.	How long has it been employed as broker or in any other capacity with the corporation, and on whose recommendation was it appointed?
4.	Is this company the exclusive broker for the corporation, and if not, how many other persons or companies are so employed, and what are their names and addresses?
5.	What remuneration does this company receive for its services to the corporation, and what services has it rendered the corporation to date, and how much has it been paid in each case?
6.	What is the total amount this company has been paid to date for services rendered the corporation?
7.	Is this company employed in any other capacity by the government or any board or other corporation set up by the government, and if so, by what department, board or other corporation and in what capacity and how much has it received to date for its services?



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Is Mr. D. C. Mackenzie employed in the contracts division of the Department of National Defence?
2.	If so, (a) what are his duties; (b) what has he received in salary and expenses; (e) when was he appointed; (d) what are his qualifications; (e) what positions did he occupy before entering the department; (f) what recommendations were made to the minister for his appointment and by -whom?

Motions for Papers



HALIFAX BUILDINGS TAKEN OVER FOR WAR PURPOSES

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	How many apartment buildings, hotels or other dwelling places in Halifax have the department of defence taken over during the period November 1, 1942, to January 31, 1943?
2.	How many of these places were (a) purchased outright, (b) arrangements made for occupancy for the duration of the war?
3.	What number of each type of building has been taken over?
4.	By which branch of the service were they acquired?
5.	What use is to be made of each?
6.	How many persons were obliged to seek homes or lodgings elsewhere because of the action in taking over these places?
7.	Has the government compensated the city of Halifax for the loss of revenue, in taxes, by the taking over of these buildings?
LE DOMAIN DE l'eSTBREL


Mr. BERTRAND (Terrebonne):: 1.	Has Le Domain de l'Esterel at St. Marguerite been taken over for military purposes?
2.	If so, what portion of it is being used?
3.	For what purpose and when was it taken over?
4.	What are the conditions of the lease and to whom is the rent paid?



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY-CONTROLLERS


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What has been the total cost to the federal government of referring the Alberta debt legislation to the courts?
2.	What remuneration was paid to each of the legal counsel so engaged?


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
[Stage Direction]
DATES, 1942-43 Mr. COLDWELL:
For a return showing the numbers of persons registered as unemployed in the five regional offices of the Department of National Selective Service as at the following dates: November 1, 1942; November 15, 1942; December 1. 1942; December 15, 1942; January 1, 1943; January 15, 1943.

Mr. STOKES:: For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the Prime Minister or any official of his staff, the Minister of Labour or any official of his department, and the representatives of the employees and of the employers in connection with the strike in the steel industry.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I might say a word just here with regard to this motion; it applies to other returns as well. There is no reason why a complete return should not be made up. It might, however, be possible to save a great deal of labour in the departments and a good deal of expense as well if the files could be looked over in advance by the bon. member who is asking for it. In the case of at least some of these returns there are a great many communications which have been sent in for obvious reasons but are really not very important, considering, in some cases, the sources from which they come. After seeing the papers the hon. member could decide for himself which ones he would wish to have brought down as a return.
Take, for example, the request for correspondence on the steel strike. I received a very large number of telegrams, obviously the result of certain organizations having been circularized to make particular representations. They were so identical in phraseology that there could be no doubt on that. This happens in regard to any number of subjects. To have all those telegrams individually copied by stenographers, to say nothing of the time of officials who have to look them over, is just a waste of public money. At this time of war, when we are seeking to economize in the departments and when officials in the departments are overworked,' I would ask hon. members to be as specific as they can in regard to the material they may wish to have brought down, and, where it will help to serve the public interest in the matter of economy and time, to be prepared to follow the course which I have suggested.-namely, go to the department and see what information there is and limit as much as possible the material
Motions jor Papers

which is to be copied and brought down. In these matters there is no desire on the part of the government to conceal or hold back any information, but of necessity there must be, or should be, discretion exercised on the part of the minister in respect to the amount of work involved in different returns.


Gordon Graydon: I might say something on that point. I have no doubt that as a rule hon. members who ask questions or have motions on the order paper for the production of papers are not familiar with how much work the preparation of the return will actually involve. Until such time as the motion appears on the order paper and the full information is asked for it is difficult for a private member to assess the exact relationship of certain correspondence to the general subject to which he is referring. In answer to the remarks of the Prime Minister with respect to this matter, I would say that if there is a great deal of correspondence which is of a similar nature to that which has preceded it, there might be some way of having reference made to that fact on the return so that a great volume of material need not be copied out at public expense. I would thoroughly agree with that. On the other hand it must be remembered that, once a return is passed, it is not merely for the private information of some hon. member. It is for the information of the house and of the public. We must bear that in mind in connection with the answer which the Prime Minister has made.


Mr. HOMUTH:: I think if the Prime Minister will read that question over he will find that it deals only with the official documents as between the strikers, the negotiators and his department.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: What I was saying really had reference to several of the motions.


REPORT OF MR. JUSTICE BARLOW ON STEEL INDUSTRY
George Henry Stokes: _ For a copy of the report of the commission investigating conditions in the steel industry, which was headed by Air. Justice Barlow, together with a copy of the minority report.


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION-GENERAL MANAGER
Mr. CARDIFF:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda or other documents passing between the chairman of the board of governors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, or any member of that board or any official of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and the

Prime Minister, or any member of his staff, the clerk of the privy council, the Minister of National War Services, or any official of his department, the Minister of Munitions and Supply or any official of his department, or the Minister of Transport or any official of his department, with respect to the retirement of Major Gladstone Murray from the position of general manager of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, his appointment as director of broadcasting of the said corporation, the appointment of tlhe Rev. J. S. Thomson to succeed him as general manager, and the salaries to be paid to the said persons and to the assistant general manager of the said corporation.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: With regard to this and certain other motions, it is generally recognized that communications between a minister of the crown and officials of the government are privileged and that it is within the discretion and also the responsibility of a minister to decide whether such communications should or should not be brought down in a return. Take for example a matter which has to be decided by a minister, involving communications which he receives from members of his staff. Unless it were understood that communications of the sort would be privileged, many communications would be drafted, not so much with a view to giving a minister the exact information he would wish to have as with a view to having the communication in a form in which it might be made public. That is. quite obvious, and therefore it has always been understood that communications between departmental officials and heads of departments are privileged. In regard to the particular request in this motion, there may be communications concerning the appointment of one person or the retirement of another to the bringing down of which there could be no objection. But in other cases there are communications, which I can think of, wherein the government has sought to get information with respect to say some matter to be considered by the cabinet. It would certainly not do to have communications of that character brought down.
Here too it is necessary to consider what I mentioned a moment ago, about the amount of time and expense involved in seeking to provide information. This may be a matter largely of procedure. The government might say, with respect to bodies such as the CBC, [DOT]we will consider only such questions as are placed upon the order paper in the first ' instance and refuse to provide a committee by which information in detail may be obtained. On the other hand, the government might take the view, that a committee of the house should be appointed to look into certain matters and that all information must be elicited before that committee. I do not

Motions for Papers
think either would be a good position to take exclusively. I do say, however, that as respects the time of the house as well as the business and the procedure of the house generally, where we have a committee for the purpose of dealing with any subject, questions should be asked and information elicited in the committee rather than by means of questions and motions on the order paper. There may be some questions which hon. members would like to have answered immediately, but where there is a committee of the house dealing *with a subject, as there will be with respect to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, I should think that information should be sought in the committee rather than by questions on the order paper.


Major James William Coldwell: The Prime Minister's suggestion with reference to this question underlines the question I asked the Minister of National War Services (Mr. LaFleche). It raises the whole matter of the status of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. That was the purpose of my question to the Minister of National War Services and I am anxious to see the position clarified. As I understood the Prime Minister's remarks -they implied, to me at any rate, that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is now regarded as a department of government, whereas I have always understood that it was a free and independent corporation and therefore had not the same standing as departments of government with regard to correspondence between a minister of the crown and officials of the corporation. That is the point I had in mind when I asked the question.


Gordon Graydon: I was about to make an observation similar to that of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). I was amazed to hear the Prime Minister, in reference to this question suggest that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation had the same status as a department of government. Those of us who have made some study of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's structure realize that it is half and half, so to speak, partly a department of government and partly a public corporation. As I understand, it is in some respects like the Canadian National Railways while in other respects it is not. One of the recommendations of the radio broadcasting committee last year was that this anomalous position of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation should be clarified, and I hope the government will do something about it.
The Prime Minister is not on solid ground when he argues -that in a matter of this kind communications between the minister of the crown responsible and officials of the Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation should be in any way privileged. If we are to take the government's view, as outlined so many times, that this is a free and independent corporation, then it seems to me that there cannot possibly be privilege as between a minister of the crown and a free and independent corporation such as this is supposed to be.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend's description of this corporation as being partly one thing and -partly the other is, I think, fairly accurate with regard to the view of the situation as it stands at the present time. It was for that reason that I made my remarks quite general and indicated that, while there might be some information which the government would be prepared to give immediately, there was other information which should properly be brought out only before the committee appointed to deal with matters affecting the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Certainly it is not the government's view that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is a department of government. It is not; it is a separate corporation. It is, however, a corporation with respect -to the affairs of which the government is of the opinion that a committee of this house may be appointed to discuss. There is that difference. The fact -that we are having a committee on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation makes clear that it is in a different category, vis a vis the house, from other corporations.


Thomas Vien: What is the pleasure of the house?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Answered.


Thomas Vien: Carried.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Subject to what has been said.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Lewis Elston Cardiff: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, or other documents exchanged between any member of the board of governors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation or any official of the said corporation and any other person, since March 31, 1942, with respect to the broadcasting of speeches of any member of the government or of any leader or representative of any political party.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: This is information that might be brought out before the committee.


Thomas Vien: Carried.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No, dropped.
Motions jor Papers


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the hon. member for Huron North (Mr. Cardiff), for whom I have moved the motion, I must protest against the Prime Minister taking that attitude. I know what he would say if he were on this side of the house asking the question. This is something to which we are entitled and we want the answer.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not saying that my hon. friend is not entitled to it, but I am saying that the time and place to get it is before the committee. To take up the time of the house in discussion on returns to be brought down would only mean that whatever is brought down would be gone all over again when the committee is in session.


Gordon Graydon: I think perhaps the Prime Minister might review his position and allow this information to come down, because it is information which, in my opinion, we should have.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No; I make this statement because I have a responsibility for the procedure to be adopted- in the house. If we begin to pass motions which call for detailed information regarding these outside organizations whose affairs are to be reviewed by committees, we shall be spending unnecessarily a great deal of the time of the public service in preparing returns to those motions.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: If the information must be prepared for the committee, why can it not be prepared in response to a motion in the house and brought down in the regular way?


Thomas Vien: Dropped.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Thomas Vien: All in favour of the motion please say aye.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Aye.


Thomas Vien: Those opposed, nay.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Nay.


Thomas Vien: In my opinion the nays have it.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: We expected that, anyway.
Motion negatived.


GOVERNMENT LABOUR POLICY
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, briefs, memoranda, or other documents, addressed or presented by any representative of any national organized labour body to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Labour, or any official of the Department of Labour, dated since March 31, 1942, with reference to the labour policy of the government, and, in particular, with reference to the relationship existing between the Minister of Labour and organized labour.


Thomas Vien: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Subject to the reservation I made a little while ago with respect to these motions that call for pretty nearly everything.


Thomas Vien: Carried, subject to the reservation made by the Prime Minister.


MOBILIZATION ACT-POSTING OP MEN FOR EXTRATERRITORIAL SERVICE
Mr. McGREGOR:: For a copy of all orders in council authorizing the posting for service of men called up pursuant to the National Resources Mobilization Act, outside the territorial limits of Canada.


Charles Gavan Power: Return tabled.


GOVERNOR GENERAL'S WARRANTS
Robert Henry McGregor: For a copy of all governor general's warrants issued since January 1, 1942.


ENDEAVOUR, SASK., POSTMASTERSHIP
Mr. NICHOLSON:: For a copy of all correspondence, recommendations, reports and other documents in the possession of the Post Office Department, dated since January 1, 1941, regarding the change of postmaster at Endeavour, Saskatchewan.
Mr. MULO'CK: No objection, 'but subject to the usual reservation that the reports of officials are confidential, and are tabled only at the discretion of the minister.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: You have that too.


Thomas Vien: Carried, subject to the reservation made by the minister.


INVESTIGATION INTO SINKING OF P.E.I. CAR FERRY &quot;CHARLOTTETOWN&quot;
Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: For a copy of the findings of Mr. Justice Archibald, Halifax, Nova Scotia, with respect to the sinking of the ferry steamship Gharlottetoivn off the coast of Nova Scotia in 1941.


ALBERTA DEBT ADJUSTMENT LEGISLATION
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, letters and other documents exchanged between the dominion government or any official thereof and the government of the province of Alberta or other provincial government or any official thereof, concerning the Alberta debt legislation, as well as a copy of all briefs submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada and to the judicial committee of the privy council, along with a copy of decisions that have been handed down with regard to this legislation.

Military Service
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I take it the copies of decisions which have been handed down are the decisions in the supreme court, and before the privy council.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Yes.
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	And not decisions
which have been handed down by other courts prior to that.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: No, only those two.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: The hon. member will realize it will be some time before we can have these documents ready.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Yes.


CANADIAN ARMY-ENLISTMENTS, DISCHARGES, ETC.
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: For a return showing:-(a) the total number of men by military districts who have enlisted with the Canadian active army as of the latest available date; (b) the total number of men by military districts serving overseas with the Canadian army as of the latest available date;
(e)	the total number of men by military districts who are attested for service anywhere, but who are now serving in Canada, as of the latest available date; (d) the total number of men by military districts who are serving with the Canadian army reserve, as of the latest available date; (e) the total number of men by military districts, and/or administrative districts, who' have been called up for training and service pursuant to the National Resources Mobilization Act, as of the latest available date;
(f)	the total number of men by military districts and/or administrative districts, called up for training and service under the National Resources Mobilization Act w'ho have volunteered for service anywhere; (g) the total number of men who have been discharged from the Canadian active army on the ground of (1) medical unfitness, (2) misconduct, (3) all other reasons.


Charles Gavan Power: There is no objection whatsoever, indeed the information is readily available, with respect to (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) and
(g)	. But with respect to (b), if my hon. friend1 wants that information at once there will be some difficulty, and it may take some time. If he will permit me to table as soon as possible the information with respect to all the others, and would ask a separate question with respect to (b), we would be able to get it out for him. But I must advise him it would take some time to get the information, because I fear it would mean the examination of files overseas. Perhaps my hon. friend would have a chat with me as to whether he wants the information concerning (b) to the extent he wishes to have the other information. In any event, the order may pass, with that exception.


Thomas Vien: Carried, subject to the statement made by the minister.


RADIO BROADCASTING
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, I should1 like to ask a question of the Prime Minister. I am informed there are now two vacancies on the board of governors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Would the Prime Minister indicate to the house when the appointments will be made, and when making them does he propose to follow the recommendation of last year's report of the committee on radio broadcasting that if possible there should be included persons who would be able to represent the points of view of agriculture and labour?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The government has been considering carefully the recommendations of the committee which sat last year. What my hon. friend has mentioned is just one of the considerations of which the government is anxious to take account. How soon the appointments can be made I cannot say at the present time, but I hope it will be very soon.


MILITARY SERVICE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders- of the day:
Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Albemi):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask two questions of the Minister of National War Services (Mr. LaFleche). I really should make it a question of privilege, because it concerns the privileges of all members; but if I get these questions answered it may suffice.
On May 5, 1942, I wrote the minister, who was then deputy minister, on some matters of public concern with respect to selective service. I wanted information that the public should have. Receiving no answer I wrote again on August 3 of last year. Having got no answer I wrote again on September 29, and specified five specific questions on which I wanted definite answers. Getting no answer I wrote again on December 29, and again no answer. I wrote again on January 30, 1943, and again no answer-five letters and no reply.	_	_ _
The questions I wish to ask the minister are these. Does he not think that anyone, whether a member of parliament or a private individual in Canada, who writes civilly and definitely to a public servant ought to get an answer to his questions in less than nine
Food Shortage-Potatoes

months? My second question is, when may I expect an answer, not just an acknowledgment or a stall?
Hon. L. R. LaFLECHE (Minister of National War Services): Mr. Speaker, may I say to my hon. friend that I did write him recently-


Alan Webster Neill: On a totally different subject.
Mr. LaFLECHE: -and in my letter I requested the pleasure of discussing matters with him. May I say that the matters about which he put the questions, in the correspondence he mentions, were very largely in a state of flux throughout; and at the present time they are not under the jurisdiction of the Minister of National War Services.
I certainly agree with the hon. member that he should have answers, and I shall do my best to supply them. But I would request the privilege of discussing these matters with him, so that I can help him all the more.


INQUIRY AS TO REPORTED SHORTAGE OF POTATOES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Knapman Fraser: In view of the fact that there is a shortage of potatoes in some districts in Canada, will the Minister of Agriculture make a statement as to what is being done to remedy the situation?


James Garfield Gardiner: I shall be in a position to discuss that matter during the course of a day or two.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister gave me that same reply last year in regard to beef, and I waited months for the answer. I hope he will not take as long in this case.


POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION REPRESENTATION OF FISHERIES DEPARTMENT ON ADVISORY COMMITTEE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: I wish to ask the Prime Minister a question in regard to an announcement appearing in the press that a committee has been set up to formulate plans for post-war reconstruction, on which apparently most of the departments of the government are represented. Will the Prime Minister not go further and consider having a representative on that committee from the Department of Fisheries?
[Mr. Neill.)


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I imagine the committee to which my hon. friend is referring is the economic advisory committee. If that is so it will not be necessary to consider the matter further, as Doctor Finn, the deputy minister of fisheries, has been named a member of that committee.


Thomas Reid: That announcement was not made; that was why I asked the question.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I thank my
hon. friend for the question.


FINANCIAL MEASURES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make an announcement concerning the business which the government proposes to place before the house in the next few weeks. I have particularly in mind several financial measures which will be provided for in resolutions which will appear on the order paper during the next few days. I think it is most desirable that the house should be made aware at once of the general nature and purpose of these proposals and of their relationship to each other.
The measures to which I refer include the supplementary war appropriation for the current fiscal year, the main war appropriation for the new fiscal year, and the bill to establish a Canadian war supplies allocation board and provide an appropriation for it.
The house will, I am sure, wish to begin the discussion of the war appropriation bills as soon as possible. Hon. members will be given the opportunity to discuss fully Canada's war expenditures, including the record for the current fiscal year as well as the programme proposed for the next year. However, as the war appropriation vote last session is already almost exhausted and we shall be needing almost immediately additional funds to take care of expenditures during the remainder of this month and the month of March, I would like the house to consider the best procedure by which the supplementary war appropriation could be dealt with expeditiously, without limiting in any way the right of the house to make any inquiries which it may desire and debate in full the details of expenditure for the current year.
As was indicated in the speech from the throne, it is the government's intention to

Financial Measures
have the budget brought down at an early date. I hope to have it ready within the next two or three weeks, so that the Canadian people may know as soon as possible the details of our financial and taxation programme for the year.
I wish to outline a little more fully the measures that are being proposed to make possible the continued flow of Canadian munitions, foodstuffs and other war materials to the various theatres of war. The principal measure for this purpose is the bill to set up a Canadian war supplies allocation board and provide it with authority and funds to procure war supplies to be transferred to others of the united nations. There are two subsidiary proposals which I shall mention later, one of which is provided for in the supplementary war appropriation and the other in the main war appropriation.
Canada has been able to provide a huge volume of war supplies over and above the requirements of our own forces. Raw materials and foods we have been able to furnish from the beginning, and we have greatly increased our production of these basic necessities to meet, the war requirements of Britain, the United States, Russia and others of the united nations. From the large new factories we have built during the war and the extensions to other plants has come a flood of munitions and specialized war equipment *-ammunition, guns, tanks, aircraft, transport vehicles and merchant ships-which have been sent to many theatres of war. A large part of these war supplies has gone to Britain and to British forces abroad. Much has gone to other nations of the commonwealth. Canadian supplies have also been sent in substantial volume to Russia and China.
In order to enable these various countries to obtain these supplies from Canada, special financial arrangements have had to be made, because these nations did not have available Canadian dollars that were required to pay for Canadian products.
The main way in which we have assured this flow of war supplies to our allies heretofore has been to provide Britain with the Canadian dollars necessary to pay for what the sterling area obtained from Canada in excess of what it sold to Canada. This served to make Canadian dollars available not only to Britain but also to Australia, New Zealand and other British empire countries which purchased their foreign exchange from Britain. The first means by which we provided dollars to Britain was that of paying our debts before they were due. The next was merely to allow pounds sterling to accumulate to our credit. Later these sterling balances not used in payment of debts were converted into a loan to Britain, interest free for the duration of the war. Finally we provided a free gift of a billion dollars, assuming this as part of our share of the cost of the war. This billion dollars has now been exhausted. Other means must be found to continue providing Britain with the large volume of essential war supplies she requires from Canada.
Others are involved as well as Britain. Canada desires to continue sending supplies to Russia, to the heroic Russian army and to the hard-working men and women who have made its success possible. We want to play our part in providing China with everything that can be transported to her, so that she may strike back at Japan quickly and effectively. We want Australia, New Zealand and other parts of the commonwealth to be able to get from Canada all that we can provide them of the things they require from us in carrying out their part of the united nations' effort. Heretofore, as I have indicated, Australia and New Zealand have purchased from Britain the Canadian dollars they required, but we think it would be more satisfactory from the point of view of all concerned if they were able to make more direct arrangements with us.
We will continue to produce many kinds of war supplies substantially in excess of the requirements of our own forces. WTe are able to supply a great deal because we have a high productive capacity in relation to our population and because we are relatively safe from direct attack and invasion. I believe, and I think most Canadians believe, that it is our national duty and our privilege to share our abundant supplies with the other united nations, putting the excess of our supplies over the requirements of our own forces into a pool to be allocated among those of our allies who can make the best use of them in accordance with strategic needs. No financial impediment should be allowed to interfere with this sensible sharing of our war production. We are engaged in a common enterprise; the defence and security of Canada are imperilled if any of our partners lack arms; victory for each depends upon victory for all.
After thorough consideration, therefore, the government is proposing that Canada should share its production of essential war supplies with the other united nations on the basis of strategic needs. It is proposed in the legislation to reserve the right to transfer goods on such terms and conditions as the government may deem appropriate, so that in certain cases Canada may receive the benefit of such reciprocal arrangements as may be practicable. However, the government believes that the conditions under which Canadian war supplies
Financial Measures

are made available to the other united nations "should not be such as to burden post-war commerce or lead to the imposition of trade restrictions or otherwise prejudice a just and enduring peace." Therefore, an essential feature of this proposal is that it shall be good and sufficient consideration for transferring war supplies to other united nations that such supplies are to be used in the joint and effective prosecution of the war.
To make the matter absolutely clear, I shall quote the paragraph dealing with these terms and conditions which we intend to incorporate in the bill. It is as follows:
It shall be good and sufficient consideration for making war supplies available to any of the united nations hereunder that the said war supplies are to be used in the joint and effective prosecution of the war, but no war supplies shall be made available to any of the united nations except upon terms and conditions approved by the governor in council or by regulations, and the governor in council may require, in respect of specific classes of supplies or any specific transfer of supplies under subsection one of this section, such reciprocal action or provision of supplies or any such other direct or indirect benefit as the governor in council deems appropriate.
To carry out the new arrangements, it is proposed to establish a Canadian war supplies allocation board consisting of five ministers and acting as a committee of the cabinet, which will purchase or procure war supplies in Canada and then allocate and transfer such supplies to those of the united nations which require them, in accordance with strategic needs. The government is proposing to request an appropriation of $1,000,000,000 to provide funds for the production and transfer of these war supplies.
In addition to guns, ammunition, tanks, aircraft and similar military equipment, the war supplies to be covered in this measure will include raw materials and foodstuffs, which are just as essential to a nation at war as arms themselves, and which we are particularly well able to supply. Of course, all our exports of war supplies will not need to be transferred under this arrangement, because Britain and others of the united nations have current receipts of Canadian dollars which enable them to pay for substantial quantities of what they obtain from us. It is only the excess which they cannot pay for that will be dealt with under this new measure.
Incorporated in the supplies which Canada will furnish to other united nations under this proposal, there will be in almost all cases some materials and parts imported from the United States. Canada is able to obtain these materials and parts because of the sensible arrangements already existing between Canada

and the United States arising out of the Hyde Park agreement, made between the President and the Prime Minister in April of 1941.
In accordance with that agreement, the amount which Canada must purchase in the United States has been reduced to a small extent by arrangements under which the United States endeavoured to lease-lend to Britain certain components and materials required from the United States for British orders and commitments in Canada. The principal effect of the agreement, however, has been that Canada sells substantial quantities of war supplies to the United States in order to obtain the funds necessary to pay for her war imports from the United States. It is hoped that, as a part of the programme of coordinated war production in the United States and Canada and the mutual cooperation which has existed between the two countries, it will be possible for us to transfer some war supplies to the United States under the new mutual aid bill instead of being forced to rely on sales of all war supplies to the United States in order to meet our minimum United States dollar requirements.
It is of the greatest importance that the vital flow of arms to the fighting fronts be maintained and increased this year. That flow must be directed in accordance with strategic needs and not diverted or obstructed by financial considerations. Moreover, we do not want that flow to give rise to huge war debts between nations, debts which cannot be liquidated without destroying trade, debts whose very existence will undermine international understanding and good will. We want it to make the most effective contribution to an early victory, not only for our allies but for ourselves.
In certain cases it may be practicable to obtain reciprocal benefits to Canada in the form of goods or services from other countries in return for what we transfer to them under this plan. We will enter into such reciprocal arrangements where they can be made. Already the United States has found it possible to obtain substantial reciprocal aid corresponding to its lease-lend aid to other nations. In some cases it may be possible to arrange for the return after the war of t'he equipment or vehicles which Canada provides under this new programme. In still other cases the nation receiving the war supplies from Canada may be able to provide us with some other form of post-war benefit. But we do not want to make the sharing of war supplies dependent upon the ability of those who use them to pay for them. We recognize that we in Canada, because of our position and capacity, are able

Financial Measures
to produce and contribute to the common cause more war supplies than we require for our own fighting forces. We also recognize that others of the united nations, who, for geographical reasons, have had to grapple more closely with the enemy, require far more than they are able to produce. Each nation must make the maximum effort of which it is capable in the form in which its most effective effort can be made. It should be enough that those of the united nations suffering far more than we from the attacks of the enemy, having necessarily to take a far greater part in the fighting than we, should make effective use against the enemy of the arms, the materials and the food that we produce.
I do not think the spirit behind this measure can be better expressed than it was the other day by one of our French-Canadian newspapers in commenting upon the announcement in his excellency's speech when it said as I translate it: "Whether they are employed in England, in Nortji Africa, in China or in Russia, whether they are used by Canadian soldiers or by our allies, all our war supplies are contributing to the triumph of the cause of the united nations, who, in effect, have pooled all their means of defence against a common enemy."
I referred to two subsidiary measures that are being proposed to assist in ensuring that our allies are to continue to obtain what they require from us. These measures have very direct benefits of their own as well.
The government proposes to take over the ownership of all the interests of the United Kingdom in war plants in Canada. The British government has provided over two hundred million dollars of capital for the construction and equipment of factories in Canada to produce munitions for the British forces. The United Kingdom owns the whole or a share of many such munitions factories or specialized equipment in privately-owned factories. The Canadian government now proposes to take over these British plants and this equipment and to reimburse the United Kingdom for its investment in them. We will then have complete ownership and control of all the capital assets provided for under the capital assistance programme of the Department of Munitions and Supply. There will, I understand, be a great saving in the amount of administrative and accounting work on war production in plants heretofore jointly owned by -the Canadian and British governments. Finally, the transaction will provide the British government with cash to meet its immediate deficit of Canadian dollars during the remainder of this fiscal year, before the
new mutual aid bill can be put into operation. Funds for this transfer of munitions plants will be requested in the supplementary war appropriation bill.
The other related proposal has already been explained 'by the Prime Minister, as well as mentioned in the speech from the throne. I refer to the expansion in the number of Royal Canadian Air Force squadrons overseas, and in the degree to which Canada bears -the cost of equipping and maintaining them. This will have the effect of increasing our expenditures in sterling ini the United Kingdom, thereby providing indirectly additional Canadian dollars to Britain to assist her in purchasing supplies she requires from Canada. This additional cost of the air force overseas will, of course, be reflected in our war expenditures to be covered by the main war appropriation for next year. Canada will also meet the full cost of pay and allowances for Royal Canadian Air Force personnel serving overseas in Royal Air Force squadrons.
These air force changes will reflect and emphasize the increasingly important part being taken by the Royal Canadian Air Force in achieving that air supremacy in Europe which is so essential an element in victory. They will also make clearly Canadian what should be Canadian.
The measures I have outlined today are intended to ensure that Canada's war production over and above that required by our own forces is directed as rapidly as possible to those fighting fronts where it will be most effective in defeating the enemy. From the beginning of the war, the Canadian government, with the full support of this house and the Canadian people, has followed the policy that whatever can be done by the provision of equipment and supplies to enable our forces and our allies' forces to fight most effectively, to accomplish their objectives with the least cost in men, must be done. These measures are required to continue that policy. They do so by enabling us to mobilize our resources most quickly and most efficiently. That means a great saving of national strength and resources, for it shortens the war; it means an enormous saving of human life; ultimately it means victory.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to make any lengthy, comments on the statement which the Minister of Finance has just read, but there are two matters upon which I think we should have some clarification. Three principal nations among the united nations now conducting this struggle against the axis powers are providing large quantities of the sinews of war by way of munitions-the United
21S
Financial Measures

States, Great Britain and ourselves. I should like to ask the minister if the programme which is envisaged by the bill he mentions will be in collaboration with the lease-lend operations so far as the United States and other nations are concerned. Will there be collaboration with that country as well as with Great Britain in the allocation of supplies? So far as I could see there was nothing in the minister's statement which indicated that this was a move in collaboration with the other countries which are now supplying China and Russia. I should like the minister to be clear on that point because it is a very important factor in the discussions.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The allocation board set up under this bill will undoubtedly find it necessary and will wish to keep very closely in touch with the munitions' assignment board in Washington and the assignments board in London.


Gordon Graydon: Before the government decidted to bring down this legislation, may I ask whether Great Britain and the United States were consulted!?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not think so, no; but perhaps I had better give that som-e consideration and make inquiries before I answer the question definitely.


Gordon Graydon: The only point I wished to bring out was that we are engaged in a vast pooling arrangement of our resources and man-power to defeat the axis, and it seems to me only appropriate that we should bring down any such bill as this only in collaboration with our allies.


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is very important, too, to communicate one's intentions to the Canadian parliament before they are communicated to other nations.


Major James William Coldwell: I understand that the minister is interested in getting the supplementary war appropriation bill through as rapidly as possible. If I might make a suggestion it would be that the supplementary bill be introduced and carried through the house without discussion, interrupting this debate, if necessary, for the purpose, on the understanding that we should be free to discuss all war matters on the main measure.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I am very much obliged to the hon. gentleman for making the suggestion, for that is exactly what I should like to see happen. I suggested last year that the debate of our whole war effort take place on the main appropriation bill, but the house did not take kindly to the suggestion. It is important that the supplementary appropriation bill be passed 
immediately or very soon. I do not know what the house will want to do about that, but if the leaders and the members talk it over and there is no objection to that course, I will put the resolutions in connection with these bills on the order paper right away. A full accounting of our stewardship can be made on the main appropriation bill. That is when the mam debate takes place every year, and I dlo not see any reason why we cannot adopt that procedure this year by mutual consent.


Major James William Coldwell: With this proviso, of course, that anything which might have been discussed on the supplementary 'bill may be discussed on the main bill.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I readily agree to that.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I supplement what the Minister of Finance said a moment ago in reply to my hon. friend as to the war supplies mutual aid allocation bill, as it will be called when introduced. The particular action as therein proposed has been proposed by the Canadian government on its own. It was our government that decided to adopt this method: of aiding to the utmost in the war effort. In the course of the preparation of the measure particular departments in the governments of Great Britain and the United States especially interested were cognizant of what was in our minds. I think the word "cognizant" is the best word to use, better than "collaboration" perhaps.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I just did not know how to answer the hon. gentleman's question, whether other governments were consulted.


Gordon Graydon: They were not consulted.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Were not. This is our own action, but I should not like to say that certain details were not discussed.


Gordon Graydon: May I answer the minister's suggestion with regard to expediting the passage of this legislation, following up what the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) has just said. Our view, of course, is that in times like these we must not allow any technicalities to stand in the way of the government's proceeding with the war effort. I think all members of the house will wish to make sure that no course of procedure is adopted which will in any way hamper the government with respect to the war appropriations which are required. I have tried while I have been in this position to facilitate as much as ^possible the government's war effort and the legislation in connection with it. I do not think it is the wish of the Canadian people that we should put any small technical obstacles in the way of the government. So

The Address-Mr. Tucker
far as our party is concerned, so long as the reservation that has been made is observed, we shall be glad to discuss matters pertaining to our war effort and get a complete report upon it on the main war appropriation bill, which will come up in due course. I think the minister will find that it will be very easy to arrive at an agreement which will meet the government's wishes and give them the necessary funds with which to carry on.


THE FIGHTING FRENCH
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, the hon.
member for Weyburn (Mr. Douglas) asked me on Friday last:
May I ask the Prime Minister what liaison is being maintained between the Canadian government and the fighting French organization in London under General de Gaulle?
The answer is that contact is maintained with tjie fighting French through the delegate in Ottawa of the French national committee, Major Gabriel Bonneau, whose appointment in this capacity, in succession to Colonel Pier-rene, was announced by the Department of External Affairs last week. Major-General G. P. Vanier, Minister Designate to the allied governments in the United! Kingdom, has been appointed to act in consultation with the French national committee on matters relating to the conduct of the war.


GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH
[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, February 5, consideration of the motion of Mr. W. E. Harris (Grey-Bruce) for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Graydon, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. W. A. TUCKER (Rosthern):: Mr. Speaker, my first words this afternoon I should like to be those of joy at the safe return from the epic conference at Casablanca of the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Great Britain. I am sure it is the hope of all of us that both may be spared to continue to give to their respective countries that courageous and far-sighted leadership which they have given up until
now, and that they will be spared to see their countries through to the victory which I hope is not too far in the future.
My next word I should like to be one of satisfaction and pleasure at the continued good health of our own leader, the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King). I have noticed that throughout the country, for one reason or another, there is not the same tendency to hold up his leadership to the approbation of our people that all are disposed to give to the leadership of the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Great Britain. Our Prime Minister is the leader of our nation at war. Whether or not the decision was right that Canada should go into this war, that issue was finally decided when this country declared war on the German reich on September 10, 1939. He is now the leader of the whole Canadian people, and there should be no further argument because the only way in which this country can survive is by victory of our cause. That has been recognized by such leaders as Herbert Hoover in the United States, who stated plainly, just recently, that no matter what one might have thought before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, that question is now at an end; the United States is in the war; the only way to get out of it safely is to win it, and all the people, without reservation, should get behind their commander-in-chief. Those words should be taken to heart by everybody in Canada; because, no matter what our beliefs as to what should be the future set-up in Canada, no matter what race or religious creed we happen to belong to, it would be very bad for all of us if we did not win this war, and it is only by unity that we can hope to make the maximum contribution to victory. For this reason I am happy and pleased that the right hon. gentleman who now leads the government is at the head of the country at this time.
Looking over the situation at the outbreak of the war, with the problems which obviously would confront us as a people, anyone, to whatever party he might belong, could not but see that the unity of this country was to be tested as it had never been before. I believe I can say that Canada is more united to-day from coast to coast than she has been at any other time since the war began. Many thought that this stage of our effort would find Canada at war within herself because of issues which were bound to arise. That has not happened. I believe that everybody, regardless of party, should, if he is honest, give the credit to our Prime Minister for his able and fearless leadership which has achieved this. Without this unity obviously we could
The Address*-Mr. Tucker

not have made the splendid contribution we have made, and if our leader has made that unity possible he should be given the credit, just as Mr. Churchill is deservedly honoured for the leadership which he has given Britain.
There is another reason why I am glad that destiny ordained1 that the present Prime Minister should be our leader prior to and when this war struck us. I have reference to his record of friendship with the United States of America. It must be admitted that we were greatly relieved by, for example, the Ogdensburg agreement, with the declaration of the President of the United States that he would not see Canada brought into subjection by a European state. That statement implied that the United States guaranteed that Canada would not be defeated by Germany and it was approved by the people of the United States. It did not go unnoticed by Germany and Japan; for they realized that if the United States could not see Canada defeated it meant that in order to defeat Canada they would ultimately have to strike at the United States, so it followed in the natural course of events that the United States sooner or later would become our ally. Who of us to-day that wishes to be honest with himself can do other than thank God that the United States stands by our side face to face with the power and might of the German reich? And is it not something to be thankful for that a programme was pursued by our government and our Prime Minister, year after year, of friendship and close collaboration with the United States and their great leader? When the history of this era comes to be written, and particularly of the epochal meeting between the Prime Minister of Great Britain, a country at war, with the President of the United States, not yet at war-at which time there was laid down the Atlantic charter, which in effect was a declaration of war against nazi Germany and all it stands for-it may very well be said that the Prime Minister of Canada had acted as a bridge between the two Englishspeaking countries and had more to do with that meeting, the Atlantic charter and the resulting present situation than many perhaps realize
Our war effort, by all admission, has been a magnificent one. It has been magnificent because of the unity which alone made great national achievement possible. It has been magnificent because our leader has had the ability to surround himself with ahle and outstanding men and has given them the authority and the power to go ahead and do the best they could in their own departments without being continually hampered by dictation from him.
(Mr. Tucker.]
In regard to the war effort I should like to mention, in passing, that I regret it has not been found possible to locate more war industries in western Canada. We in the west realized at a time of great urgency, particularly after Dunkirk, that speed in getting out war materials was most important, and we did not unduly press for the setting up of industries in the prairie part of Canada. But now that the turn has come for the better, as it has, we do urge that the government . should recognize our forbearance at that time, should realize what has been done to decentralize industry all over the United States and stimulate manufacturing particularly in the western and central part of that country, and do something of the same kind in Canada. We ask particularly that a start be made in the production in western Canada of alcohol from grain grown in the west as a basis for a synthetic rubber industry there. In the past we have always been told, as one reason why industry could not be established in western Canada, that the raw materials would have to be shipped long distances to be fabricated there. In this case we have untold quantities of raw materials which could be turned into alcohol and then into synthetic rubber. I ask that everything possible be done-perhaps it is already being done; I hope it is-to spread a certain amount of industrial production over the western part of Canada, particularly in the prairie provinces.
I wish to express to the government, and in particular the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) my appreciation of their having done away with the requirement which obliged loyal citizens of German origin who were naturalized following the last war to humiliate themselves by reporting each month to the mounted police in their own districts. When that requirement was first imposed our people were in a state of nervous alarm because of Dunkirk and what had happened elsewhere in Europe. It was perhaps understandable that they should be uneasy. But those of us in this house, of all parties, who were acquainted with these people knew that with the exception of one or two here and there, practically all of them were loyal to this country, and it was too bad that they were subjected to that obligation. I thank the government and the minister for having removed it.
The next thing I wish to refer to is the attitude of the government at the outbreak of war. We all recall the speech of the Prime Minister asking parliament to declare war on the German reich. The policy was laid down that we would stand at Britain's side. However, we noted at that time the activities throughout the country of a party which

The Address-Mr. Tucker
claims that in external affairs it has always been right and therefore should receive the support of the people now and in the days that lie ahead: I refer to the party led by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). Let me quote from the policy of his party as read by him in this house and reported in Hansard, second session of 1939, page 54. It suggested that-
-the same struggle for trade supremacy and political domination which caused the last war ... is again the primary cause of the present conflict.
That was laid down as the considered opinion of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation throughout the country at that time. He went on:
... in part at least, the people of Britain and France are waging a war against aggression.
"In part at least." It was very good of him to make that admission. Then he said:
Canada should he prepared to defend her own shores, but her assistance overseas should be limited to economic aid and must not include conscription of man-power or the sending of any expeditionary force.
And what was the economic assistance? The expansion of war industries "must be strictly controlled" according to the policy laid down. Mark this:
Volunteers for home defence should not be required to sign also for overseas service. This practice, now being followed, is unwarranted and should be abandoned.
In other words, at the time we were setting out to defend ourselves against Hitler it was the considered policy of the C.C.F. not only that should we not send troops overseas but that we should discontinue raising volunteers in order that those who were willing to go overseas might be permitted to do so.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: That is not what it says.


Walter Adam Tucker: It certainly is, and I have t'he book here. If my hon. friend wishes to get up when I am through he can try to prove differently, but I defy him to do so. The hon. member must realize that I have only a few minutes at my disposal. If I could be persuaded to read the whole statement of their policy, it would take up all my time.
The C.C.F. on May 20, 1940, as reported at page 50 of Hansard, indicated continued support of that policy, in a speech by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. Then on June 10, 1940, twenty-one days, three weeks, after that time, France had fallen and Italy had struck. Three weeks before these momentous events the C.C.F. had said that they reiterated their stand that no military assistance should be given to Great Britain. I have given the page and the hon. member can look it up if
he has any doubts, but he knows it is true. If I were given unlimited time I would read it all, and the more I read the worse it would be.


An hon. MEMBER:: The more you talk the worse it will be.


Walter Adam Tucker: Worse, not for me but for my hon. friend who is interrupting. I hope that Mr. Speaker will take these interruptions into account in computing the remaining time for my speech.
Many people have said that at the time France fell the only forces which were armed and prepared to defend Great Britain were the Canadian troops that were, already in that country, and some people have suggested that the only reason why Hitler did not invade Great Britain was that these Canadian forces, which were highly mobile and ready to strike wherever he might attempt to land, were already there. If that is so, and no one can say it is not so, history may record that it was because of the decision of the Canadian government to stand at Britain's side and send troops over there that to-day we are able to stand as free men in this parliament. There is the record. Who was right at that time-the C.C.F., who said, on May 20, three weeks before France fell, that they would not have had troops in England, or this government who had them there and who, perhaps, thereby saved the day?
There is one other point I would mention in that regard. We well remember that on June 10, 1940, our fortunes were so black, that the policy of the government at that time was to shut off as quickly as possible the supply of materials to Japan, but to do it in such a way that Japan would not be able to say she had been insulted and thus be given occasion to enter the war. The Prime Minister on the floor of the house stated more than once that it was the desire of the British government that we should not do anything to provoke Japan and give her an excuse for attacking us. When we think of what would have happened to us had Japan attacked us or had she been given reason to strike on June 10, 1940, before the United States stood at our side, before Russia was attacked, when we stood alone alongside Great Britain and the other members of the British commonwealth of nations; when we think of \vhat would have happened to us if Japan had struck then instead of eighteen months later, then we must at least be grateful that nothing was done to give Japan that excuse. And who can say now that she would not have accepted the gauntlet if it had been thrown down to her? We know now that the government of the United States had the
The Address-Mr. Tucker

same requests made to them. Although we were shutting off these supplies as fast as we could, without giving any overt cause for Japan to attack Great Britain, throughout this country the C.C.F. were going up and down claiming that the reason we did not absolutely quit sending supplies to Japan was that profit element was involved. They were told that there was danger of bringing Japan in, but that did not stop them from going up and down the country making that claim. As a matter of fact that very claim was made in this house. On May 20, 1940, at page 53 of Hansard, the present member for Rosetown-Biggar said:
The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation believes that the only effective way to eliminate war profiteering is to nationalize all war industry. This too would prevent the export of essential war material to potential enemies and indirect shipment to enemy countries. .	.	.
To-day the copper which we export to Japan mangles the bodies of Chinese patriots. . . . Each year we of this little group have urged the stopping of the export of such supplies to aggressor nations.
They coupled Japan with aggressor nations on May 20, 1940, three weeks before the fall of France, three weeks before the entry of Italy into the war. They were talking of Japan as an aggressor nation and suggesting that we should slap her in the face. There is the record of the C.C.F. party.
Well, here are the facts. No scrap iron was exported after October, 1939, no copper after October 8, 1940, and exports of aluminum, nickel and zinc had all been stopped between those two dates, but stopped in such a way that it did not give Japan any excuse to say that she had been insulted. Did our friends of the C.C.F. make that clear? No. This speech of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar was repeated over and over again. They were the ones that did not want profits, but these other people in the other parties were ready, in order to make a little profit, to run the risk of our people being later killed by our exports of metal. The verdict of history will be, I suggest, that it was very wise of this government and the government of the United States not to give the government of Japan an excuse for attacking us at that time. Had she attacked us then it would not have been well for the democracies.
While dealing with the C.C.F. I wish to touch upon one further point. We have here an amendment moved by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar:
And further we regret that Your Excellency's advisers have failed to take the necessary action to achieve a total war effort by neglecting to apply the powers contained in the National Resources Mobilization Act to war industries 
and financial institutions in the same manner as they are being applied to the mobilization of man-power for military service.
I should like to read what an hon. member of this house said in regard to a similar proposal.
On September 8, 1939, the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) said:
t Therefore, the New Democracy declares that justice, equality and effectiveness depend upon conscription of finance, industry and man-power.
Exactly the same in effect as the amendment of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. That will not be denied? And this is what the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar said about that, speaking after the hon. member for Lethbridge, as reported at page 54 of Hansard for the fifth session of the eighteenth parliament (on September 9, 1939):
We must see to it, then, that during this struggle the foundations of a regimented totalitarian regime are not laid. Yet already we have heard in the house, and particularly in the speech last night of the leader of the New Democracy group, a demand for conscription of men, of finance and of industry. Moreover it was suggested that this was good in peace and in war. Let us beware of the implications of such a policy; for whether or not it is apprehended by those who advocate it, such a war-time policy, if successful, would see us emerge from this struggle as a thoroughly regimented and totalitarian state.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Under this government?


Walter Adam Tucker: Well, my hon. friends are moving for this, under this government. That was the opinion of the leader of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation with regard to the conscription of finance, industry and manpower at the outbreak of war. What are we to think now of their motion? He has condemned it, himself, in most unmeasured terms. And this is what he goes on to say:
Let us make up our minds at the very outset of this struggle that under no circumstances and in no guise shall we permit the foundations of a regimented totalitarian state to be laid in Canada.
I ask the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar and his followers to read his own words uttered only three years ago, and then to vote accordingly with	regard to their owd
amendment.


Thomas Reid: Hansard has a lot of good
points, too.


Walter Adam Tucker: Yes, it has some good
points.
There is one matter I should like to deal with before concluding, namely, the fact that when we win this war-and I have no doubt we are going to win it-we must see to it that

The Address-Mr. Johnston (Bow River)
we do not lose the peace. We must see to it externally by making sure that any possible aggressor is not permitted to get going again, in the way in which Hitler was permitted to get going; we must be sure that any such aggressor is nipped in the bud. We must watch any possible aggressor, wherever he may be, and we must be sure of some form of world organization to prevent from reoccurring anything such as happened between the last war and this one.
Internally we must see to it that the productive powers of the country are used to raise the standard of living of those who to-day are making such great sacrifices in order to protect our whole set-up. Many of the young men who to-day are offering their lives, many who have given their lives, had not much in a material way at the beginning of the war to defend. They had only themselves and their loved ones. Many of them had been out of work; many had been in camps where they had only a bare subsistence. The suggestion was made over and over again that if war came it would be found possible to raise the national income of our people so that, with our present productive powers, everybody would have a good income and a good standard of living. But in those days of peace it was not found possible to give that standard of lving.
Without argument or question, when war came and our country was in danger, those young men went to defend it. It would be almost sacreligious if we did not see to it that those young men who are risking their lives to defend their country on their return or the dependents of those who have given their lives, were able to enjoy their fair share of the productive powers of our country. Hon. members will recall how it was argued before the outbreak of war that we were producing up to our full productive capacity-that scarcity and poverty were inevitable. I hope that argument will not be offered any more. People, like myself, were scoffed at when we begged and pleaded for a stepping-up of our productive power and a. stepping-up of our national income, and when we said that those young people wdio were not getting a chance to make a living for themselves by productive work should be given that opportunity.
I know, from young men with whom I have come in contact, young men who have entered or are now entering the army, that they expect that after this war our tremendous productive power will be put to work, in order that they may earn for themselves and their loved ones a reasonably high standard of living.


Thomas Vien: The hon. member's time has expired.


Mr. C. E. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset I should like to congratulate the mover (Mr. Harris) and the seconder (Mr. Halle) of the address in reply.
I would also extend my congratulations to the hon. member who has just taken his seat. Since war began in 1939, I have thought, as I have sat in the house, that it would be next to impossible to convert some of these old die-hard Liberals. But now the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker) has shown that he is an apt student. It is true that it has taken him four years of war, during which there was a time when the country was almost subdued by the enemy, to convince himself that the proposals advocated in 1939 by the Social Credit party are sound. In that respect I am pleased with what the hon. member has said.
But when he goes so far as to eulogize the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) for the great unity in Canada, that is just a little further than even a good-natured fellow like me will go. Had he said that the Prime Minister was possibly responsible for the great disunity in Canada to-day, he might not have been so far wrong. However, his words are as I have stated; they are not mine, and I am not taking them for my own.
It is a fact that at the outbreak of the war the Social Credit party was the only one which saw a proper solution.


Mr. HANSELL:: And never had to change.


Charles Edward Johnston: And as my colleague, the hon. member for Macleod, has said, we have never had to change. Although the government have at times ridiculed us, stating that our proposals are idiotic, yet when they come to the place where their backs are against the wall they have found it necessary to adopt those very things for which they criticized us.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: And they will go further yet, too.


Charles Edward Johnston: To a great extent I can agree with the references made about production by the last speaker. During the last year I have been over a large part of Canada, and I can say honestly that our industries are doing a good job. In almost every instance they are turning out good products in large quantities. But that is not by any manner of means the equivalent of saying that we are doing an all-out production job. In this time of war we must all realize that production is the most essential thing in our war effort. Right from the first, when we
224	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Johnston (Bow River)
asked for the complete conscription of industry, the Social Credit party has urged that production is one of the very first necessities in connection with our war effort.
Certainly it cannot be said, even by the hon. member who has just taken his seat, that the government is responsible for this all-out war effort, or possibly I should say for this partial war effort. Had it not been for the pressure of public opinion-yes, and even of industry-we certainly never would have achieved the amount of production being carried on to-day. In fact, I do not think the government would wish to take credit for all the development in production. It has become an established fact all across the country that this government will not move until it is forced to do so. Certainly credit should be given where credit is due, and I would be the first to give it, but I think one of the greatest responsibilities upon the shoulders of the government is to see to it that when there is an obstacle in the way of an all-out production job, that obstacle is removed by legislation, and that every possible step should be taken to assist industry and the people to do a greater job than is being done. As the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Usley) have said on many occasions, the only limit to our productive capacity should be the man-power and the raw materials we have in this country.
It was for this reason that we of the Social Credit party advocated an all-out war effort in 1939. At that time wTe stood alone in our demands, and we had the most severe criticism directed at us. We have not by any manner of means achieved an all-out war effort yet, even in the field of production, to say nothing of agriculture. As I have said already, we are doing well. I have travelled around the country; I know the industries are doing a good job and that the men employed in those industries are just as anxious as they could be to carry on a greater production programme than is the situation at present. Industry is also anxious to increase production, and I would not say that the government were not equally anxious, but what they desire to do and what they actually do are two entirely different things. It largely boils down to this, that as a result of government policy we have not been able to get down to an all-out war effort. I remember that last year I made in this house a statement to which the Prime Minister took very strong exception, even going so far as to attempt to reprimand me and to say that my statement was untrue. Now, after having had a year's experience on the war expenditures committee, after having gone through another year of war and after having travelled across 
the country, I am more than ever convinced that what I said then was true. Therefore I am now going to repeat my statement, that by reason of government policy industry has been compelled to slow up production.
I am not going to dwell further upon that statement, but I have repeated it in order to make myself perfectly clear to the house. I think every hon. gentleman is greatly concerned that we should achieve an all-out war production, and for that reason I think we should have more information. The other day I was pleased to hear the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) state that the four thousand men at the Angus shops in Montreal, who were expecting to be laid off, were going to be given some other useful work to do. As the minister said, many of these men are trained mechanics, and he said he would see to it that they were kept at work, either in the production of Valentine tanks or in other plants where their services might be required. But while he was making that statement I could not help thinking that I have heard similar statements on previous occasions, so that before I put too much faith in what he said I am going to wait and see the result.
I recall that when I was in Calgary a short time before coming to Ottawa for the present session, there were from 150 to 200 men laid off at the Ogden shops, where they had been making guns. I visited that plant; I was introduced to the superintendent, Mr. J. L. Gubbin, who had been brought there from, I believe, Montreal. He was exceedingly courteous to me and called in one of the plant foremen, whom he asked to show me about.
I was shown all through the plant, and I think I saw, everything that was to be seen. Here was a factory that had been changed over to make guns; now they were laying off two hundred men, among whom I wks told were some of their best mechanics. These men were going to be thrown out of their jobs; as a matter of fact some had already been laid off, and I believe the greater portion have not been given other employment even yet. That was not, by any manner of means, the fault of that plant. The management were exceedingly put out because they were not able to keep these men working. As was pointed out to me, the management had gone to a great deal of expense and trouble in training these men for this particular job, and now that job was to be taken away from them. At that time the management did not even have an order to go ahead with anything else.
That is why I am a little sceptical of the minister's statement the other day, when he said he would see to it that these four thousand men were put to work. Here is an actual

The Address-Mr. Johnston (Bow River)
case where trained men were laid off, right in the midst of our war effort; and two hundred men in a factory of that kind is a very large proportion. It was not that the men desired to quit; they were not going on strike. It was the very opposite; they were very angry because they had no jobs. Some of them said to me, "Is this supposed to be our war effort?" I was talking to one of these men in his home the evening after I visited the plant. He told me that for the previous two or three weeks these men had known that they were going to be fired, and do you know what took place? It was just exactly as I have stated in this house time and time again. These men were deliberately slowing down the work, not because they wanted to do so but in order that the job might hold out; and that was not against the rules of the management, either. I do not say that the company was making a greater profit, because it was a cost-plus contract, but certainly the cost to the government and the country was much more.
Those in charge of industry dislike very much having their men thrown out of work, because the management know that when they are asked to do another war job they will not be able to find trained men to do the work. But here were these men being laid off, with no orders at all in sight from the Department of Munitions and Supply. That was why I said to the Prime Minister a year ago that the policy of the government was wrong; and it was as a result of the policy of this government that this plant was forced to close down. They did not have even as much as a go-ahead letter in connection with another contract. They hoped to get another contract, it is true, but they did not even have a blue-print in connection with it. As it was explained to me at that time, if the management had been given even the blue-prints in connection with an expected contract, they would have been able to go ahead and prepare their plant, which would have enabled them to use some of these two hundred men, but that was not the situation. In fact I was informed that under the contract which they hoped to get-I emphasize the word "hoped"- they would not be allowed to make gun barrels. They were making gun barrels at that plant, but their equipment would have to be pushed to one side and left idle because they were being barred from the advantage of making the same type of gun which they had been accustomed to make.
I do not cite this as one particular case where the government has failed to give orders in sufficient time for an industry to be able to absorb its unemployed when one 72537-15
contract was tailing off into another. Let me give the house the details of another absurd situation lest some hon. members think I am just a little prejudiced. I should like to refer to a speech made by a Liberal member of this house. I may say that I have thought there were not any good Liberals in the country any more.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Are there?


Charles Edward Johnston: To my surprise, yes, there are one, two, or possibly three. Of course, I will agree with my hon. friend that they are as scarce as hens' teeth.
I should like to refer to one statement made by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) who I see is in the Chair at the present time. I hope some day he has that Chair. He said, as reported on page 133 of Hansard:
We have shipyards in British Columbia, at Vancouver, New Westminster, Victoria and other points, which are not working to full capacity. I have in mind one now, a shipyard in New Westminster called the Star shipyards, which has eight ways; six of them are idle, and the other two soon will be.
I am sure that had the hon. member for Rosthern read that statement he would not have thought we were doing an all-out production job. The hon. member for New Westminster then went on to say:
There is no reason why these shipyards should not be working to full capacity, and every kind and type of ship should be built.
I agree with him one hundred per cent. That has been my greatest concern since this war started. I have made no bones about it. I have said definitely that I wanted to see this country producing to the maximum. I was convinced of this a year ago when I was speaking in this house, but the Minister of Munitions and Supply took exception to what I said. I see he is not in the house at the moment; in fact, with one exception, there are no ministers at present in the house. I suppose they are taking their cup of tea. The Minister of Munitions and Supply has taken exception at various times to what I have said, but the facts are there and not even he can get away from them. There is a terrible state of confusion in this government during war time.
Let me give the house another illustration, the Calgary rolling mills, to which I have referred before. From the very outset of this war I have advocated in this house that we should get the Calgary rolling mills going. There was a tremendous amount of opposition even to getting them started. They were going to move them to Vancouver at one time. Then they were finally started,

226	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Johnston (Bow River)
and ever since I have tried to have another blast furnace put in there so that the plant could be worked to one hundred per cent capacity. Whenever I have spoken in the house I have referred definitely to the rolling mills section, but the minister rose in his place and said that the plant was working to one hundred per cent capacity. I do not know why he should have made a remark like that; probably he was just ignorant of the facts. He should have known that the rolling mills section of that plant has, I believe, never worked a 24-hour day. I have a full report on the whole matter, and I was in hopes that another blast furnace would be put in so that this plant could be worked to full capacity.
I understand1 that at last the Department of Munitions and Supply has consented to put in another blast furnace, so that now the plant will be able to go ahead and employ more men. But it has taken the department four years to realize that fact. Think of all the scrap we have been shipping from the west to the east, even to Hull, Quebec. When I was home in Three Hills, the little town in which I live, I saw a car of scrap steel at the station, and I was told by the station agent that it was to be sent to Hull, Quebec. Even the hon. member for Rosthern has complained about there being no industries in the west. We have been shipping all this scrap steel here and then shipping back the finished product when all we needed was a blast furnace in Calgary.
I recall the president of the manufacturers' association in Alberta coming to Ottawa after the minister made the statement that that plant was working one hundred per cent. Why did he come here? He told me that he came here to get the Calgary rolling mills working one hundred per cent. When I reminded him of what the minister had said, he told me that that did not make any difference, the plant was still not working to capacity. This shows a lack of planning. I do not contend for one moment that all the blame should be placed upon the Minister of Munitions and Supply, but I do say that when a member points out these things to him he should make a special investigation to see whether they are true or not. If they are true, then he should attempt to alter the situation that exists. No man is perfect and no man can, without more help, look after a job as large as the one he has to look after.
Here is another situation which I believe requires immediate attention. We are rationing everybody on oil. Those people who are living in houses heated with oil are nearly freezing to death because they cannot get

sufficient fuel. Yet we have in Alberta the world's greatest potential supply. Listen to that, "the world's greatest potential supply". That takes in a lot of territory. But what is being done? Hon. members know that the members of the Social Credit party have always been after the government to do something with the oil field in Athabaska. That is not the only place in Alberta where there is oil, yet nothing has been done. I 'believe the minister promised last year that they were going to build a little pilot plant, but the Abasand company has been producing 400 barrels a day. Surely if the government had, wanted to go in there to bring about an increase in production they could have done a tremendous amount in that regard. But again procrastination was the motto. It seems that the government will not do anything until a crisis is definitely upon them. Then they try to get out from under. I have a clipping which I took from the Calgary Herald of January 19, .1943, with regard to the oil situation. It readfe:
Claim Canadians fail to see need
Canadian government officials are "dumb" because they fail to realize the importance of development of a supply of oil in western Canada to make the Alberta to Alaska highway of paramount service to the war effort according to an article in the Cut Bank (Montana) Pioneer.
The article points out a greater realization of the importance of oil to the war effort is held by United States government officials.
"Oil is desperately necessary for any armed force operating from Alaska and we have neither the petroleum products available nor the tankers or tank cars for their transportation to supply a large armed force in Alaska," the newspaper quotes a report made to the government by Representative W. J. Cole.
Then I have another clipping taken from the Calgary Herald which is headed, "Largest oil pipeline in world completed by U.S." In the article it is stated that they have built over 500 miles of this pipeline and are going on with an extension ' of something like 800 miles. They are getting somewhere. They are not waiting for the crisis to develop. I have before me another clipping, dated January 15. Speaking of the oil output it says, "Oil output down three hundred barrels a day."
Our war supply is going down-so is the government for that matter-and the government is not doing much about it. It is a very serious situation, and as time goes on it is going to grow more and more acute. It is time this federal government got busy, for that is where the responsibility lies. The responsibility is not with the provincial government or any other body, but with the federal government. Oil is definitely a war necessity,

The Address-Mr. Johnston (Bow River)
and you can be well assured, Mr. Speaker, that if the big oil companies have anything to say about the matter, there will be no more oil production in this country until the civilian supply is absolutely cut off. They are going to make the present supply last no matter whether we win or lose the war. Unless this government steps in and does something, our oil position is going to grow worse and worse. I do not know how much worse it will get.
We are having strikes all over the country. When the hon. member for Rosthern was speaking about unity I could not help thinking of the great number of strikes that are now in existence or pending. There was a steel strike in Nova Scotia, another at Sault Ste. Marie, another in Montreal, another in Ontario-there are strikes all over. Who is to blame for these strikes? The other day I was interested to hear the Prime Minister defend the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell). He told us what a terrible job the Minister of Labour had and how pathetic it was that everybody should jump on him. Possibly the Prime Minister was right because I do not think the Minister of Labour is all to blame. He is in a dual position: he must satisfy the demands of labour and he must also satisfy the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley). Of course the workers in different industries are striking. They are not striking to curtail production-not by any means. They are just as desirous of increased production as anyone else. What they are striking for is increased wages. In these war times everything has gone up in price. While the index of the bureau of statistics indicates a rise in the cost of living of something like 16-2 per cent, everybody knows that the cost of living generally 'has gone up much more than that, and accordingly these workers, and rightly so, I think, are demanding an increase in their basic wage. When I say that I do not necessarily mean an increase in wages all along the line. This strike situation is another evidence of the government's procrastination. It never attempts to solve a difficulty until a crisis is reached.
These workers who have been on strike have had quite a going over by some of the newspapers, especially the Montreal papers and some others. We have received from Cockfield, Brown and Company, Limited, of Montreal, clippings from the Montreal Star-not on behalf of the workers. Looking over these reports, I notice that they give the working hours of the men involved in these strikes. They say:
Wage-earners by hourly earnings were distributed as follows.
I will cite just a few figures. There are 410 employees receiving 55 cents an hour and
under, or 9-3 per cent of the employees. Those getting from 55^ cents to 65 cents an hour number 1,115, or 25-3 per cent of the employees. Let us take those two together. They represent about 1,500 men in the one plant. At 55 cents an hour, and working 48 hours a week, a man gets $26.40 a week, or $105.60 a month. Out of that $105 he is not only expected but forced to buy victory bonds. He has to pay doctors' bills, bus fare, income tax, national defence tax, both of which have increased, and he has also to pay for clothing which has increased in price, and then pay rent, fuel and so forth-all of these things out of $105 a month. Yet the Prime Minister rises in his place, raises his hands to heaven and says that the members of this house should not criticize the poor Minister of Labour so much, because the price ceiling on wages must be maintained. Shame on the Prime Minister for making such a statement! We have men working in Canadian industries for the paltry sum of $100 a month, when we have right in this country huge profits being made-and make no mistake about that.
The Prime Minister went on to speak about the fear of inflation. No word has been so much misused as that word "inflation". Every time the Minister of Finance wants to get out of a jam he uses that word "inflation". We are getting used to it now. The Minister of Finance knows quite well that if you raise the wages of the men in the lower salary brackets you are not going to have inflation. He knows that; the Prime Minister knows it, and so does the Minister of Labour who has just entered the chamber. The Minister of Labour knows very well that if you raise the basic wages of those in the lower wage brackets you are not going to have inflation if you have controlled prices and rationing. The blame is put on the Minister of Labour when he is not the only one to blame. It is the Minister of Finance. Therefore why not put the blame where it belongs. These workers went on strike, but first of all they had tried every other means and had got nowhere. Then this government steps in, always procrastinating and putting things off until a crisis or a strike is upon it. Then it is up against it.
Lest some people, others besides the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Finance, are still fearful of inflation, I will tell them where they can get the money to raise the wages of the workers who are in the lower wage brackets, and then there will not be so many strikes. I was a member of the war expenditures committee. I am not going to discuss the work of that committee, but I should like to quote two of its recommendations, and
228	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Johnston (Bow River)
then I will ask hon. members if the workers are to blame for asking for a little higher wages. At page 760 of No. 124, Votes and Proceedings, containing the recommendations of the war expenditures committee, I find this:
In its investigations the subcommittee found in one instance that an aircraft producing firm agreed to pay a salesman for release of an existing sales contract an amount equal to 50 per cent of its firm capital and which agreement the subcommittee believes to be an improvident agreement and should not have been entered into had the facts been brought to the attention of the department promptly.
There is one instance, if you want to get a lot of money-and I emphasize "a lot"-where you could get money to pay more wages to those in the lower income brackets. I commend that to those who are so fearful of inflation. Let me read the next recommendation of the committee, on the same page:
That active steps should be taken now to plan for post-war salvage of physical assets owned by the Department of Munitions and Supply. Hundreds of millions of dollars of public mbney have been spent on buildings, plant and equipment for war production, some of which has been expended on private property and which the department is under agreement to remove within a very short period of time after the cessation of hostilities. This whole problem demands special study.
There is another place where money can be found. Let me read another recommendation because I want to help the Minister of Labour and the government. In its report the war expenditures committee says:
As a result of its investigations to date the subcommittee makes the following recommendations:
(1) That the policy of placing fire insurance on material to be used for the manufacture of aircraft and also on the finished aircraft down to date of actual acceptance by the Department of National Defence for Air should be discontinued and all existing ' contracts amended accordingly to provide that this risk should be carried by the Department of Munitions and Supply and further that the amount of fire insurance carried by privately owned companies on their own property and chargeable by the companies as a cost item with respect to aircraft built under the aforementioned contracts should be restricted to an amount not to exceed actual cost less depreciation. . . .
And so on. These are instances of glaring -I was going to say-misappropriation of funds. Without question of doubt, the men who are working day after day in those plants know that men in the higher executive offices are getting salaries which must be regarded as huge in contrast with workers' wages of fifty-five cents an hour, a little better than $100 a month. They know that these executives are receiving anywhere from three to twenty-one and twenty-two thousand dollars a year;

yet you go to the workers and tell them they should not strike, that they should be satisfied with $100 a month. Well, if you are used courteously you should not be. Yet the Prime Minister has told us on more than one occasion in this house that there would be no blood money in this war. I fear that he does not know the facts, because if he did he would see 'to it that certain changes were made.
As a result of this serious situation, and in view of the references which I have made, although briefly, in passing, to the war expenditures committee, I ask the government to hold a secret session of parliament wherein the operations of the committee can be thoroughly discussed, and that the evidence be brought down so that every hon. member shall have access to it. I am sure that the membership of this house will be tremendously surprised when they have all the evidence before them, and they are the ones who should have it. In my opinion an immediate secret session should foe called. I am going to leave it at that. If a secret session- is granted, we shall discuss the matters in secret session; and if no-t, we shall discuss them outside the secret session.
One other phase of this question to which I wish to refer related to women in industry. The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) referred to it the other day; and I agree heartily with what he said. Anywhere I have travelled I have been tremendously impressed with the ability and the interest women have applied to this class of work. They are working at the side of the men and doing just as well as the men. I do not think there have been any complaints about them. As far as both quantity and quality of production are concerned they have achieved equal results. Yet we find a man and a woman working side by side, doing exactly the same type and quality of work, and the one receiving higher wages than the other. This is not right, and the Minister of Labour will have more trouble on his hands if he does not rectify it. I suggest to him that he get busy before the matter comes on his doorstep. There should be equal pay for equal work. There is no question that that is the right principle, and the United States has shown that it can be applied. I quote from the October, 1942, issue of the Labour Gazette:
A recent decision of the American war labour board establishes the board's policy in regard to the question of whether women industrial wmrkers should receive as much pay as men for the same kind of work. The board declared its opinion that women who "in comparable jobs produce work of the same quantity and quality as that performed by men" should receive the same wages.
This statement of policy arose out of a decision by the war labour board ordering the

The Address-Mr. Gregory
Brown and Sharpe Manufacturing Company of Providence to introduce the principle of equal pay for equal work for their 7,600 workers. The company had offered to reduce the differential between the wages for men and for women to a maximum of 20 per cent.
That, however, was not satisfactory, and they were ordered to institute equal pay. It is further stated, in the September, 1942, issue of the Labour Gazette, page 996:
A recent memorandum of Canada's national war labour board in effect recognized the practical application of the principle of equal pay for equal work.
The Canadian labour board has recognized that principle, and if the Minister of Labour wishes to relieve himself of some pending dangers he had better take cognizance of the things which are being said on this matter.
I wanted to divide my speech this afternoon between two topics, industry and agriculture, but time will not permit me to say all I have in mind ini connection with agriculture, so that I shall do that on another occasion, nor have I been able to deal as fully as I hoped to do with this industrial problem. I trust that the government will give serious consideration to the calling of a secret session of parliament to discuss the report of the war expenditures committee, so that all our members will be thoroughly informed as to what has taken place before the committee all the way across Canada. A secret session will enable us to discuss the subject among ourselves with benefit not only to ourselves but to the country's war effort. I will leave it at that, but as I said, if the government is not going to hold a secret session we shall discuss the report otherwise when the opportunity arises.


Mr. J. A. GREGORY (The Battlefords):: Mr. Speaker, the speech from the throne deals with many important and weighty subjects. A number of speakers have already referred to many of these subjects, and I hesitated to add to the repetition, by again referring to some of these matters. However, on account of the nature of the subjects with which I propose to deal I have decided to stick to my notes and, at the expense of being wearisome or repetitious, I propose to deal with some of them again.
I am sure, in the first place, that we can congratulate ourselves, as the speech from the throne mentions, on the vastly improved war picture since this house rose last August. Second, I am sure the country at large will receive with every satisfaction the news-to quote from the speech from the throne-that- . . . the progressive expansion of the navy will be continued. The army programme will include the maintenance and reinforcement of the overseas army of two corps, and the maintenance of units and formations required for
the territorial and coastal defence of Canada and other areas in the western hemisphere. The air force will continue its three-fold activities. . . .
May I digress for a moment from the speech from the throne to say that I believe many people throughout the country are beginning to doubt the wisdom of the size of the army pattern. The seventh and eighth divisions crept into our war pattern when there appeared to be imminent danger of invasion from Japan and invasion likewise of the eastern coast. We are attempting in our war effort to maintain eight divisions with all the ancillary units and tank units and reinforcements required. Men in the country are just wondering if we have not cut our army pattern-and I am speaking entirely of the army-too generously for the cloth available. In other words, when we consider the growing demands of man-power for war industry, including shipbuilding; the actual shortage of man-power on the farms, with which I propose to deal in a moment, to produce for the fighting men and civilians at home and abroad, the ever-expanding naval man-power requirements, and the growing air force and accelerating demands for reinforcements in this service particularly, I ask myself with misgiving if the army has not cut a pattern out of all proportion to the total man-power available in Canada.
I realize that the man-power in Canada must be further combed out of non-essential industry and transferred to more essential industry, that further age groups must be mustered and that women must be trained for many classes of duties which they have not undertaken heretofore. This, sir, will probably be an awful year of wastage, and Canadians, I am sure, are in- the mood to accept, grimly and with determination, any duty which this government may see fit to impose upon them.
While I am on this subject of the proper apportionment of man-power to produce a balanced and most effective war effort, I wish to refer to the order in council of last March respecting farm labour being frozen on the farms, which has been referred to repeatedly by previous speakers. I believe every hon. member understood that order in council, and I believe they understood that the divisional boards in Canada had no power thenceforth to draft young men from farms when it could be proven that the sole or main occupation of the draftee was farming. That was my understanding of the order in council and of the speech made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) on March 23. I do not know whether other provinces have reason to
The Address-Mr. Gregory

complain of the attitude of the divisional boards with respect to the drafting of men for Canada's army, but in my province of Saskatchewan there has been a total disregard of the requirements of agriculture or of the consequences of depleting the farms of farm labour. In many instances the last son of an aged and decrepit father has been drafted. The only remaining worker on the farm has been drafted, and I personally know of farms which will not be producing do capacity this year in grain, hogs, cattle, cream, eggs and other farm products.
I am not concerned with the number of postponements or the number who have been called up for service in Saskatchewan. I see an attempt made in the daily press of that province to excuse the actions of the divisional boards by quoting these figures. I am only concerned with the facts as I find them. I find families of three and four sons, none of whom has yet been called from the farm in that province, and then I find a last surviving worker on the farm taken off the farm, with the result that production will be slowed up this spring. When I find that, I am concerned in the work of that board. I am going to quote one instance.
I pleaded four times for ,this particular young man, by telephone to the divisional board, by two letters and by personal interview, and the edict of the board was that this man must go. The farmer [DOT] happens to'be a deformed, dwarfed, crippled man from his birth. He earned his living during most of his life by keeping books in a general store in which he had a financial interest. The store was sold, and he bought a farm and employed his son-in-law, a neighbouring farmer, and a very fine farmer indeed. He entered into agreement with his son-in-law to come and operate and manage the farm. I am referring to this son-in-law being taken from the farm on which there remained only a deformed, dwarfed, crippled man. I have another appeal from him to-day, a letter again requesting that this son-in-law be permitted to return to the farm; otherwise the farm will not be operated this spring. I submit that the production of food is a very important matter in the winning of the war. I am supported in this belief by a little excerpt of information that came to my office this morning headed, " Hoover on food problems." The ex-president of the United States, before a meeting of industrialists, made a speech in the city of New York on January 21, in which he dealt with the question of the food problem as it

affects the united nations. I am going to quote four short excerpts from Mr. Hoover's speech on that occasion:
Food supply has now become secondary only to military operations in determining the outcome of the war. And it will take first place in saving the world from anarchy after the war.
Again:
The burden of furnishing food supplies to the united nations now and to a starving world after the war rests largely upon the American and Canadian farmer.
Again:
Agriculture simply must be envisaged as a munitions industry. The farmer must receive men and tools if he is to perform his part.
And lastly:
But the first and imperative necessity is to get more production. The American farmer will do it if he gets a chance and the fate of the world may depend upon it.
I should like you to visualize the condition of the farmers of western Canada during the last forty years. The young man of forty years ago stood behind the handles of his walking plough and yoke of oxen and, later on, his horses and gang ploughs, but during the last twenty years that young farmer's son has grown up and has bought a tractor with heavy discs and ploughs and seed drills and heavy machinery drawn by the tractor. In most instances the father never learned to operate power machinery and is still using his horses while the son operates power machinery. The young man is called for military service and away he goes. I need not enlarge upon this picture this afternoon of the father who is now forty years older than he was at that time, carrying on, not with power equipment but with horses. His hogs and cattle have been sold because he has no one to feed them. That is a picture of many farms in western Canada under present conditions.
The original draftee under the National Resources Mobilization Act was called for thirty days training and that was extended to four months. I have no quarrel with that term of four months. Later on he was kept in uniform and he is in uniform to-day. I ask you, sir, do we need to retain these draftees in uniform? Would they not be better employed on the farms, in the coal mines, in the logging camps or at other useful occupations, subject always, of course, to military call when required? Do we need a seventh and an eighth division, a reserve army and a defence army for the protection of Canada from invasion, or from internal strife? Both factors have largely disappeared since this became the formal set-up of the Canadian

The Address-Mr. Gregory
army. Should we not alter our policy with respect to retaining the trainees in uniform? In any event, in the light of orders which have recently gone out to the divisional boards, orders which were reported in the papers the other day, it seems to me that there are a lot of scrambled eggs which should be unscrambled.
In other words, I am asking the government to give instructions to reconsider the call-up of this drafted army. Send back to the farms many of these young men who should be on the farms, 'because in my judgment their contribution to the war effort of Canada can be better performed on the farm than by standing in a defence army in uniform.
To change the picture, may I say that Canada has passed through an industrial revolution in the last two years. Among the nations of the world her record stands out in shining relief. I believe that when history is written of this particular period it will refer to certain characters who are at present on the very active stage in the government of this country. If I were inclined to look into the unwritten pages of history, I believe I could visualize the names which would appear on those pages. I could see the name of Clarence D. Howe, the miracle man of this period, the man who has transformed the economic life of this nation in the last two years, a man of energy, a man of genius, a man of foresight, a man of decision, the man who turned Canada into an arsenal for our allies, as well as for our own fighting forces- a man to whom this country owes a very great debt of gratitude. It is a remarkable contribution, sir, to think that in two short years we have become so industrialized that we require to-day only one-third of the war equipment manufactured in Canada for our own fighting forces both in Canada and abroad, and that we can contribute the other two-thirds of that equipment to the armies of the united nations. To-day Canadian equipment is fighting on every front, wherever the war is being waged. I believe history will not be backward in giving credit for this remarkable contribution to our Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe).
If I were to gaze again at the pages of history and try to conceive what will yet be written therein, I would see another character. Every time I think of fehis subject, that other character comes to my mind in a quaint sort of way. I see a Hindu wizard sitting on a carpet on the ground, lighting a match, the flame leaping to the heavens, enlarging and extending until it covers the whole of the firmament. That character of the Hindu wizard takes form and shape in my mind, and
I believe history will record that the wizard of this period has been C. G. Power. To my mind, he is the figure who lit the small match, who gave birth to the small flame which enveloped the skies, and became a leading part in the direction and the activity of the wTar effort of Canada. The commonwealth air training scheme was his responsibility, and I believe history will call him the wizard of this incomparable and unique period in our history.
Turning again to the speech of the throne, we find that parliamentary assistants for ministers are to be provided. In my judgment this is long past due. I have sat in the house, along with other hon. members, for three sessions, watching the lines deepen on the faces of tired ministers who were attempting vastly more, by way of the burdens they are carrying, than human endurance is capable of bearing. Therefore I welcome the approach to the British system of under-secretaryships.
Recently, however, I heard a speech delivered by one of the leaders of a great political party in this country, criticizing the appointment of men to 'boards, commissions and controllerships, allegedly accusing these boards, and appointees to boards, commissions and controllerships of being supreme over parliament, and even supreme over the government. He described them as being dictators, practically, riding roughshod over parliament, and over people's rights; and even placing the democracy of our country in danger.
Well, I listened for the remedy, and finally it came. The remedy was the appointment of under-secretaries to do the work, in place of these boards, commissioners and controllers. First. I wish to dissociate myself from those who fear dictatorships in war time, and who fear that the liberties we must give up during war time may never be regained when peace returns. The parliament of Canada passed the War Measures Act, and the powers the government is taking are undler that act. The government, by virtue of that act, appoints boards, commissioners and controllers to d,o a certain kind of work. With the return to peace parliament will repeal the War Measures Act, and the operations of these boards, commissions and controllerships will come to an end.
Candidly I have always stood ready to give the government vast power. I want it to cast away any timidity, of which it has sometimes been accused'-if, indeed, it has been guilty of timidity. I am sure that if a demand comes for greater sacrifice and greater duties, the Canadian people will always be ready to answer that call. We want the
The Address-Mr. Gregory

government, then, to take all necessary power, and let us get on with the running of the war.
To those who fear the loss of democracy, who fear the setting up of a dictatorship in war time through boards, commissions and controllerships, and who would remedy these alleged grievances by the appointments of under-secretaries, may I say most emphatically that the proposed remedy bears no relationship to the alleged wrong.
For a moment let us consider this: What are under-secretaries? First of all, they are members of parliament. They are, therefore, responsible to their constituencies and to parliament, as private members. This is a purely representative capacity. Then, second, they are assistants to the ministers, and are empowered to act for them and to speak for them in parliament and in the country, within the limits of the ministers' policies and the general policies of the government. Again, the duties and functions of an under-secretary are purely representative. In the second instance, they represent the minister and the government, and that is all. Those are the functions of under-secretaries.
What about these boards, controllers and commissions? In peace-time we are very clear about the relationship between a minister and the staff under him, who carry out his instructions and whom we call civil servants. They receive orders from the minister, and it is their duty to see that the mechanical or practical work is carried out on his orders. But war-time has thrown an emergent responsibility upon every minister to create boards, commissions and controllerships to perform specific war-time jobs. All these boards, commissions and controllerships, however, operate under some minister. They must confer with the minister; they must accept the minister's policy; they cannot go beyond the policy established by the minister or by the government of the day. Therefore, sir, in a very real sense these appointees are only a temporary war-time civil service, and in no way are their functions similar to those of under-secretaries. I welcome the appointment of undersecretaries to overworked ministers.
Then, Mr. Speaker, I read with very great satisfaction another passage in the speech from the throne:
... a comprehensive national scheme of social insurance should be worked out at once which will constitute a charter of social security for the whole of Canada.
Knowing the life history of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), I would have been very much surprised indeed if in this fourth year of war provision had not been made in the speech from the throne for

greater security and a happier nation after this war is won. I remember the Prime Minister as a student of humanities at the university. I remember him as a post-graduate on social problems. I remember his journey through Europe, following his student days, studying the social conditions of the masses. I remember him as the first commissioner of labour, as the first deputy minister of labour and, later, as the second Minister of Labour. I know something of the splendid contribution he made under the Rockefeller foundation during the first great war in harmonizing the differences of employers and labour in the United States. Therefore it is not surprising to read the words which were delivered by the Prime Minister at the lord mayor's luncheon in London on September 4, 1941, when he said:
Much is being said about a new world order to take the place of the old world order when the war is at an end. If that new order is not already on its way before the war is over we may look for it in vain. A new world order cannot be worked out at some given moment or reduced to writing at a conference table. It is not a matter of parchments and seals. That was one of the mistaken beliefs at the end of the last war.
A new world order, to be *worthy of the name, is something born, not made. It is something that lives and breathes, something that needs to be developed in the minds and hearts of men, something that touches the human soul. It expresses itself in good-will, in mutual aid. It is the application in all the human relations of the principle of helpfulness and service. It is based not on fear, greed, hate, but on mutual trust and the noblest qualities of the human heart and mind. It seeks neither to divide nor destroy. Its aim is brotherhood, its method cooperation.
Therefore, sir, the Prime Minister has run true to form in the speech from the throne and has- followed Liberal traditions established during the long and useful career of the Liberal party in both Great Britain and Canada. Again Liberalism has been true to its past history, "Humanity First". With the implementing of the recommendations of the committee on social insurance, I am sure we shall all welcome the day after this war when we can assuredly say that we have made a land fit for heroes to live in, that we have made of life a journey to be enjoyed rather than a burden too heavy to be borne. We said that after the last war, but with shame were forced to admit that we had done nothing to implement the statement. That will not be so after this war.
Again referring to the speech from the throne, I note with very great pleasure the broadening of Canada's diplomatic relations with other countries. This is just another indication of Canada's growing importance within the British commonwealth of nations.

The Address-Mr. Gregory
I note with particular gratification and' pride that a native son of Saskatchewan, Mr. Justice T. C. Davis, has been appointed high commissioner to Australia. I am sure that in this capacity he will be a credit to Canada and will bring great distinction to himself.
I cannot commend the expressed intention, as mentioned in the speech from the throne, to bring in a bill to redistribute the representation in the House of Commons. As a result of extraordinary circumstances, largely resulting from the war, Saskatchewan stands to lose four members, according to the 1941 census. Even before the outbreak of war many young men and women of that province were drifting away from the farms and urban centres, looking for employment. On account of drought and prices of farm commodities, the sons and daughters of our farmers were discouraged; and lack of employment in the towns brought about a great exodus from Saskatchewan. I join with other hon. members in protesting against this bill being brought down at this time, for the reasons so splendidly outlined by the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker).
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


John Albert Gregory: Mr. Speaker, when the house rose at six o'clock I was referring to the great exodus of young people from Saskatchewan to look for employment. We have reason to believe that after this war is over there will be a return flow of population, and it would be most unfair to penalize Saskatchewan to the extent of four members during the next ten years.
May I say further in that connection that this exodus has been aggravated and accelerated by the policy of crowding all the industrial war effort of Canada into a small compass within what one might call a charmed ring in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. I have made frequent representations, and many other members from Saskatchewan have made frequent representations to ministers and departments asking for a fair share of the industrial war effort for Saskatchewan. I was pleased the other evening to hear the hon. member for Saskatoon City (Mr. Bence) speak along this line, and the hon. member for Rosthern and other hon. members have spoken to the same effect.
It may not be known that there are many spots in Saskatchewan particularly favoured by nature for the location of war industries.
Other hon. members may speak for themselves, but I prefer to speak of one particular location within my own constituency. I refer to the town of Lloydminster, which sits astride the fourth meridian line where the provinces of Saskatchewan' and Alberta meet. It so happens that this town has developed a great industry in natural gas and crude oil. If I had the time this evening I should like to tell the house something of the proportions of these natural gas and crude oil resources. The power plant in the city of North Battleford which develops steam and electric energy to satisfy the needs of the town of Battleford and the city of North Battleford, as well as the airport in the immediate vicinity and a mental hospital which has buildings on both sides of the river and a population of three thousand, uses Lloydminster crude oil to heat the boilers.
May I tell the hon. member for Saskatoon City that if a gas pipe line were built from Lloydminster to his beautiful city, that city could be served with both light and heat as well as every village, town and city on the 200 miles between Lloydminster and Saskatoon, and the surrounding country on each side of the pipeline, and still Lloydminster would have an abundant supply of natural gas left over. What a magnificent site for a war industry, for that matter, any industry, to be established! It would be suitable for a flax mill, which is a war industry, an industrial alcohol plant, a synthetic rubber plant, a bone processing plant or a steel rolling mills. The northern half of Alberta and Saskatchewan is filled with abandoned farm machinery and other scrap steel which could be gathered together as salvage to keep a moderate sized steel rolling mills going at the town of Lloydminster. Again returning to the speech from the throne, I note:
A joint committee representative of the departments of agriculture of Canada and the United States has been agreed upon to coordinate the efforts of the two countries in the production of food for the united nations.
In this connection may I suggest that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) be appointed immediately as minister of food and be given full authority over the production of food in Canada. I assume that the price control board would still exist as a body with full authority to fix prices, but the appointing of the Minister of Agriculture as minister of food would naturally place in his hands the question of the classes of food most needed for our war effort. After giving him that authority as minister in charge of the production of food, the next logical step

The Address-Mr. Gregory

would be that he would have increased, influence in bringing his representations before the price control board.
It is a well known fact that there is nothing more sensitive than prices and production of all kinds of farm commodities. If one raises the price of a particular food) product, the production increases; if the price decreases, there is an immediate response and reflection in the amount of that particular food which is raised.
I am going to pause here to say that there never was a time in the history of western Canada when there was the same degree of appreciation for the efforts of the Minister of Agriculture as there is at the present time. I do not think there has been a man in western Canada who has been more blackguarded. at certain times, who has been more misrepresented, than the Minister of Agriculture. Not only in my constituency, but throughout the length and breadth of Saskatchewan there is a growing appreciation of the fights which the Minister of Agriculture has put up here for western agriculture. This appreciation has grown as the result of a broadening knowledge of the class of fight which the Minister of Agriculture has put up.
There is a further growing knowledge or growing opinion of a fact which I have emphasized on previous occasions in this house, that government must always be by compromise. We have four great regions in Canada, the maritimes, the central provinces, the prairies and British Columbia. No region gets all that it asks for. All that the members can hope to get from any government sitting in Ottawa is a compromise, taking into account the influences and objections of members coming from other regions. Therefore I say that with that growing knowledge that government must be by compromise, the Minister of Agriculture is receiving greater appreciation in western Canada than heretofore.
I am reminded to-night of a couplet which we learned as boys in school in that famous poem of Oliver Goldsmith, "The Deserted Village". In referring to the village preacher Goldsmith said this:
And fools, who came to scoff, remained to pray.
I am going to translate that liberally, and referring to the Minister of Agriculture I would say:
And those who came to scoff, remained to praise.
That is the attitude to-day in western Canada toward the Minister of Agriculture.
I view with great interest the arrival of a new party in the house with a refreshingly new creed. Or is it an old volume with a

new cover? The leader of this new party, the Progressive Conservative .party, is well known in western Canada. I should like to digress for a moment to congratulate the house leader (Mr. Graydon) of this party upon his elevation to his present position. May I tell him that there are many on this side of the house who would be almost inclined to forget bis politics while basking in the sunshine of his lovely smile and gracious manner. As I say, the leader of this new party is well known in western Canada. At one time he was a farmer, and he has served the farmers of Saskatchewan through the college of agriculture in Saskatchewan and through the provincial department of agriculture at Regina. He is known to be progressive in his views and progressive in his outlook, but many of those standing on the side-lines are wondering if he will impose his views upon the party, or if the old, hard-crusted high tariff, Tory wing of the party will impose their views upon him. Mr. Speaker, may I say that I have no misgivings whatever of future happenings in this regard. There will be no hard-crusted, high tariff parties anywhere in Canada after .this war is over. Many will be free traders, and we all will be believers in low tariffs. Let us view the picture for a moment; let us go back to the early days of Canada. In the primitive days of Canada's industrial growth [DOT]the home market was the only market Canada had for her manufactured products. Thus a policy of protection of the home market by a high tariff was built up as a policy for the protection of industry in Canada, and it has continued ever since the "national policy" of 1874 was first initiated. But as Canada's industries expanded-


Thomas Vien: Order. The hon. member's time has expired.


Mr. P. E. COTE (Verdun):: Mr. Speaker, one feature among others of the speech from the throne has attracted the attention and the interest of the entire population of Canada, and doubtless of my constituents as well, many of whom I have already consulted in this regard. I refer to the proposed legislation on post-war social security. A committee of this house, to be assisted by an advisory board, which was appointed a few days ago, will soon be set up, whose definite duty it will be to study the social problem from its different angles and submit its conclusions to this chamber. Let us hope that this committee, one of the most important ever appointed by this house, will get into action at the earliest possible date, and that each of its meetings

The Address-Mr. Cote
will prove most fruitful and beneficial to every class of our population and to a united Canada as a whole.
I have great confidence that the government will neglect no way of realizing to the fullest possible extent the hopes which the entire population draws from that item in the speech from the throne.
I consider as an additional token of the serious intentions of the government in that matter the statement which was released last Thursday by the hon. Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) which concerns the welfare of the widows of veterans of the last war.
Ever since my election to this house I have devoted much of my time and endeavours to the relief of those ladies who were in needy circumstances. During the past three years I have had the honour to be an honorary president of the Quebec branch of the Non-Pensioned Veterans' Widows Association Incorporated. The headquarters of that body happen to be in the city of Verdun, and the president is one of the most respected among my constituents. For these reasons I regarded it as my imperative duty to do everything in my power to assist in obtaining justice for the needy widows of those Canadians who so magnificently contributed to our country's war effort of twenty-five years ago. Through the president of the Quebec branch they asked me this year to take steps to have a committee room in this building reserved for a delegation representing them that intended to come to Ottawa next Wednesday in a further attempt to impress their views upon the Minister of Pensions and National Health. Last week I received an assurance that room 268 could again be made available for them this year. But now I may say to the minister that his statement of last Thursday will deprive him of the pleasure of meeting again those gallant delegates, since their requests have now in a very substantial degree been met.
For the last five years these associations of veterans' widows have consistently appealed to members of this house that legislation be enacted to remedy the deplorable physical and moral condition of their members throughout the country. Time and again they have stated their grievances. With your permission, sir, I shall quote from the last brief which has been forwarded to each hon. member of this house, I believe on January 25 last, under the signature of Mrs. Margaret Wainford, president of the province of Quebec non-pensioned veterans' widows association, and with the
endorsement of eight similar bodies from Toronto, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Calgary, Vancouver and other cities.
We are again placing before you a request that a pension of $40 a month be granted to all non-pensioned veterans' widows under the following categories:
(a) the widows of those men who were in receipt of a pension of 25 per cent but less than 50 per cent disability,
(b)	the widows of those men who were in receipt of a pension of less than 25 per cent disability,
(c)	the widows of those men who served in actual theatre of war though not in receipt of a pension,
(d)	the widows of those men whose history sheet shows record of serious illness.
The Minister of Pensions and National Health stated a few days ago that provision is being made in this year's estimates to permit allowances for veterans' widows who. through advancing years or through mental and physical infirmity, are incapacitated from earning a decent living and are in necessitous circumstances.
I have no doubt that the attitude which the minister has taken in connection with this problem has already received the spontaneous approval of this house, and more particularly of the members who have given their strong support to the cause u,p to this day. I find it a duty to recognize the valuable assistance given by my fellow members from Trinity, (Mr. Roebuck), Davenport (Mr. MacNicol), Cariboo (Mr. Turgeon), Mount Royal (Mr. Whitman), St. Antoine-Westmount (Mr. Abbott), St. Ann (Mr. Healy), and Hochelaga (Mr. Eudes), and it is with sincere pleasure that I thank them on behalf of the Quebec branch of the association.
I do not hesitate, however, to state that the one who will be happiest to hear of the policy just announced is probably Mrs. Wainford, who has so ably and devotedly presided over our local association since its foundation in 1937. Replying to a question by the special committee on the Pension Act and the War Veteran's Allowance Act at its sitting of April 9, 1941, one of the Toronto delegates gave the following appreciation of her work:
Mrs. Wainford took up the torch in Quebec and she has never let it burn out.
This is a concise and eloquent admission of the debt of gratitude which the non-pensioned widows feel toward their courageous leader.
To-day we all join to praise the government for having listened with no less sympathy than efficacy to a just and meritorious case. By so doing the government has clearly demonstrated
The Address-Mr. Noseworthy

that it intends to continue its sound policy toward the solution of as many social difficulties as possible at this time, and on that ground alone it certainly deserves the recognition of the whole country.


Mr. J. W. NOSEWORTHY (York South):: This is the first opportunity I have had to participate in a debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. When I first came to this house the debate on the address in reply had just concluded, and the vote was about to be taken.
I have been wondering for some days what good purpose is being served by this-usually lengthy-debate. I take it for granted that every hon. member can foretell now with a reasonable degree of accuracy what the vote will be, and none of us is so optimistic as to believe that by his speech in this debate he will be able to change a single vote. I suggest that the leaders in this house agree among themselves to limit this debate, so that we may as soon as possible get on with the much more serious business of this session, some items of which I shall attempt to outline.
I have been very much impressed during this debate by the fact that this Cooperative Commonwealth Federation group has received more free advertising from both old parties this session than, I think, we received during the six months I was here last session. I begin to look around for a reason for that free advertising, and I recall that members of his majesty's loyal opposition took a certain little old lady to Winnipeg last summer. That little old lady had on several earlier occasions divorced her former spouses. She had been known by many names. At Winnipeg she divorced her most recent spouse, had a really good face-lifting job done, was outfitted in a new suit of glamorous clothes, and remarried to a new spouse, which meant of course that she must take his name. She was even given a book of etiquette to guide her in the future. With that she sallied forth for new conquests. Inasmuch as the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation was in a large measure responsible for that episode in the little old lady's life, I presume the criticism we have been receiving is the way the Progressive Conservatives have of showing their appreciation of our work.
I have also been amazed at the indignation displayed by this newly named party because the government has promised to implement by legislation some of the resolutions contained in their Winnipeg programme. I take it that, had that programme been drawn up in the interests of the Canadian people, there would be rejoicing, instead of indignation and

consternation, over the fact that the government had done so. I want to assure the members of that group that there was no indignation felt in the ranks of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation last summer when they proceeded to build an entire programme from a few planks taken from our platform and tied together with a great many reservations. It makes one question just what were the objectives of that new party programme, and I suspect that this letter, which, when I returned over the week end, I found being circulated, in my riding, expresses more clearly than I can just what the objective of that conference and that new programme was. This is a circular letter. The recipient of it is asked to return it with one dollar attached-
. . . and your membership in the South York Progressive Conservative Association will be paid for one year. You will thereby assist us and yourself to defeat the C.C.F. . . .


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That is not as bad as the C.C.F. franking their appeals for money.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I have also been amazed, Mr. Speaker, at the resentment felt in the ranks of the Progressive Conservatives on account of the disappearance of the small business man, the small vendor, the small manufacturer. This is no new phenomenon in Canadian life. The small business man in every field has been going under over a period of many years, under the government of both Liberals and Conservatives. Monopolistic and capitalistic enterprise have been slowly but surely squeezing out of existence the small man in every enterprise. The only new feature in the present situation is that those enterprises, which formerly were carrying out this squeezing process by themselves, now have lent their key men to the government, and from those inside positions they are able to accelerate the process which has been going on for a generation.
I am sure that we all share the gratitude expressed in the speech from the throne for the change in the war situation. It is fitting that, in the light of the important part which our fighting forces are likely to play in the coming year, the government should have made the gesture of appreciation which they did at the beginning of the debate. I am confident that every hon. member is agreed that this gesture was a fitting one. It is agreed that those hon. gentlemen who moved and seconded the address made worth-while contributions to this debate. Whether they expressed the point of view of the soldier or the point of view of the Liberal party can well, I think, be left to the good judgment of the men themselves in the armed forces. What we in this group

The Address-Mr. Noseworthy
objected to regarding that incident was the apparent attempt being made by certain Liberal members to make political capital out of those speeches.
I want to assure you, Mr. Speaker, and the members of this house that the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis), about whose speech there was a lively discussion afterwards, himself a great war veteran with a creditable record, and with his eldest son, a boy of eighteen, now serving in the Canadian army overseas, had no intention of saying anything disparaging to the forces themselves. I am in agreement with the one constructive suggestion which he made on that occasion and which was entirely overlooked in the heated discussion that followed, namely, that when the coming redistribution bill is introduced, provision should be made to change the elections act whereby the men overseas may have the right to elect their own representatives to speak freely for them in this parliament.
I suggested at the beginning of these remarks that I would welcome a short debate on the address in reply in order that we may get down to the serious business of this session. I shall set forth a few matters which, in my opinion, constitute the main business of this session apart from the regular and routine business which will come before us. Our first obligation, in my opinion, is to strengthen and maintain the morale of our men overseas; for upon them, in the coming year or years, we shall in the final analysis depend for victory.
What distinguishes war from peace is the fact of sudden death. No amount of talk about the totality of modern warfare, no amount of talk about the privation of civilians or about equality of sacrifice should blind us to the contribution that our fighting men are called upon to make. Only those civilians who are suffering under the heels of soldiers in occupied countries of Europe, or those civilians in Russia and China who are starving and dying that their defenders may have bread and arms, can claim any right to share in the fame that these men will win. The first concern of these men overseas is, I take it, and I have talked with many hundreds from all parts of Canada from overseas during the recess, that we should in this country mobilize everything we have for a speedy winning of the war, in order that as quickly as possible the men may be able to return to their homes. I am confident that, should we bring into this house representatives of these armed forces to speak freely for them, they would support in this chamber measures for the mobilization of wealth, industry and man-power far beyond anything that this government has yet done.
The next concern of these men is with the opportunities which will be accorded to them on their return from overseas for rehabilitation in civil life. Anything that we can do by planning or by legislation which will provide for them the substance of that democracy for which they are fighting overseas will give them greater determination to win. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that nothing we brought down in this house last session is sufficient to engender any enthusiasm in the returned men. They are looking for something much more substantial than anything we have provided so far.
We propose to give to those who cannot find jobs $9 a week if single, and $13 if married. I am told that eight thousand of the boys who have gone overseas have married since they went there. Those among those eight thousand who survive the war will return to this country, without any homes, without any capital reserve, without any furniture, without anything to start a home except a wife, and possibly children. We have no right to ask them to spend any of their time in this country on $13 a week. The least we can do is to see to it that they are kept on the country's payroll until we can find places for them in the civil life of Canada.
The people of Canada want to see this parliament get down to the business of making definite provision for a change-over in our production from war to peace, with as little loss of time as possible, when the war is over. During the war years we have just about doubled our capacity to produce. We can produce about twice as much now as we could in 1929, notwithstanding the fact that we have withdrawn so many of our men from peacetime or war-time production to the armed forces. The people of Canada are asking to-day, and they want an answer from this parliament, what use we intend to make of these increased facilities. Are we going to proceed, when the war is over, to use these facilities to produce the commodities they need, or do we intend to restrict production in order to increase prices and to increase profits as we did before the war began? The only assurance we have received so far from the government came from two cabinet ministers during the Winnipeg by-election. These ministers assure us that there need not be any unemployment, or any depression after the war, because we have many more factories and many more skills developed than we had before the war. That statement will provoke nothing but laughter and derision in any public audience to which it is made. During the depression there was not a community in this country which did not have factories and
23S
The Address-Mr. Noseworthy


Karl Kenneth Homuth: What was the rate per hour?
htfr. NOSEWORTHY:	Among women
workers the increase amounted to 77 per cent.

The Address-Mr. Noseworthy


Humphrey Mitchell: Would my hon. friend quote percentages in Canada He has quoted percentages in Great Britain, and I wonder if he has the same information in both cases.


Joseph William Noseworthy: These are the percentage increases since 1938.


Humphrey Mitchell: I do not like to interrupt my hon. friend, but when he quotes wage rates in one country I think he should quote wage rates in the other, instead of quoting wage rates in one country and percentages in the other.


Major James William Coldwell: The minister knows the wage rates are different in the two countries.


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes, I know something of wage rates in England.


Major James William Coldwell: And the cost of living is different; rents are different, and so on.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The point I am making is that while in this country wage rates have been frozen in order to prevent inflation, in England they have been allowed to rise as much as 60 per cent, while the cost of living, except in reference to luxuries, has risen by less than half that percentage. Those statistics have been issued by the labour office in England.


Humphrey Mitchell: I think if my hon. friend looked at those figures he would find that he is speaking of wages in bulk rather than wage rates. When he says that wages in Canada are frozen, that is not so; and no one knows it better than he does.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Wage rates are
frozen in Canada.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is not true.


Major James William Coldwell: The minister will have an opportunity to make a speech showing it is not true, if he can.


Humphrey Mitchell: And I shall.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The treatment being meted out to the men who are trickling back from overseas is not such as to engender enthusiasm among the armed forces. I find there is very little difference between the treatment being meted out to men returning from this war and that meted out to those who came back from the last war. Only yesterday I met a man back from overseas a few months who told me that he had received the same treatment men received, to my knowledge, in 1920. He was passed from one plant to another; no industry wanted him, and he finally secured a part-time job with the municipality as assistant to the ash collector. That was the best job we in Toronto
could provide for a man returning from overseas. I have another case which came to my attention over the week-end, that of a young man who returned from overseas more than twelve months ago. He receives no pension or other consideration. He is paid $9 a week while attending a vocational class. He has had to be taken, always in a state of collapse, off every job he has tried! handle since returning from overseas. He has passed out a number of times in his classroom at the technical school; yet that man receives no consideration. It is time we had something much more promising to offer those men whom we are asking to risk their lives overseas to save democracy.
I should like to direct attention to another situation which came to my attention yesterday, through a deputation representing men who are working on the Alaska highway. If half of what they tell me is correct, the government should immediately institute a thorough investigation into the situation prevailing there. I am informed that while United States workmen are being paid $1.25 an hour, Canadian workmen are paid whatever the contractor chooses to pay them, anywhere from 60 cents to $1 or $1.10; that three or four hundred of these workmen are crowded into quarters built to accommodate 100, living under conditions unfit for cattle, let alone human beings; that while Americans can buy their small necessities, cigarettes and so on, at cost, Canadians are gouged for all that the traffic will stand. I am told that these men are charged $1.25 a day for food and a bunk. The situation is such that they are almost in open revolt over the exploitation that is taking place in' that camp. Conditions such as these are doinj more to impede Canada's war effort than any other single factor. This parliament and this government should take steps now to remedy this situation if we desire to secure the whole-hearted support of our people in our war effort. It just is not good enough to have these measures withheld so that they may be dangled before the eyes of the people just before election time. The people of Canada want to see definite measures introduced and put into effect now, while the war is on.


Thomas Vien: Order. I must inform the hon. gentleman that his time has expired.


Mr. LIONEL BERTRAND (Terrebonne) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, for the sixth time since the outbreak of this war, parliament has met to discuss the nation's affairs. In his review of the situation, the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has stressed
240	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Bertrand (Terrebonne)
the fact that the year 1943 marked a favourable turning-point for the united nations. He has praised the courage of the 'allied soldiers and extolled the valour of our armed forces overseas. I join him in paying tribute to our sailors, our airmen, our soldiers; they bring glory to Canada. After Vimy, Dieppe will add to the history of this war a chapter of gallantry, worthy of my country's traditions.
The war is still going on. The speech from the throne, apart from reminding us of its stark reality, intimates that the Canadian people must keep up their efforts, and generously provide the united nations, as they have done in the past, with great quantities of arms, munitions and war supplies. But war will end one day, and already the government are heralding a programme of social security meant to offset the unavoidable consequences of postwar readjustment. While prepared to support all measures that will endeavour, through a charter of social security to protect the lowly and the weak in all emergencies, I nevertheless have serious fears and deep feelings of hesitation as regards some expenditures which to my mind are out of proportion with our resources and often detrimental to our own defence. Accordingly, while wishing to make some remarks of a general character, I reserve the privilege to advance some other particular considerations when the legislation forecast in the speech from the throne comes up for discussion in this parliament.
The present conflict, Mr. Speaker, has imposed on our people great sacrifices which I need not review. This war, brought about by ambition, pride, and lust for domination, has engulfed Canada which, remote as it is from Europe was in 1939 less concerned with overseas quarrels than with pursuing in peace, on this American continent, its forward march. It does not behoove me to analyse at this time the reasons which have brought about our participation. One fact is outstanding: we are in this war, and we will remain in it to the end. Our population has accepted every restriction and sacrifice; it has shown its willingness to bear a heavy burden of taxes. It has accepted these restrictions, sacrifices and taxes, and will continue to do so with a patriotic spirit provided the war occasions as few abuses as possible.
Far be it that I should at this time, through a criticism which to some will seem carping in spite of its sincerity, be unfair to the government. During the last three years they have been confronted by perplexing problems, by numerous situations which were both difficult and complicated, by the imperious need of meeting uncontrolled circumstances which

often became uncontrollable. The Right Hon. Prime Minister has fulfilled his duties-I believe we all are agreed on that point-with a devotion that enhances his political fame; he has been on a level with the great parliamentarians of the modern world and the prestige he enjoys in the United States will receive special recognition in the history of the present war.
I am pleased to witness this closer association of Canada and the United States. To my mind, it _ presages for America, a marked advantage in the solving of post-war problems. The American nation on the other hand, has copied a number of our legislations. Canada, together with the United: States, has endeavoured to restrain the egotism and slave-driving ambitions of war profiteers. Certain measures have been adopted which although not perfect have, in many fields, if not cured every evil, at least mitigated the effects of an inflation which could easily have become uncontrolloble. Limitless restrictions have been imposed on our people, some were doubtless warranted, others may not have been absolutely necessary, but they were all willingly accepted by the people of this country who considered that they were still preferable to the horrors of bombardment and war. Huge gifts were handed, mostly to Great Britain, gifts that have helped the allied cause to a great extent, but that have appeared exaggerated to many, when the small population and inadequate defence of the country were taken into account. In spite of the wide powers granted the government in the field of enlistment, the voluntary system is still maintained as the sole method of reinforcing our armies overseas. The selective service authorities have just recently stated that a redistribution of man-power was under consideration. The recruiting of men for the armed forces is of paramount importance; however, what good would be the largest armies without a sufficient number of hands on the home front to manufacture modern weapons -and draw from the soil the food necessary for the physical welfare of the nation.
I stated a few moments ago that war should not become a pretext for misuse of authority. In war time, nothing is more detrimental to morale, to sound cooperation between the administration and the administered, to good will and voluntary efforts than the misuse of authority in military affairs. Of course, war entails certain inconveniences and tremendous sacrifices and expenses and these very conditions must forbid every abuse. For my part,
I believe it is dangerous to inaugurate bureaucracy even in war time, for it is raising a state within the state, which, with time, may

The Address-Mr. Bertrand (Terrebonne)
become a state against the state. I followed very closely the remarks of the Prime Minister in this regard. He stated that the present methods would endure in war time only. So much the better. However, it will become impossible, after the war, to eradicate the habits contracted and the precedents established. Parliament adopts legislations, for which the departments are responsible, but their administration is left to hundreds of officials, and this means, first, the scattering of responsibility and, for the public at large, besides enduring the inconveniences of the moment, the duty of protecting themselves against the disastrous enthusiasm of lawmaking officials.
It is no doubt necessary to organize boards: among the essential ones we may mention the war service boards, the crown companies. However, I feel that certain of these boards have too many ramific; tions and the evil lies in the fact that each branch constitutes a miniature government. Without any responsibility whatever to the electors, these boards, committees and subcommittees substitute themselves to parliament, and even to the . cabinet and the departments of the government. Setting too much faith in the power of legislation, they ceaselessly enact new regulations to remedy evils the real pauses of which they have not investigated and, most of the time, they are astonished that their legislation remains ineffective or produces results opposite to what they expected. Step by step, they invade every branch of the government with the result that parliament has become a figure-head and the members serve solely as a buffer to absorb the shocks of public opinion.
No one is against the war effort. No one, if he be a Canadian in heart and mind may refuse to do his share loyally. We all know that the government cannot see, control, lead, know or do everything; however, the war effort cannot be useful and efficient unless it is based on general policies which our people expect to see carried out in return for their sacrifices.
We believe in the war effort; but it must be rational, that is exempt from the narrowness of views which inspires autocratic government and allows irresponsible parties to transform the authority which has been granted them into dictatorial privileges;
We believe in the war effort, but the legislation, the orders in council, the public orders must converge to a practical end instead of engendering greater evils and culminating in man-made disasters adding to the unrest which is already prevalent;
We believe in the war effort, but it must not become a cause of economic upheaval, by the elimination from our industrial life of small or average industries which have been the mainstay of our country through the ten-year depression and will still be important factors in the posh-war rehabilitation;
We believe in the war effort, but it must not be a damper to all intellectual endeavours; if, for example, the war effort demands that the advertising of wine, beer and liquor be prohibited, at least, let us, by some compensation, prevent the liquidation of a number of newspapers of my province and, especially of about forty weeklies which, for years, have established themselves firmly through unpublished sacrifices and devotedness to a cause as a symbol of social progress and public cooperation in the districts they cover;
We believe in the war effort, but, in the army, let it be a further reason to the establishment of a sane and mutual understanding between officers and men; let the rulings concerning postponements requested by soldiers be arrived at in such a way that no chance of unfairness be possible; let some of the medical examiners in the training camps or in appeal centres take the trouble of examining the recruits before deciding that they are fit; these examinations appear to be rather superficial, since a large number of recruits are sent back to civil life a few months after their call, on the ruling of a medical board, this entailing useless expense to the country;
We believe in the war effort, but let it not become, due to over-enthusiasm on the part of certain high officials, a reason for invading the provincial field and upsetting their legislative set-up, especially when their rights and legislative measures are specially important to them;
We believe in the war effort; but let it not be a pretext to those in whom authority is vested and who, for example, are responsible for expropriations, to pose as dictators, to resort to arbitrary actions, to call in the R. C. M.P. even before every possible conciliatory and good-will method has been exhausted;
We believe in the war effort, provided it does not prevent workers to receive fair treatment in war plants, provided the salaries paid in one province are not higher than in another, but are the same all through the country;
We believe in the war effort, provided it is exempt from favouritism, the worst cause of misunderstanding and the most harmful enemy of production; provided it is also exempt from waste, this other enemy which
242	COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Bertrand (Terrebonne)
destroys, in our population, the will to economize, and paralyses all enthusiasm for cooperation ;
We believe in the war effort, provided it becomes possible for the farmer to accelerate, increase and double his production by keeping or getting the necessary help and also by obtaining the tools of which certain government orders have deprived him;
We believe in the war effort, through cooperation that is not dampened by racial or religious prejudice or imbued with extreme imperialism, or narrow Canadianism or provincialism; but that remains essentially Canadian and inspired by the love of country and the maintenance of Canadian liberties and traditions. If it be true that this type of patriotism does not preclude our humanitarian feelings from responding to the allied nations' appeal, our answer must not, however, go to extremes, but rather remain within the bounds of common sense.
Mr. Speaker, after three years of war, our debt, which in 1939 amounted to $3,000,000,000 has reached the staggering total of $8,000,000,000, or $700 per capita. This means that four years of war will have almost trebled the debt which Canada had after 73 years of existence as a confederation. Therefore, I understand how Mr. T. V. Soong, Chinas foreign minister, could state on November 3rd, 1942, that in this war Canada had, in proportion to her population achieved more than any other country in the world. During the last three years Canada has put all her resources in the prosecution of the war. We had no army in 1939. In 1943, we have overseas 200,000 men ready to serve anywhere as volunteers and in this country over 225,000 soldiers for the defence of Canada as recruits. In 1939, what did our navy amount to? We had fifteen ships, mostly of small tonnage, and a total number of 1,774 enlisted sailors. In 1943, we have 500 warships or corvettes, sailing the seven seas, with a strength of over 50,000 men. We had no air force in 1939; in 1943, we have on active service 150,000 men most of whom are gaining fame over occupied Europe. The male population of Canada, that is .men from 19 to 45 years old, numbering 2,215,800, has supplied so far nearly 800,000 men, volunteers or recruits, or almost one third. In proportion to her population, Canada is now taxed more heavily than Great Britain or the United States. Can we do better? Can we accomplish more than that? Can we go farther? The champions of imperialism continue to proclaim that this is not enough.

Mr. Speaker, I have no imperialistic leanings, and I condemn those who, while living
in this country, have more love for the empire than for Canada. I am not anti-British, because I have never been ashamed of being a citizen of the Empire. A descendant of people who settled here two hundred years ago, I have the right and the duty of being above all a citizen of Canada. I said Canada, Mr. Speaker, not Quebec. I love my province, I would defend her against any one, but the sincere love I have for her imparts to my patriotism a truly national character. I also consider as extravagant the gift of $1,000,000,000 made last year to Great Britain, and the loans we have made to her, in view of the fact that at that very time Great Britain was loaning money with interest to foreign countries. 1 support the speech from the throne for the legislation as a whole which it forecasts, but I reserve the right to take such decision as I consider best when bills providing for such gifts and for the creation of the board which alone will see to their allotment, come up for discussion in this house. I have been at variance with the government in the past, and I shall still be whenever I feel it -my duty. I was elected to uphold in this parliament the principles which my constituents have commissioned me to defend1 in 1940. I am here for that sole purpose. I shall remain on this side of the house, because freedom of speech prevails here, and I regret that some Liberals have seen fit to found new parties when they could exercise that right to voice all their views.
The amendment moved by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) will not have my support. That amendment takes the government to task for having "failed to provide for the effective use of Canada's man- and woman-power". In other words, we should have mobilized all our man-power and poured it overseas so as to obey the old imperialistic slogan "help the empire". I have already said in this house that Canada had no orders to take from any one as regards the conduct of her own affairs. I cannot admit that the empire has a right to ask us everything, to demand everything from us and that we should always be bound to grant all its requests.
Again, we are in no way bound to accept the decisions taken by the British general staff when we have no voice in the council. If Canada is in this war of its free will, as we are often told, it should not be the servant* of anyone, but the equal of the other nations that battle to crush Hitler.
Has any other doctrine than that of out-and-out imperialism ever been preached by

The Address-Air. Bertrand (Terrebonne)
the Conservative party? If to-day that party camouflages its doctrine under a borrowed name, does it imagine that the new frock will hide its past? Even after twenty-five yeurs that party still drags, as a millstone, the responsibility of the abuses, waste and nefarious legislation of the last war. Behind it, financial and privileged interests take cover, men eager for power hide; the imperialist clique, always an obstacle to the unity in this country by its appeals to prejudice, by its lectures, literature and propaganda, by raising English against French, stands in the background. Imperialist history has not changed; it adheres to the same principles, the same errors, the same opinions, the same propaganda, the same programme. Never enough, claim the imperialists. All for the empire, nothing for Canada. I have this to say: this war was in the first place a European war; America became involved afterwards; it is now a world war. Why should so many lecturers come and tell us that we should fight, contribute everything to save the empire? Canada is in this war to-day not for the empire but for something greater than all empires; for the triumph of democratic principles and ideals in the world, for the maintenance of a civilization founded on respect for Almighty God and the cult of human liberty. Shall I vote for the subamendment moved by the C.C.F. leader (Mr. Coldwell) ? No. Does not the sub-amendment favour a total war effort? Manpower, but together with all other national resources. When so many doctrines pave an easy road toward new methods of government, I claim we would be mistaken should we move toward advanced socialism and destroy with one sweep the edifice built by the labour of mankind under private enterprise.
The social legislation forecast in the speech from the throne appeals to me. Is it timely? I would think so. As Gustave LeBon wrote: "To foresee is useful, to forestall is more useful still. To foresee is to remove the unexpected from the future. To forestall is to nullify the elements of surprise." We shall come out of this conflict impoverished but free. Problems, however, shall not be lacking: the adjustments to be made in countless fields; the return to civil life of thousands of soldiers; the change over to a commercial and industrial footing of thousands of plants having suspended normal operations due to the war; the exacting economic conditions with their various and universal effects. This critical post-war period frightens me and I congratulate the government for its determination to
prepare right now for what the future might unexpectedly spring upon us. Nothing could be more unfortunate in my estimation than to see, after a war costing billions of dollars, the hideous spectre of unemployment over thousands of Canadian homes and to countenance once again thousands of brows furrowed with care because hands are forced into idleness. On the other hand, nothing would please me more than to see us come out of this war without shock or upheaval, thus giving palpable proof that happiness can yet be attained in every walk of life on this Canadian soil, that soldiers whose civil careers had been halted by the ambition of the great can still through gainful employment let such dreams blossom forth as have not been crushed by the war; nothing would please me more than to see industrial plants and factories enter with renewed facilities into a period of progress and prosperity, should all those war plants scattered throughout the land become the nuclei of industrial centres for the greater benefit of the whole nation.
The year 1943 marks a turning point in the war. There is a promise of better days soon to come. Events seem to forecast final victory in a near future. Following a common road we cooperate ever more closely with the United States sharing a common ideal, vying with them in courage and in love of liberty. A part of the Americas, Canada is called upon to play an important role on this continent and no less an important role among the nations of the world. Canada is a nation. A nation has a soul. It comes from a common historical treasure of greatness, great men and great achievements, of customs and traditions, of sorrows and triumphs, all of which go to make up the social asset at the very origin of a national ideal. This soul is born of the will to develop together the common heritage and) a common love of country becomes the indispensable bond that makes for a strong nation, for a firm social structure. Now, patriotism inspires us to defend the country in its hour of peril and I know not of any Canadian who would be lacking in courage on that score. Patriotism puts no obstacle, in view of the divine precept of charity, to helping within the bounds of one's resources other countries in the throes of adversity; we have not failed to observe that precept. To attain greatness a people must have achieved great things and still harbour great designs: such are my people.


Mr. G. RUSSELL BOUCHER (Carleton):: A great deal has already been said in this debate concerning the address in reply to the
The Address-Mr. Boucher

speech from the throne, but I should like to make, if I can, a little contribution in furtherance of this discussion.
I believe the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) has pretty well set out the policy of the Progressive Conservative party in relation to the matters that are most urgent in our country to-day. I believe, too, that the Hon. John Bracken, in his fourteen points, given some time before the Winnipeg convention, when he was guiding the provincial ship of state and before he took the helm of the national dreadnought, has set a beacon at which this government might very well aim and, I think, has aimed to some extent in the speech from the throne.
As I listened to the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) describing the little old lady who went to Winnipeg, got her divorce, married her new love-as he stated -and came back to the ship of state, I could not help feeling that, in the light of the attitude of the socialist party for which he spoke, who in western Canada call themselves the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, Labour, and Farmers' party and are so addicted to bigamy in their three-foldi name, their three-fold life, and their practice of bridegrooms' promises, the hon. member should be well qualified to make that comparison.
I also understand that the hon. member for York South has been for some time in the teaching profession and that as a teacher in a secondary school he is expected to know a good deal of history. I am afraid that his lack of knowledge of Canadian history and Canadian parliamentary institutions displayed itself rather flagrantly in that he did not know, or did not profess to know, that the leader of this dominion at the time of confederation, Sir John A. Macdonald, called this party the Progressive Conservative party.
I should like to join those who have already spoken in this debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne in drawing the attention of the house to what I regard as a most regrettable omission, the failure to mention or, at any rate, sufficiently mention the most important and most critical problems facing our country to-day-man-power and woman-power; labour relations; agriculture; and, I might add, finance as a fourth.
Our most difficult problem, a problem demanding immediate attention in Canada, is the allocation of man-power. It will be generally agreed, I believe, that the drawing of men and women from peace-time pursuits into war production, to the extent that we have carried it, does of necessity diminish the supply of labour, but I do not think we in Canada

can say that we are really short of labour yet. Our problem is the result of improper placement of labour. Labour is not used in the most efficient manner, and the government of the day has lacked initiative and courage. It has not shown the initiative which it should have done in the placing of men and women.
I was privileged this fall, as a member of the war expenditures committee, to visit a great many of the aeroplane production plants in Canada, as well as some in the United States. What struck me with amazing force was the part which women are playing to-day in the manufacture of aeroplanes in this country. I believe that about fifteen or twenty per cent of our employees in aircraft production are women. In one of the great factories of the United States the percentage is as high as forty, of women engaged in that industry. The objective is from sixty-five to seventy-five per cent of women employees in aircraft production. That is their immediate objective, and it is one at which we, as members of the House of Commons, and the government particularly, could very well aim. The women of the country, I am sure, are only too willing to put their hands and their hearts into an all-out war production effort, but that problem has scarcely yet been touched in Canada. In the allocation of man-power we have something that could not only harness our manpower and increase our production but, to a great extent, bring about equality of sacrifice and continuity as well as equality of service among the Canadian people.
Take the position of key men in industry. That is a serious point in the war effort to-day. Expanding our industries as we are doing and training our men as we are, throughout the length and breadth of Canada, as members of that committee we could see that particularly in the aircraft production industry many of our key men, many of our best trained men in the field of aircraft production, men skilled in the production of certain types of planes, were on what was known as slowdowns through lack of material, as a result of the inefficient allocation of man-power in our primary industries producing raw materials. Our plants were capable of manufacturing two, three and even four times what they are now doing. They had the men, to a great extent capable men, and the plants were certainly capable of manufacturing aircraft; but the men were sitting down, slowed down waiting for material. They were held by the firms who had employed them, where the organizations were disrupted by reason of slack time, waiting for conversion of a factory from one type of plane to another, instead of being

The Address-Mr. Boucher
placed elsewhere, where they could be giving all they had to an all-out effort. This was quite demoralizing to employees who, as faithful, loyal, anxious and courageous citizens, wish to do all they can in industry to further our war effort. A key man in a certain factory, making a certain type of aeroplane, found his factory converted to the manufacture of another type. He had special techniques, capabilities and experience to do that particular job. Why could he not have been moved to a firm who could use him, where his technical skill could be used to advantage in an all-out war effort, instead of slowing down, waiting until a new type of production was embarked upon by the firm for which he worked?
That condition was prevalent all across the dominion, not only in the aircraft industry, but certainly in the shipbuilding industry as well, and in other industrial enterprises. What could be more serious to the war effort than such a situation, when we want to produce all we can? In the failure of the government to mention this matter in the speech from the throne they have failed to mention the most important problem, probably the most difficult that is facing our country at the present time.
The allocation of man-power applies not only to industry but also to agriculture, which comprises one-third of our population drawing only one-sixth of the national income. Let me quote the words of a great man in the United States, a former president, who in a speech in New York on January 21, made this statement:
Agriculture simply must be envisaged as a munitions industry. The farmer must receive men and tools if he is to perform his part. . . . The shortage of labour, of machinery and methods of price control are limiting the vitally essential expansion of this production, and the flocks and herds upon which production depends. And unless we can quickly realize and quickly reverse these limiting forces there are dangers to the conduct of the war.
That is a quotation from a former president of the United States, a country which has been just a little over one year in the war, whereas we are in our fourth year.
Another matter to which I direct the attention of the government is that of existing labour relations in Canada. I do not wish to dwell in detail upon it; but with regard to the steel strike, I am of opinion that the rate of wages paid1 to labour, in comparison with tripling and quadrupling the rate paid in salaries to some officials in the management of the companies, constitutes a just complaint which is not only demoralizing to the war effort, but depressing in its effect upon production. This is a factor causing greatly increased costs of production. I do not think I would be far astray in this statement, that if the materials were available we have the plants; and with the men, if labour relations were as they should be, we could increase our production of aeroplanes at least three times what it is at present with the factories we now have set up in Canada.
Another thing to which I object, as affecting both industry and agriculture, is the repeated call for men to serve in the armed forces and the uncertainty of the men as to when they will be called from munitions production or from agriculture into the armed forces. The men in industry and agriculture are some of the best we have in Canada, some of the most loyal and patriotic men, the furthest from slackers, men who would be the last to want to feel that they were not doing their utmost in the war effort.
Perhaps agriculture would give the best illustration. Let us consider the case of the young man on the farm. He has been raised on the farm; he has spent his whole life on the farm. He has received his education from the farm and has studied the various principles of farm operation, such as the rotation of crops, maintaining fertility on the land, the proper feeding of his stocks and flocks, the proper cultivating of his land, the planning of seasonal crops a year ahead. He has studied the multifarious sciences, such as the complicated science of marketing. He may have had an education in primary and secondary schools, and may have even attended university. But he is now on the soil, and he feels that he may be called from that soil some day-but he does not know when. It may be a call in three months or in six months, and he may be granted a postponement-but there is no certainty whatsoever of his getting off. In fact, in my own experience very often they do not hear from their applications for postponement until the very day they have to report for military service, or after.
What chance has this young man to use his scientific knowledge? He has applied himself with sincerity and devotion to his mode of life, to the mode of production on the farm, to the complicated problem of progressive agriculture, and the uncertainty connected therewith. What opportunity has his employer, be it his father or otherwise, a year in advance to plan crops, to decide how many milch cows he will keep, how many hens he will have, how many sheep or hogs he will keep, what grain he will grow? What folly it would be for a farmer in these days,
The Address-Mr. Boucher

in view of the shortage of farm help, to plan on keeping sixty or seventy milch cows, and to rotate his crops on a 100 or 150 acres of land! What folly it would be for him to plan his seasonal occupations, when he does not know that his son or his hired man may be called the following day for military service 1
Several illustrations have come to my attention. Before, however, making any further comments, may I say that my objection is not levelled in any way against the registrar in military district No. 3. I believe the registrar and the selective service board in military district No. 3 have properly reflected government policy. I have no personal criticism to make of them. But I have had many young men come to my office to see me. I have had young men come to see me the very day they were to report for military service, and tell me they had made application for postponement three or four weeks, or a month or two months before, and had no reply. They asked me what to do. These young men were in unfortunate predicaments If they signed up, volunteering their services in the armed forces, they could count on just about six months more trying to get out-if they ever could. If, on the other hand, they stayed away and suffered the_ shame and ignominy which would be theirs, the condition would not be relieved, These men would not suffer that shame, but would prefer to answer the call.
On many occasions I have had to go to my telephone and communicate with the registrar at Kingston, Ontario. The registrar could not know whether this man was or was not a good farmer. I have tried to find out what attention would be given to his application, and I have had the registrar tell me, "Well, I will fix it up for him; tell him to wait until he hears from me."
This does not lend itself to efficiency. It does not lend itself to encouragement to agricultural workers in our country to put their heart and sold into the production of cheese and bacon, which the government would lead the worker to think they want him to produce. The agricultural worker is told that the world requires these commodities and that he should produce them.
But, once he has got into the armed forces, up to a short time ago when an announcement was made-and possibly even after that announcement, if one reads it carefully- whether or not he was a farmer's son, whether or not he had been spending his life in agriculture, whether or not he was a specialist in that industry, if he was in the militarv ser-
TMr. Boucher.1
vices he had about one chance in a hundred of ever getting back into agricultural production.
I remember one case very clearly. It had to do with an only son and two sisters, whose father had died a year earlier. These children lived with their mother on a 250-acre farm. They had eighteen milch cows, all the necessary machinery, splendid and fertile dairy land. This young man received his call for military service. Fearing he might be put into the army, and desiring to enlist in the air force, he proceeded to join that force. He had been in it for only two weeks when the one and only hired man they had left them. There was the mother with her two daughters left to look after a herd of cattle. I believe I am correct when I say that there were forty head of cattle altogether, including the eighteen milch cows. In addition, there were 200 hens, and 150 acres were under cultivation, the remaining 100 acres being held for pasture. The woman and her two daughters were left to farm that land.
Upon application being made by the young man, myself and many others, to let him return to the farm, where he was so urgently needed, we received the answer that there was no change in his situation. The attitude was: He knew what he was doing when he enlisted; he cannot get out of it. What happened as a result of this? The farm was converted from a dairying farm to pasture land. The mother and daughters had to leave their house and their farm.
Another case was brought to my attention. In this instance I interceded for an only son whose father and mother were both ill. The mother was confined to bed, as a cripple. The father was arthritic, and was not able to carry on his duties around the farm. This young man signed up under these circumstances. No leave of absence or discharge could be secured for him.
I know about a third case, and I point this one out as indicating something which the selective service board may possibly cure. I think they must cure it, and I surely hope they will, under the recent announcement. In this instance the farmer in question had three boys, one of whom was laid up with a heart condition, which left him incapable of doing the heavy work on the farm. The second was laid up with a stomach condition, rendering him unfit for work. The third was called. He signed up, leaving his sick brothers at home to look after a herd of sixty-seven milch cows. In this instance the farm consisted of 250 acres of tillable land. This boy applied for leave of absence-not a discharge. He wished to return to work on the farm, and was refused.

The Address-Mr. Boucher
He obtained a doctor's certificate to the effect that the father could not look after the farm. Upon a rehearing being permitted, it was stated that the authorities had thought that the two boys left at home could run the farm. They pointed out, however, that upon reviewing the circumstances they saw matters in a new light. They realized that the situation had changed since the boy had enlisted, and they permitted him to go back for six nxonths.
I believe all hon. members have their hearts and souls in the soil of Canada. Few of us have not had sufficient contact with agriculture in Canada to appreciate how difficult it is for the agriculturist to carry on progressively under prevailing conditions. Each of us will realize that to become a successful farmer requires many years of hard work; one must become accustomed to the mode of living. It is a highly developed vocation. Yet in these diays we see farmers staying at home who are not permitted to sell a pound of butter manufactured on their own farms. A farmer may not kill his own pig for his own use, without first obtaining permission. Were we to engage in farming we would find that it requires some planning, and I certainly think the farmer merits more consideration than he is receiving.
For these reasons I welcome the announcement made the other day that the strings with respect to national selective service, as far as agriculture is concerned, are going to be loosened. My only regret is that the extent to which they are to be loosened was not announced long before this.
In my community many a herd of milch cows has been reduced and many a farmer has had to discontinue his activities, for I think it will be found that enlistments in the army from my constituency compare favourably with those from any other constituency in Canada. What is the farmer getting for the milk he has to sell? He is receiving the very same price he was getting in the depth of the depression. To-day in the city of Ottawa milk sells for twelve cents a quart, including a bonus of two cents paid by this government to the consumer, not to the producer. That was the price four years ago.
I now come to the price ceiling, which is of greatest concern to the farmer. I think every hon. member will agree that there is a great deal of truth in the old adage that farm prices are the last to rise and the first to drop. The object of having ceilings on prices is commendable; but in order to fit into our national economy these ceiling prices must be fair in our national interest. These
ceilings were put on in the fall of the year, when in the main the produce of the farms was ready for marketing. This was done just after we had emerged from a depression, when the business man was able to raise his prices, change his brands, cut down on quality and quantity and do whatever else might be done in order to meet the fixed price. As usual, however, agriculture was behind commercial enterprise in raising its prices, and those prices did not reach the levels they should have been allowed to attain.
What has been done to meet the situation? Well, the government give a bonus on cheese. That is all very well. They give a bonus on butter, but that bonus is given to the consumer. A bonus is given on milk, but no part of those two cents a quart goes to the benefit of the producer. The only way in which the bonus on butter can help the farmer is by increasing the consumption of butter, but the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) and the government would have us believe that it is the duty of the farmer to convert his milk into cheese. He cannot do both. Then there is the farmer who manufactures his own butter, which he brings to the city and tries to sell. He cannot sell it unless he collects coupons, and he can collect only so many coupons from each individual. What an encouragement to agriculture that is! Then there is the question of farm wages. I do not think there is anyone in this house interested in agriculture who will not deplore the shortage of help on the farms. Why is there such a shortage? There are two reasons: either the farmer's son has left, or the farmer cannot pay wages high enough to get a man to help with the work. Agriculture demands long hours, with heavy work, which can be done only by those who have been accustomed to it. How many people not brought up on a farm can go out and establish themselves on the land, and produce as progressive and thrifty farmers do? I ask hon. members to compare the wages being paid to-day. A man driving a truck for an industrial concern can get eighty cents an hour. Can any farmer in Canada pay eighty cents an hour for a man to operate his power machinery? Is that not the best answer we have to any talk of equality of service and of sacrifice for our farmers? Or there is the other answer, the fact that one-third of the people of Canada who are engaged in agriculture receive only one-sixth of the national income. I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that until the farmer can afford to compete with industry for labour, he is not getting his proper share of the national income.
The Address-Mr. Boucher

What can. we do about the matter? First, there are the national selective service hoards. How many agriculturists are given positions to advise the registrars as to what farmers' sons are needed on the farms, as to what farmers should be called and what farmers should not be called? In my own case the registrar is at Kingston, almost a hundred miles away from my community. How can he know whether John is a good agriculturist, turning in a good war effort on his farm, and Tom is not? I believe that was the reason for the action taken in the case I mentioned a short time ago, where the man made application for a six months' postponement and was refused. To-day a farmer may send his son or daughter into industry, into the army, or into the civil service. If the daughter enters the civil service she receives a cost of living bonus, and rightly; but dad does not. That daughter comes to Ottawa ; she gets her meals in a restaurant, where there is supposed to be a price ceiling. Will any hon. member say that restaurants serve meals of the same quantity and quality to-day as they served before the price was fixed? Go up to our parliamentary restaurant and see; you will get one potato instead of two, and someone says that is not a good one either. The daughter receives a cost of living bonus, superannuation benefits, and all the rest of it; she sees the millions of dollars being spent on temporary buildings which are to be removed within six months after the war is over; she sees the billions of dollars being advanced to industry to speed up war production. Then she goes home on a visit to dad and mother and says, "What about you?"
I had intended to go into the question of finance, Mr. Speaker, because I believe the people of -Canada are critical of the millions of dollars being spent on temporary buildings, on the construction of munitions plants, on the large increases to the already high salaries.
I have every sympathy with civil servants in the low income brackets, who are paid S60 or $70 or $75 a month and who must pay $30 or $35 for board; but even so, that is more than their father and mother -are earning on the farm. As they see the vast industrial expansion; as their sons and daughters return home and tell them of the conditions under which- they must live in Ottawa, it is a wonder there is not much more discontent. It is no marvel to me that the agriculturist, able as .he is to see what is going on, should ask for parity and equality of treatment.


Mr. L. A. MUTOH (Winnipeg South):: Mr. Speaker, I -am not one of those who would 
let the seriousness of the 'hour or the seriousness of my own remarks deter me from those amenities of life which, even in troublesome times like these, may -be more pleasant than [DOT]they otherwise might be. For that reason I elect to begin in the traditional way by extending my compliments to the mover (Mr. Harris) and the seconder (Mr. Halle) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I would be remiss if I did otherwise at this moment than address a remark to a personal friend of mine who has been done a most signal honour since this house last met. I refer to the present leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon). I mentioned to him before, and I should like to remind him again, that a signal honour 'has been done to him because there is the probability of his going down to posterity as the last leader of the once great Conservative party.
It will not be expected of me in this house at this time that I should attempt to make a political speech, neither will it be expected that I should fail to comment upon at least one event which took place in or near the constituency which I have the honour -to represent. While I accept no responsibility for it, I was interested in what took place in the city of Winnipeg during the past few months when an honour was done to one of my most distinguished constituents in the person of the Hon. John Bracken when -the late Conservative party surrendered to him at Winnipeg. The people of Winnipeg, and indeed the people of all Manitoba I think will join with me in a feeling of some natural pride that a man whom most of us have known at one time or another has been so signally honoured by an old and established -we thought it was established

political party. With respect to that I should like to make just one observation. I do not think I shall be misunderstood when I say that if the erstwhile Conservative party can do as much for John Bracken in the federal field as the Liberal party did for him in the -provincial field, then he is one of the most fortunate men that Canada has produced.
I do not think I have ever made in this house anything approaching the nature of a constituency speech. There may be some difference of opinion about -that, but in any event I do not think I ever did. For a little time to-night I propose to speak about, not only the constituency which I have the honour to represent but the city of Winnipeg and the province of Manitoba as a whole. We in Manitoba during the war have done a magnificent job. Thousands of our finest sons are

The Address-Mr. Mutch
carrying Canada's battle might by land and sea and air throughout all the fields of operation of the present war. Two of as fine regiments as 'have ever left Canada have suffered grievous sacrifice, almost elimination, first at Hong Kong and then at Dieppe. No loan which has been put before the people of Manitoba has failed of its quota; no appeal for the Red Cross, no appeal to sacrifice has ever gone unheeded. During the period of the war all of these appeals have been exceeded by the citizens of that city and that province.
Take salvage collection alone. The figures in connection with national salvage collection came to my desk the other day, and they showed that the voluntary collections in Manitoba amounted to 42,167 pounds per thousand of people. The nearest province to Manitoba was Ontario with a figure of 37,100 pounds per thousand, but our original figure was almost double that of nearly every other province in the Dominion of Canada. These figures indicate the war-mindedness, the war spirit and the earnest desire of the people of the city of Winnipeg and the province of Manitoba to make their full weight felt in this war. We are proud of these results, but we are by no means satisfied with them.
I should like to say to the house, to the members of the government and to all who may be interested that the contribution which Winnipeg and Manitoba are making to the war effort is not contingent upon any quid pro quo return by way of those advantages in the way of distribution of work and the added increment of wages which accrue in some places at some times in a state of war. Up to the middle of 1940 any war contracts accruing to the city of Winnipeg constituted a mere trickle, and at no time have they bulked large in the economic life of the province. It is perfectly true that we have one large and successfully operated war plant, a plant which is an outgrowth of the war, due entirely to the war, and for the work which has been given, for the opportunity which has been accorded to share in the war contribution, we are indeed grateful.
Responsible thinking people in the city of Winnipeg do not ask that one man should work for one day at a job which is no longer essential to the war effort of Canada, but we do object to the suggestion which is put out at times that the full weight of the manpower of Canada, and to a lesser extent the machine-power of Canada, are employed in this war when we have in our own city and province a residue of unemployment, a considerable number of employables who are
possessed of skills but who are not yet employed, and a considerable backlog of unskilled labour which is capable and willing and anxious to share in the industrial war effort of this country. What we desire is that in the fulness of the national effort we be given an opportunity to utilize those powers which we have, in order that our contribution to the war effort of Canada may be as great as possible. We can show unused resources, and we are now ready to share fully in the war effort.
I do not think anyone in the province of Manitoba or in the city of Winnipeg thinks of war contracts as a sort of melon to be cut. I have never heard any responsible person say that because we have sent so many thousands of men, so many thousands of our women into the service of Canada, both at home and elsewhere, because of their sacrifice and effort, we have a right to participate in any economic melon or anything of that description. That is not the background of the complaint which I desire to register in this house to-night. We want a full opportunity to contribute and, frankly, we do not think we have had it.
In the last few months I have had an opportunity to travel over considerable portions of Canada, and I suggest in all seriousness that there has been plant expansion which is both unnecessary and uneconomical and, as far as I can see, wholly unjustifiable in view of what remains available in other parts of Canada, particularly that part from which I come. I do not suggest that this is the major breakdown, but I do know the potentialities, the unused reservoir if you like, of labour that is available. Again I suggest that the magnitude of this expansion was unnecessary, and the practice should not be perpetuated. In my opinion, workers should not be sharing work and wages to-day anywhere in Canada in order to keep their number employed if we were in a position fully to utilize, as we have sometimes said we were, the whole man-power and woman-power of the nation.
There is one suggestion that I should like to make. I do not wish to deal with it in detail, but I will place the information I have before the minister who probably can do something about it. I speak of steel for fabrication. It is no military secret that steel is constantly going through Winnipeg to British Columbia for fabrication, where we are told that facilities are already congested and conditions sometimes unsettled. We have facilities in Winnipeg for the fabrication of steel. I know something of the arguments against it, the problem of trans-shipment.

The Address-Mr. Mutch
Simplicity of design; the potentialities of the fabricating plants in Winnipeg are matters about which I am not particularly qualified to speak. Therefore I will not be technical, but I suggest to the minister, the government and the house that consideration should be given to the provision of some of these simple expedients for a fuller and freer opportunity for our people at this time.
I have seen factories built or reconditioned in a certain spot in the middle east of Canada, because there was in that particular place what the minister called a pocket of unemployment, yet within 150 miles of there work was plentiful and a cry was going out for labourers. I do not object to the building or reconditioning of such plants in order to provide work there for those Canadian workers who prefer to stay in their own homes. But I do not think it jibes very well with the suggestion made, I do not know how officially, but certainly unofficially, that we ship our unemployed population across half the continent.


Mr. KNOWLES:: It is being done right now.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: I do not even regret that.
I say I am glad they are being given an opportunity anywhere. But I am registering my protest against that discrepancy. I am not admitting for a moment that full consideration has been given to the situation in Winnipeg. I do know that a deliberate attempt has been and is being made, and the, cause, of those workers has been bedevilled, by people who seek to make political capital out of workers' misfortune. That being the situation, is it to be wondered at that some of our people are willing to follow' will-o'-the-wisps, to listen to the persons that some call prophets of doom? Is it to be wondered at that many of our people are worrying not so much as to whether we are going to have another depression after the war as when the one they have been living in for the past ten or fifteen years is going to end? And is it to be wondered if some ask the question, if in a time when Canada is all out in the war effort we cannot get a break, what hope is there about what may come after? This is aggravated by the fact that this country is full of unthinking people who go up and down prophesying distress and misfortune when the war is over. I do not make any bones about who these prophets of doom are; they are the people who hope to get political power in this country after the war if, as they hope or at any rate proclaim, we are in for a bad time once the war is over.
Personally I have no fear of the aftermath of this war on Canada. I do not think anything that we in this house in our wisdom or lack of it can do can hold back the future destiny of this dominion. I look forward to seeing within fifteen or eighteen years, or at the most twenty years after the close of the war, thirty million people in Canada. I hope in twenty-five years to see forty million. Would anyone say now, in view of what we know, that -this is impossible? Dare anyone stand up against the surging tide of humanity that will be inevitable when the holocaust that we are now enduring is over? Mankind is bound to surge from the wreckage and destruction of the old world to build again in the new world, encompassed by the freedoms for which we fight. We must look to a necessary and, as far as I am concerned, welcome period of mass immigration into this country when the war is over. Some will say, selective immigration; with that I have no quarrel. Let it be selective as to health, as to skills, as far as that is humanly possible. But I wonder how long artificial selective principles can stand against the march of 'humanity in view of conditions which prevail, not in isolated spots in Europe but throughout practically the whole of the known world to-day with the exception of our own fortunate north American continent. The tide will turn to us. If we catch it on the flood, we can do in twenty-five years in Canada what it took England seventy-five years to do and what the United States with the policy of the open door scarcely accomplished in fifty years. That is one thing the war is doing for us, one opportunity it has placed at our front door.
If we believe that, as I do, I wonder why we are delving into the dead ashes of yesterday. Yesterday cannot come again. To-morrow will be better or worse as we make it. I am not in the least afraid that when the war is over we shall slip back into repetition of the mistakes of the days following the last war or of the depression. I expect we shall make new mistakes. I do not think all the foresight, wisdom and legislation this side of eternity can prevent some mistakes being made or even the repetition of some of those we made before, because society is not a static thing. If mankind followed a precise and perfect pattern throughout the ages or even throughout a generation, we might be able to look back and say, Yesterday we made this mistake; we will not make it again. But in our social legislation or social thinking or national thinking we must not be in the position of turning our eyes backward all the time in order to keep constantly in our memory the mistakes we made. We are all equally guilty or bear
fMr. Mutch.]

The Address-Mr. Mutch
our share of responsibility for the shortcomings of that era, and I include the prophets of the new utopia with the rest. The only difference between them and us is that they are trying to perpetuate the memory, to seize on that unfortunate chapter of our history and intimate that while the rest of us were going to economic damnation along certain lines, they were looking the other way seeking in order to prevent the anchor from dragging.
I do not see it that way. They look to the past, saying to the public, Look here, when the whole works start to slip back down the hill we have the biggest block to put under the wheel; we have something brand new to block the wheel with, and if you will trust us you will never go back. But you will not get up the hill by blocking the wheel. My wish is that when the time comes to resume our upward climb we shall have the vision to give new leadership so that all will put their shoulder to the wheel in the spirit of the pioneers, who came to this country not just to get rid of persecution and difficulty and merely hoping to have exactly what they had over there except for the removal of the things that troubled them. They were not satisfied with that; they did not endure the hardships of the pioneer for that; they came to build something better, not only something which did away with the things which caused them to come here, but something finer and better for their sons than had existed before.
I venture to say that this is the spirit which motivates large numbers of the people of Manitoba. We have not been caught up in the dizzy whirl of the intense activities of the industrialized parts of Canada. We have had time in the evenings, and some of us unfortunately in the daytime, to look at the picture of the past, to think about those sons and daughters of ours who are not *with us, who are engaged elsewhere, and we are thinking of what is going to happen to them when they return. We are wondering what we are going to be able to offer them; and, if the boys who are in the actual theatres of war are also wondering what they are to return to, if it is any consolation to them at the present time, we too are thinking about it. One of our conclusions is that we cannot go along forever with twelve or fifteen million people scattered across a country which has a governmental and industrial set-up sufficient for a terrific expansion of population. Many of us on the prairies have watched the growth of the city of Winnipeg. Some remember it when it was hardly more than a very small town. I cannot go back that far, but I have seen the population doubled. We recall some of the conditions which caused it to grow, which kept its
sons and daughters at home and made them busy. We are determined that some of those conditions shall return, and we do not expect to accomplish our purpose entirely by legislating ourselves into utopia.
We cannot think all the time of to-morrow; and, as 1 have said, we should not look backwards except for a moment or two, for humility's sake. It is not enough to have a vision of the future. It is not enough to make up our minds that we will not repeat the mistakes of the past. There is also some obligation to look at the problems of to-day.
I should have liked to speak for a little while, though I shall not do so, about the military contribution which Canada is making in the war. I shall reserve my remarks on that subject to a later time when the department concerned is under discussion and the minister has been restored to health and is in the house.
But there are problems of urgent importance. The plight of the aged in Canada cries aloud for more generous consideration, and I suggest to the government and to the house that the British North America Act will not do for our present needs. Canada expects a better deal and she wants it now.
We are concerned about attacks on the price control measures. We believe in stern measures against those who, for selfish reasons, attempt to undermine the protective influences of both price and wages legislation. Stern measures in dealing with those selfish attempts where they occur would meet with proper acclaim. I would suggest that control must not become a weapon in the hands of either side in an attempt at class war, and the government must see to it, if they are to get the popular support which controls require, that control is a means to an end and not an end in itself. No union, no combine, no individual can afford at this stage of Canada's struggle to contribute for selfish or unworthy ends to the weakening of any war effort.
We cannot overlook the problems of those who are dependent upon the state. I have pleaded on three or four occasions for further consideration of the lot of the aged. I have in committee and in this chamber appealed on more than one occasion for better treatment of the widows of the men who fell in the last war or who have died since, and I am grateful for the announcement that some provision along that line is to be made.
I do not believe that the government or the provinces can afford to wait until the end of the war before doing something about the housing situation in this dominion. I know there is a problem of raw materials as well as of securing skilled labour for doing the work.
The Address-Mr. Mutch

. But I suggest seriously that the war effort itself is suffering in a major degree in at least some parts of Canada by virtue of our inability as yet to figure out a way to deal with this situation. I do not suggest that there is an unwillingness to deal with it, but I maintain that we have been incapable of dealing with it up to this point and that we require to do more about it, and to do it now, if we are to sustain our proud boast that we are getting the maximum of effort from our people.
One other matter, and I shall close. We had in Canada in pre-war days a degree of sectionalism which thwarted the best efforts of the finest minds that have been engaged in the problem of governing Canada for the past twenty years. I am happy to say of my own knowledge that to a large extent that narrow sectional attitude has been dissipated throughout the period of this war. I come from the west, and for seven or eight years I have stood with good humour all the jokes with respect to the desires, idiosyncrasies and peculiarities of the people of the west. In return I have made various retorts, pungent or otherwise, depending upon the degree of intimacy, which have been endured with good humour. I suggest to the administration, because it is a matter of great concern to them, that to proceed with a measure for the lessening of the representation of western Canada, and particularly of Manitoba and Saskatchewan, in this house during the period of the war is to invite the resurgence of a bitterness which has largely evaporated' during the last few years. It is likely to accentuate every nasty insinuation which has ever gone on the record, and which is in the process of being forgotten. Although we believe that our contribution in the war is as good as anyone's, as I have said before, we do not ask for our contribution a quid pro' quo in the matter of the distribution of the things which come out of the war, except in so far as it is in the general interest of the war effort. Our people ask no more than that. But we cannot go home-I question if anybody from Manitoba or Saskatchewan can go home-to our people and1 convince them that they are anything but stepchildren in the family of Canada if, at a time when by every single word which is said in this house and in every act which is passed in this house or by order in council our lives and the lives of our children are affected, this measure of restriction is to be applied. We do not feel that we are overrepresented. There are some who may question the quality of the representation.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hear, hear.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: My hon. friend may find it
out. Perhaps there are some who question it, but there is hardly anyone who believes that we are overrepresented; in view of the fact that almost every other section of the dominion has, at one time or another, perhaps for lesser cause than exists to-day, been able either to fix its representation or enhance it. I do not want this to sound like an attack; I do not intend it to be such. But it is not good enough to say that some well-established practice that has existed for a period of years is one of those sacred necessities which we cannot disturb in a time of war. To me that is hooey. We think a way can be found to suspend it and to protect our representation in this period until such time as those thousands of our people who are serving either overseas or in other parts of Canada can come back and we can get in the prairies that representation of population which is relative to the natural home and habitat of those people. We desire, and I think most of us demand, that the matter be left for the period of the war and a reasonable period of adjustment afterwards.


Mr. J. G. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: I wish to take a few minutes of the time of the house to bring forward some ideas which I should like to have the government consider before they proceed with legislation, or before the budget comes down. First of all, I want to say a word with regard to trade. To-day in the House of Commons, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) ro9e in his place and, I think, convinced everybody of the difficulty that Great Britain and other parts of the empire are having in an endeavour to pay, partly at least, for the commodities that Canada is' sending forward to that country to help them in the war, and to help us through them. Therefore I say that to have any tariff whatever against Great Britain at this time is absolutely ridiculous. To put anything in the way of allowing Great Britain at this time to ship goods into this country to help to pay for the commodities that she is getting from us is too foolish, and I hope that the government, during this session, will see to it that tariffs are entirely wiped out between Canada and Great Britain.
I wish to say a word also about trade with the United States of America and with any other country in the world that wishes or is willing to deal with us on a free-trade basis. In my opinion, during this war the industrialist of Canada has proved that in the war effort he has carried out he is the equal, if not the superior, of any industrialist in the world. We have found, in looking into the production of munitions and supplies for

The Address-Mr. Ross (Moose Jaw)
the war, that the industrialist in Canada has done a remarkable job, that the engineers behind that industrialist have great ingenuity, that they have been able to cut costs at an amazing rate, and that we can stand on our feet industrially to-day with anyone in this world.


An hon. MEMBER:: Give him business; that is all he needs.


John Gordon Ross: The way to get it is to open trade routes. Do that and you will get business. When this war is over, industry throughout the world will have to be rehabilitated. All industry to-day is practically on a war-time basis, and there must be an adjusting period. All industry must change over again to peace-time pursuits, and therefore at that time all industry will be on a level in the world, a level on which it has not been for many years. There are also many controls-war controls, exchange controls, and the controls in the handling of raw materials-which will have to be gradually done away with as we come to the finish of the war. No one to-day can be hurt by the removal of any tariff, because exchange must be turned over to those who are to import into the country and the whole thing is controlled anyway. So that now is the one time that Canada can lower her tariffs or do away with them altogether, without hurting any industrialist, any worker, any citizen of the Dominion of Canada. Therefore, in the budget the government should come down with free trade with Great Britain and the freest kind of trade with the United States and many other nations.
We have had some war-time controls which I do not think have worked altogether to the benefit of Canada. Under the wartime prices and trade board, we have practically closed the American border to the shipment of cattle to the United States. We have done that, but I hope the United States people will not look upon that as a more or less unfriendly act in trade on our part. Some of them may say that at the time they needed beef cattle from us we would not allow cattle to cross the border. It must be remembered, however, that we are giving them a considerable amount of beef in other ways. For instance, their ships that go in the convoys from this country get large supplies to take them over and back. Their people in Alaska, their troops, their construction workers, have received large supplies of beef from Canada, and, as we all know, the north American continent as a whole is short of beef to-day.
Ever since I came to this house in 1925, and I believe for many years before that,
there has been a great lack of appreciation of the importance of agriculture in the Canadian economy. The present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) and every past Minister of Agriculture has had to battle like a Trojan to get any money for agriculture out of any government in Canada. This has been the policy of all governments in this country. Thank goodness we have not tried the policy which an hon. member who seeks to interrupt me is trying to bring in, but every Minister of Agriculture has had to battle to get sufficient funds to help agriculture in Canada, and I do not doubt that the present minister has made himself unpopular with some other ministers in the government in an endeavour to put forward the rights of the farmer, which I know he does morning, noon and night. But what we need to-day in this country, more than we have ever needed it before, is a forward-looking policy in agriculture. That would be, not a policy for one year, but a policy for at least five years, or for at least two years after t'he war, whichever may be the longer.
The situation on this continent to-day is this. The United States and Canada, the two greatest food-producing countries in the world, are shipping considerable supplies of food to the united nations, and while doing that are having to cut down, to some extent, on the amount of food being used by their own people. For some years the United States put into effect policies of curtailing production in agriculture. At the present time there is only one product that is even called a surplus product in Canada and the United States, namely, wheat.
As I said before in this house, and as I will say again, all of that will be needed by the end of this war, or immediately after the war is over. When the war started there were those in Canada who thought it would not be well to bring down a policy with regard to hogs, butter, eggs, cheese or milk, because we would get ourselves into a position where we would not be able to sell them, and we would have surpluses. But that has pretty well all gone now. There are Shortages in respect of all those commodities to-day, as far as the needs of the united nations are concerned.
We must plan for the future, for the war, for the period after victory, for bargaining with people who need food, and for the feeding of people as our armies go forward. Canada must be the chief supplier of these commodities. As quickly as possible we must accumulate stock piles of food, in order to feed the people of the united nations, and the

The Address-Mr. Ross (Moose Jaw)
people who will be liberated in Europe. Even in north Africa to-day, people who have been liberated there are not receiving sufficient food. If Italy were to fold up in this war, there would be 55,000,000 more people to be fed, immediately. Then, we must consider Greece, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria-food must be available with respect to all these countries when our armies start to move in.
Although they may not be interested in what I am saying, I wish my hon. friends in the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation would keep quiet, so that others might listen.
I have said that we need future planning and stock piles. For instance, such commodities as powdered eggs, powdered milk, flour, peas, beans, edible oils and fats of different kinds, dried fruits, dried and desiccated vegetables, canned meats-all these should be accumulated in great quantities as quickly as possible.
There are those who will say that we have not sufficient processing plants. Well, when war started we did not have manufacturing concerns to turn out the munitions of war. However, we have them now, because we built them. We can build processing plants in Canada very rapidly, if we want to. Some will say we have not the storage warehouses in which to store these goods. These, too, may be built very quickly. Some say that these meats, and other commodities, cannot be stored for a period of years. I believe Canadian scientists have enough brains and enough ingenuity to find ways and means of protecting perishable goods in storage.
We must find new methods of shipment and . handling of perishable foods, in order that these commodities may be transferred during the war, and rapidly thereafter. I have said that Canada must be the main supplier. Why? Because in Canada we have followed a sane policy of endeavouring to try to keep our population at a fair level. Through our price control and wage control measures we have endeavoured as far as possible to give an even deal throughout the country, and not to let wages and salaries run away and thereby start an inflationary spiral.
Unfortunately the United States of America has not followed quickly enough. We find that in that country many thousands of people are getting high wages in money, but because the commodities they have to buy are rising rapidly in price they will not get much more out of it in the end. They will be paying higher prices and demanding many foods which to-day are not plentiful in the United States. That process has already started. Therefore it 	,! ,.|
may be that the increase in food production in the United States will be taken up by their own people for some little time.
Then, in Canada we should have a policy in regard to live stock for the time the war is going on, and for the time when it is over.


An hon. MEMBER:: Why have you not one now?


John Gordon Ross: There is one; but I am talking about a more extensive one. No doubt in many parts of Europe the supply of live stock has decreased considerably. We cannot develop a live stock policy in a year or two years, For instance, the production of dairy cattle cannot be accomplished in much under four years. The same applies to beef cattle. Breeding stock of hogs or sheep can be produced much more rapidly. That condition, however, does not apply to cattle. Therefore I say that money should be made available to the Minister of Agriculture so that a policy may be developed whereby we can produce more and better live stock in Canada, against the day when the war is over and this live stock can be shipped to rehabilitate the herds and flocks of Europe. But help fn that regard must come to the farmers throughout this country.
I do not intend speaking beyond eleven o'clock this evening. I had intended only to point out that Canada is one of the united nations in a position to accumulate large supplies of foodstuffs of all kinds and classes. They can be produced by farmers from one end of Canada to the other. Our policy should be such that not one available acre of cultivated land should be left unproductive while the war is in progress, from now on. Every acre should be used to produce as much as possible. I do not say that high prices should be paid by the government for those commodities that are to be put into storage, but I say that fair prices should be paid to all producers in agriculture. I will admit that this may mean the financing to a very considerable extent by the government of such a programme for one, two or three years. Let us take a look at what has been done in the past. Last year we financed, to the extent of a billion dollars, goods which were sent to our allies. This afternoon the Minister of Finance spoke of some amount of money to be spent this year in order to see to it that the united nations may be able to obtain their supplies from us. Well, I do not know what the government spent last year on agricultural products to be turned over to the united nations, but I venture to say that it was not over ten per cent of the

Railway Act Amendment
billion dollars. Probably $900,000,000 went into industry throughout Canada and perhaps $100,000,000 into agriculture. Certainly that is not a fair proposition. If within the next two or three years we devoted four or five hundred million dollars to the purpose of gathering together and storing foodstuffs for the united nations, in the end we would not have to pay that whole cost. The united nations will have to feed these people who are liberated, and we are in a position to have these foodstuffs readily available when the war is over. It is a big job, but it is a job that we in this country must tackle. As a farmer I say it is the business of this government to-day to think along those lines and to endeavour to formulate a policy that will carry out thoughts of this kind which I am. satisfied have been in the mind of the Minister of Agriculture for some time. But with this government, as with past governments, it is a hard job for him or any other minister to get money with which to do anything for agriculture.
There is only one other thing I want to say, and then I am through. This afternoon I listened to the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker) when he referred to the leader of this house (Mr. Mackenzie King). We have heard other leaders throughout the world praised by almost everyone in Canada. I cannot understand some of our people. Here is a man who for years has led the greatest political party in this dominion. Here is a man who for years has been Prime Minister of Canada. Here is a man who has been attacked on the ground that he did not give leadership in this country, when from the start of this war he has given leadership which has been followed by practically every other prime minister in the world. We have people who call themselves good Canadians crossing the border into the United States and disparaging the efforts of Mackenzie King and the government of Canada. They are not only border-crossers; they are double-crossers of the people of Canada. We have Americans coming into this country singing the same sort of song with regard to Mr. Roosevelt, when we know he will go down in history as the greatest president the United States ever had. He has been blackguarded by people throughout the United States, just as Mackenzie King has been blackguarded by people throughout Canada. It is about time this business stopped. Mackenzie King has given real leadership in this country, and Canada has done a better job in this war than any other country in the world.
Before taking my seat, Mr. Speaker, let me add that in Canada's war effort the farmers of this country have done a remarkable job and have said very little about the tough times they have had in doing it. Therefore I ask the government to look into the matters about which I have spoken to-night, to see if we cannot get a proper policy for agriculture in the coming budget.
On motion of Mr. Gardiner the debate was adjourned.
On motion of Mr. Crerar the house adjourned at 10.58 p.m.
Tuesday, February 9, 1943